ABSTRACT
In the largely three and half decades between the 1960s and late 1990s spanned by Norman Thomas's career, there have been several distinctive sets of values emphasized in the policymak:ing literature. The first of these focused on inputs and legitimation of process. To put a slightly different tag on it, a truly pluralized policy process required legitimately diverse representation, especially of relatively marginalized groups who were themselves the direct clients of programs. While this is a perennial issue of democratic theory and of theories of representation, it bubbled up particularly during the 1960s and even early 1970s, inspiring efforts during the Johnson administration to bring the "outs" inside. Programs designed to open up the system and to monitor the workings of the bureaucracy were much in vogue in an effort to extend the compass of pluralism. Whether or not such efforts merely sowed the seeds for confusion and a lack of accountability or, in fact, genuinely extended the range of democracy remains today a hotly contested matter. The emphasis on representation in policymak:ing, however, arose from a political conception of the marketplace. To be in the money economy, one needed to have currency. To be in its political equivalent, one needed to have stakes. The political reforms of the 1960s often were about creating these stakes for those not otherwise in possession of them.
