ABSTRACT
The revolving gridlock theory predicts that often the majority view is tempered by the need to secure supermajorities, and by the complexity of the issues. It is about elections and policy outcomes. The big story of the 1995 budget was, of course, President Clinton's veto of the Republican proposal. In addition to this big picture, there are hundreds of local stories at the district level that also demonstrate a pull toward the status quo and gridlock on the budget proposals. If gridlock results from differences in preferences even under unified government, the public may be confused about how their votes translate into policy outcomes. In the policy world, Presidents must propose the specifics of how they are going to reduce the deficit, enhance health care coverage, deal with terrorism and alliances in the world, and improve educational opportunities for American children.
