Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies

Kingdon argues that America is unusual among industrialized countries because its government is smaller and more limited, and this distinctiveness stems from an enduring interaction between ideology and institutions. Americans' suspicion of authority, rooted in the beliefs of early settlers, led to fragmented constitutional arrangements—separation of powers, federalism, weak parties—that reinforce the preference for limited government. This path-dependent feedback loop, rather than a single cause, explains why American public policy diverges so sharply from other wealthy democracies .

Kingdon employs a path dependence model. He contends that the adoption of initial institutional arrangements—separation of powers, federalism, and legal limitations on political parties—set the United States on a separate developmental trajectory that foreclosed other options. This wasn't a one-time choice but an ongoing feedback process: the ideology of limited government shaped the institutions, and the institutions in turn perpetuated that ideology by making government action difficult and fragmentation normal .

Kingdon explicitly rejects the choice between ideological and institutional explanations, arguing that the two are intertwined and mutually reinforcing. Without a prevailing ideology of individualism and aversion to centralized state action, the Framers would not have designed the institutions they did. And without those fragmented institutions, American government likely would not have remained as limited as it has. As Kingdon writes, this 'enduring and powerful interaction between ideas and institutions, each one reinforcing the other down through history' is what explains modern American distinctiveness .

Kingdon argues for a tempering of American doctrines and a return to pragmatism. He contends that lawmakers should abandon public policy creation beginning with ideology—such as individualism—and instead consider pragmatically, in light of experience, what works and what does not. He suggests that globalization might increase similarities among countries and make a 'happy medium' possible between American-style limited government and European-style social programs, though he acknowledges the difficulty of such change given America's institutional structure .

Reviews were generally positive about its clarity and accessibility while noting it presented no new original research. Library Journal called it a 'refreshing and engaging review of what constitutes our political culture and its consequences for contemporary public policy' . A Cato Institute review praised Kingdon for 'ably and succinctly summarizing the relevant literature' but found the final chapter's normative hopes less satisfying, arguing he allowed his desire for greater state action to cloud judgment about its likelihood . CHOICE noted it addresses an educated audience from general readers to graduate students .