GW Work

Politicians, media, and the public use the term "gridlock" to refer to the crush of competing interests in the policy process. Gridlock, however, is not a phenomenon that can be objectively identified or addressed. Rather, it is a catch-phrase used by partisans and pundits. Using other theories of political conflict and a case study of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1992, this article shows that political discourse would be better served if gridlock was not used as an analogy for perceived legislative troubles.

Author

• Stengel, Nicholas

Identifier

• Volume 8 - Issue 2

DOI

•  https://doi.org/10.4079/pp.v8i2.4224

Keyword

• Regulation
• Policy Perspectives

Date created

• 2001

Type of Work

• Article

Rights statement

• In Copyright

GW Unit

• Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration

Persistent URL

•  https://scholarspace.library.gwu.edu/work/7w62f8811

License

• All rights reserved

Relationships

In Collection:

• Policy Perspectives

Items

Thumbnail	Title	Date Uploaded	Visibility	Actions
	10_4079_pp_v8i2_4224.pdf	2019-08-05	Open Access	Press to Select an action Download View in Browser