Customer Reviews

The Almanac of American Politics 2002

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

For political nerds like me, the every other year publication of this incredibly detailed, exhaustive and fascinating compilation of everything you'd ever want to know about politics and politicians is a major event. When the new book arrives, I get absorbed into it for hours, and am reminded of why politics is both equal measure fun and frustrating.

The book is written by Michael Barone and other foremost political observers and experts. The political analysis is unparalled, the biographies incisive and interesting and the information on the demographics and political history of each state and Congressional district is fascinating. I also enjoy looking over the results of statewide and Congressional races in each state.

There is no better source to get an idea at the national and state level of the direction of the prevailing political winds. Charlie Cook's handicapping of upcoming races is particularly fun, and helps you get an idea of what races to keep an eye on in the upcoming political cycle and to get an idea of political trends, nationally, statewide and at the Congressional district level. Spend a few days reading this huge book, and you'll become an instant expert in politics, political demographics and political trends in the nation.

The publishers have even made up for the book's one weakness, an unavoidable one, in that the book begins to get out of date as soon as its published with all the quick changes that occur in politics and our political bodies. There is now much less lag time between completion of the writing of the book and its publication, thus making the book seem much more up to the moment. The 2002 edition is updated with all the new Senate information since the defection of Senator Jim Jeffords from the GOP. Interestingly though, there is no updated information about Congressman Gary Condit, his scandal and his now very doubtful political future.

But more than this, the publishers are providing buyers of the book unlimited access to web updates for the next 2 years that helps keep you and your book up to date on all the latest political happenings. That includes e-mail updates from Charlie Cook on all the hot political races. This is a fantastic feature that alone makes the price of the book worth every penny. If you love politics, I can't recommend this book enough.

Michael Barone is clearly a man of immense energy and political insight. His biennial "Almanac of American Politics" has been a Washington tradition for 30 years now; and it keeps getting better.

I first discovered the Almanac in 1992 and have purchased copies every two years since. My '92 edition is dogeared, with pages falling out, yet I still consult it regularly.

Barone's in-depth background information in each state and Congressional district is a feature hard to find anywhere else (certainly not all in one place). His invaluable biographical information on members of congress (and governors) is essential to understand where these people are coming from, when one sees them on CSPAN.

But the statistical information is what I treasure most. The Almanac is a quick and easy reference for finding out how vulnerable an incumbant is, who ran against them before, how their state or district leans at the presidential level, etc. These statistics are really essential for a deep understanding of congressional politics today.

In the last few years, Barone has also been providing more information about state governments. Recently, he's added the names of the leaders of every state legislature and given longer biographies of the governors. In this era of devolution, such information is greatly needed.

Another newer addition is the predictions of Charlie Cook. Cook's analysis is appreciated although I wish he would be a little more creative in his writing ("...belies the competitive nature of the district" over and over).

Barone and Cook have an excellent track record in predicting elections, but naturally they are wrong at times too. For instance, they both considered Gov. Jesse Ventura a good bet for re-election (and Barone even hinted at a Presidential bid in 2004). Of course Ventura is not seeking re-election due to low approval ratings. Since the Alamanc comes out a year before the election its focused on, it is fun to follow along and see how accurate its forecasting ends up

Granted, Barone is a conservative and his bias does occassionally surface. This can be distracting and poorly placed at times (especially for an angry leftist like me). But objective journalism is basically non-existent in this country and Barone should be applauded for staying focused and unbiased more than most.

All said, the "Almanac of American Politics" is absolutely crucial for anyone who wants more than a superficial understanding of national politics today. Read it and you'll watch "Face the Nation" and "Meet the Press" in a whole different light. Buy it; it's more than worth the price.

Political Enthusists Rejoice! This is the book for you! I purchased this book for my spouse as a gift and he thoroughly enjoyed it. We have several editions from past years and it contains practically all of the information you'd ever want to know about your Representatives and Senators, their biographical background, voting record etc... A teriffic purchase for those who are politically inclined.

A complete list of parlamentary of USA, with short biografy and result of last elections and total cost of each postulation.

Need summary statistics and complete primary elections information.

Yes, it's exhaustively comprehensive. Yes, it's district-by-district. And yes, it's over 1200 pages. However, the entire enterprise is in the end unsatisfying because of the constant undercurrent of bias.

Whether it's Barone comparing Bush's "more choice" to Gore's "more government," or his characterization of "observant, tradition-minded, moralistic" Bush voters opposing Gore voters that are "unobservant, liberation-minded, relativist," he continually finds ways to slightly polish conservative views and give a little tarnish to the liberal side of the spectrum.

The clincher for me was in the Presidential Politics segment for Florida when Barone writes of the beyond reproach fact of a Bush victory, while elaborating upon all the apparent shifty, underhanded tactics of the Gore camp. Whether or not the tactics were sinister is up for debate, but it's clear he didn't want to concede any points for the liberals, whether on Florida or on free-market ideology. This slight, but consistent bias isn't dangerous in and of itself; it's objectionable because it's coming from such a supposedly authoritative source.

After a decade of increasingly right-slanted analysis, the latest edition of the Almanac is refreshingly evenhanded in its reports of the tumultuous 2000 political season. This is the first edition co-written by Richard Cohen - one can't help but suspect that someone at the National Journal finally reined in Michael Barone and insisted that his borderline inflammatory analysis be balanced off - and Cohen's influence shows.

Even in the most partisan editions, the Almanac's strongest point has always been its short but thorough histories of political trends in each state and Congressional district; this remains excellent as always. The relatively recent addition of Charlie Cook's predictions for the next election is still here as well. As with the previous edition, these are usually a bit redundant from the main body of the analysis of each member, but fun for us political junkies all the same.

