DOCSLIB.ORG

Npr 5.1: U.S. Senate Ratification of the Cwc

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Npr 5.1: U.S. Senate Ratification of the Cwc John V. Parachini U.S. SENATE RATIFICATION OF THE CWC: LESSONS FOR THE CTBT by John V. Parachini John V. Parachini is a Senior Associate at the Henry L. Stimson Center and a Washington Representative for the Monterey Institutes Center for Nonproliferation Studies. He chaired the Poison Gas Task Force, an informal coalition of more than 20 organizations that coordinated public education activities surrounding the U.S. Senate debate on the Chemical Weapons Convention. he ratification of the Chemi- Senate rejection of the CWC force began that compelled the Tcal Weapons Convention would have significantly dimmed the United States to ratify the accord or (CWC) in April 1997 was the prospects for the Comprehensive suffer the consequences of not be- first major foreign policy debate of Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), a future ing an original state party. The po- President Bill Clintons second term. START III agreement, and amend- litical and economic costs would While the U.S. Senates 74 to 26 ments to the ABM treaty and have been considerable for the approval of the CWC proved that nuclear-weapon-free zone treaties United States if it had failed to be there is a basis for bipartisan coop- for the South Pacific (Rarotonga) an original state party to an interna- eration in the 105th Congress on arms and Africa (Pelindaba). Several of tional agreement that it led other control policy, gaining Senate ap- these completed agreements are not nations to adopt.2 While this clear proval proved extremely difficult. perceived to have as solid creden- deadline was critical to moving the Had the Senate rejected the Conven- tials as the CWC, and others are still U.S. process of ratification, it also tion, however, international arms under negotiation. The reluctance of created a situation that accentuated control efforts might have suffered the Russian Duma to ratify the Open political differences on the role of a devastating blow, given the num- Skies Treaty, START II, and the arms control in Americas foreign ber of other important agreements CWC only complicates the process and defense policy. slated for submission to the Senate in the United States. As the first The hard-fought political battle that do not have the political legacy major, multilateral arms control for Senate approval of the CWC is a 1 that the CWC enjoyed. If the Re- treaty of the post-Cold War era to stark reminder of the tenuous sup- publican-controlled Senate had re- be submitted for U.S. Senate advice port for formal negotiated arms con- jected the CWC, which was and consent, the CWC may have trol agreements in the United States. negotiated over the course of two defined the terms of debate for other The CWC ratification fight revealed Republican presidential administra- arms control measures to be consid- that the Cold War debate about the tions, what chances would arms con- ered in this decade. role and value of arms control is still trol agreements concluded during When the sixty-fifth country rati- a part of the American partisan po- the Clinton administration have fied the CWC in October 1996, an litical landscape. Despite the historic stood? 180-day countdown to entry-into- opportunity of the post-Cold War 62 The Nonproliferation Review/Fall 1997 John V. Parachini world, the near collapse of the Rus- entails intrusive inspection provi- concluded on September 3, 1992, sian armed forces, and the percep- sions to be implemented by interna- and it had been opened for signature tion of most Americans that the tional organizations. The conclusion in Paris on January 13, 1993. greatest national security threat is and the implementation of these ac- Former Secretary of State Lawrence terrorism, opposing arms control cords will likely establish patterns Eagleburger had signed the agree- measures remains a litmus test for for other arms control measures. ment on behalf of the United States, 3 many conservatives. In order to assess the prospects for and there was every expectation that The CWCs credentials led many CTBT ratification by the current this treaty would receive early atten- to believe that it would easily obtain Senate, therefore, it is useful to out- tion by the incoming Clinton admin- Senate approval. The CWC, nego- line why the CWC ratification was istration. More than a year after the tiated during the Reagan administra- such a fractious fight. Similarly, it agreement was signed, Arms Con- tion and concluded during the Bush is important to outline the key ingre- trol and Disarmament Agency administration, had a Republican dients in the CWC victory. After all, (ACDA) Director John D. Holum legacy that historically has been a despite the heated conflict surround- said that he was convinced that the great asset for arms control agree- ing CWC ratification, it was ap- convention [would] be ratified ments considered by the Senate.4 proved by a 74 to 26 vote, which promptly by the Senate and that it 9 The CWC also enjoyed the support included a majority of the Republi- [would] enter into force in 1995. of the U.S. chemical industry, the can members of the Senate (29 to While the administration submitted overwhelming majority of the active 26). When comparing the attributes the CWC for Senate consideration and retired military, and all of the of the two accords, however, the on November 23, 1993, the Senate Americas NATO allies and major pluses and minuses do not bode well failed to act on it until after the his- economic trading partners. Further- for Senate approval of the CTBT. toric Republican victory in both more, the United States had already Fortunately, as shown below, not all houses of Congress in the fall 1994 10 committed itself to destroy its factors have the same value. The key mid-term elections. Preoccupied chemical weapons stockpile in 1985. to approval of the CTBT lies in the with domestic policy, the Clinton ad- The CWC required that other coun- Clinton administrations ability to ministration had failed to pursue tries adopt the same military posture muster the required political energy Senate ratification of