The partisanship has not disappeared entirely. For example, Missouri Democrats are sharply criticized for fighting to keep the polls open late in St. Louis on election night 2000 so that all who showed up on time to vote could do so, on the grounds that such an action condoned incompetent pollworkers. Surely Barone and Cohen would concede that the rights of all registered voters to vote if they arrived at the polls in time outweighs concerns about pollworkers being insufficiently punished for poor performance. And predictably, the Florida fiasco is oversimplified and punctuated with the dubious assumption that George W. Bush really did win the state's electoral votes. Nonetheless, this edition is head and shoulders above its recent predecessors in terms of evenhandedness. If Barone's slanted analysis has scared you off in the past, this is a good year to start buying the Almanac again.

I was a regular buyer of this series until I got so tired of Michael Barone's biases and editorializing that I ceased purchasing the new editions as I had been every two years. After hearing that the 2002 edition had (finally) toned down the flagrant lack of objectivity I decided to give it another try.

During my absence things have indeed improved. More facts and statistics have been added about states and congressional districts, political analysis Charlie Cook has added brief outlooks for every seat up for election in 2002, more information on redistricting is given, more extensive descriptions of states, districts, and backgrounds on office holders is provided and yes, Barone's editorial comments, while still present, have been drastically toned down and in some cases eliminated.

However, there are still obvious examples of his bias. Many pro NAFTA comments are made mentioning benefits states and districts have received since its passage while no mention is made at all of the jobs lost in those same areas (only to often be replaced by lower paying ones) and Barone regularly writes objectively about "cultural conservatives" while virtually anyone who isn't married, with 2.5 kids while living in the suburbs or a rural area (be it office holders or their constituents) is labeled, in a rather dismissive tone as part of the "feminist left," a term Barone does not seem to use in a neutral manner. Furthermore his recap of the Florida recount clearly takes a pro-Bush side, ignoring all his inconsistencies while maximizing Gore's despite blatant hypocrisy that was strong on both sides.

But overall this is a solid, if somewhat overpriced reference for political junkies elsewhere. If Barone can continue to scale back his editorializing in future editions, this series will has the potential to become one of the most important on the subject.

I bought my first Alamanac of American Politics in 1988 at the tender age of 15 and even then, it quickly became my favorite book. Every two years, I saved up my money in order to splurge on each new edition and I also haunted every public library in town searching for past editions. Though a great deal of the Alamanac does repeat itself from edition to edition (after all, how many new things can you really write about Strom Thurmond?), its still interesting to see how it has changed from the original 1972 edition. Whereas the first editions of the Almanac (most of them under 500 pages long if you can believe it!) tended to ignore going into a great deal of detail about individual politicians (instead choosing to focus on their district and their votes), later editions have become jam-packed with just about everything you could possibly want to know about the nearly six hundred men and women detailed within its pages. And to their credit, the Alamanac's editors haven't allowed these changes to dilute any coverage of practical matters like voting records and election results. In short, for those of us who can't get enough political news (regardless of whether its hard news or just gossipy rumors of scandal), this book is priceless. Within its now nearly 2000 pages, you'll find information on every single Congressman, Senator, and Governor along with a fully detailed analysis of their states and districts. Its an amazing undertaking. As well, the 2002 edition managed to keep up with most of the developing political news up to the point of its publication (i.e., the Jeffords party switch, upcoming special elections). In short, with this Alamanac, you won't have the experience of reading a detailed analysis about an obscure but important politician just to later discover that politician happened to die a few months before the Alamanac was shipped to book stores -- a frequent occurance with previous editions. Still, this latest edition is out-of-date on two events, one a gossipy scandal and the other much, much more. No mention is made of Gary Condit's troubles but, even more hauntingly, this edition was completed and released shortly before the terrorist attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center. As much fun as the latest Alamanac is, its hard to read it without considering how much the political landscape has been forcefully (and traumatically) changed in less than a month. The Alamanac can be accurately described as a portrait of America and its sad to realize that the 2002 edition -- the most up-to-date edition yet -- is still a portrait of an America that doesn't quite exist today.

On another note, many more liberal readers have complained over the past few years that the Alamanac's editor, Michael Barone, is unfairly biased against Democrats. It is true that Barone is a self-declared conservative and its also true that over the years, his more liberal co-editors have moved on to other projects and more or less left Barone in charge of the entire project. So, basically, yes -- Barone is definitely far more critical of Democratic politicians than of Republicans. But, honestly, so what? Essentially since Watergate, the national media has been blatantly biased against anyone who happens to be a Republican. After several decades of being described as an intolerant, heartless crook (and worse) because of my party registration, its hard to build up much sympathy for people who get upset because Barone might occasionally be too quick to point out that an unsuccesful Democratic candidate didn't run an effective campaign. Its hard to see how Barone saying the Paul Wellstone seems "awkward in the Senate" is somehow more offensive then the national media's refusal to identify Gary Condit as a Democrat. But even beyond such partisan bickering, the Alamanac of American Politics is released specifically for people who love to follow politics, for people who make a point to remain politically savvy. People who aren't into politics probably aren't going to spend fifty bucks to get any of the past or present editions of this book. In short, the Alamanac will be read by people who are smart enough to recognize bias (liberal or conservative) and capable of making up their own minds. To get upset because Barone, in the process of putting together perhaps the greatest political resource available today, doesn't go out of his way to defend Al Gore's demands for a Florida recount is just plain silly.