the CWC dur- that the U.S. had adopted unilater- to capitalize on the CTBTs uniquely ing its first two years and thus had ally a decade earlier. And, finally, positive attributes and to counter the lost the advantage of a Democratic chemical weapons are widely similar negative factors that dogged Senate. The cost of this inaction viewed as a heinous weapon with the ratification of the CWC. turned out to be high. very little military value. Opinion A central criticism of President surveys published in 1997 showed DIFFICULTIES FACING Clintons foreign policy during his that there was overwhelming public SENATE APPROVAL OF THE first two years in office was that it support, across all demographic CWC lacked focus, consistency, and sus- groups, for arms control treaty mea- tained presidential attention.11 How Despite the many political assets sures banning the production, stock- the Clinton administration managed of the CWC, it faced surprisingly piling, and use of chemical Senate consideration of the CWC in strong opposition in the U.S. Sen- weapons.5 its first term was in many ways para- ate. Even ardent opponents were digmatic of what was wrong with the The next arms control agreement surprised by the amount of interest administrations foreign policy.12 the Clinton administration intends to in the Senate, and conservative Administration officials responsible submit for Senate consideration is policy circles.8 At least six factors for managing the ratification of the the CTBT.6 Among the host of arms help explain the difficulty the CWC CWC hoped that the treaty would control treaties that require Senate faced in the Senate as well as the move quietly through the hoops of advice and consent, it is the most intensity of opposition to an accord Senate review without much notice. analogous to the CWC.7 Like the that many expected to be speedily In the end, they hoped the CWC CWC, the CTBT is a multilateral approved. treaty that is universal in scope and would be approved by the Senate Negotiations on the CWC had just like the Open Skies Treaty: late The Nonproliferation Review/Fall 1997 63 John V. Parachini at night before a Congressional re- candidate Steve Forbes, maintains a defining the CWC on their terms. cess and without a word raised in op- unilateralist and isolationist philoso- CWC negotiator Ambassador position. The key difference between phy of the world. According to this Stephen Ledogar, who labored for the two accords is that the Open view, the United States should shun years on the treaty during the Bush Skies Treaty went before a Demo- international obligations comparable administration, commented that the cratic Senate in the fall of 1993. to those assumed by other states charges against the CWC by oppo- Once the Republicans regained con- when they may restrict U.S. freedom nents were so far from being based- trol of both houses of Congress in of action. Protection of American in-fact that I just dont know what 1994, for the first time in 40 years, interests is best achieved without the document they (the critics) are dis- a low-profile approach to ratification encumbrances of working with other paraging.15 Regardless of whose of any treaty became highly unlikely. states in international bodies. Both interpretation was correct, the terms Thus, the first factor that made the wings of the Republican party saw of debate were set by CWC oppo- CWC ratification difficult was the the CWC according to their particu- nents, and its supporters did not re- Clinton administrations failure to lar world view.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Charlie Sykes
    CHARLIE SYKES EDITOR-AT-LARGE, THE BULWARK Quick Summary Life in Brief Former conservative radio host and Wisconsin Hometown: Seattle, WA Republican kingmaker who gained national prominence as a leading voice in the Never Trump Current Residence: Mequon, WI movement and created the Bulwark website as a messaging arm for like-minded conservatives Education: • BA, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, • Love for journalism and politics heavily influenced 1975 by his father • Self-described “recovering liberal” who criticizes Family: both political parties for inflexibility and for • Married to Janet Riordan alienating those who reject status quo • Three children, two grandchildren • As conservative radio host, cultivated significant influence in Wisconsin GOP politics – quickly Work History: becoming a go-to stop for Republican candidates; • Editor-at-Large, The Bulwark, 2019- drew significant attention to issues like school Present choice • Host, The Daily Standard, 2018 • Became national figure after refusing to support • Contributing editor, The Weekly Donald Trump Standard • Co-founded the Bulwark with Bill Kristol, which • Contributor, NBC/MSNBC, 2016-present has become a leading mouthpiece of the Never • Host, Indivisible WNYC, 2017 Trump conservative movement • Editor-in-Chief, Right Wisconsin • Considers himself a “political orphan” in the era of • Radio show host, WTMJ, 1999-2016 Trump after exile from conservative movement • Radio host, WISN, 1989-93 whose political identity has changed many times • PR for Dave Schulz, Milwaukee
    [Show full text]
  • Originalism and the Ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment
    Copyright 2013 by Northwestern University School of Law Printed in U.S.A. Northwestern University Law Review Vol. 107, No. 4 ORIGINALISM AND THE RATIFICATION OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT Thomas B. Colby ABSTRACT—Originalists have traditionally based the normative case for originalism primarily on principles of popular sovereignty: the Constitution owes its legitimacy as higher law to the fact that it was ratified by the American people through a supermajoritarian process. As such, it must be interpreted according to the original meaning that it had at the time of ratification. To give it another meaning today is to allow judges to enforce a legal rule that was never actually embraced and enacted by the people. Whatever the merits of this argument in general, it faces particular hurdles when applied to the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment was a purely partisan measure, drafted and enacted entirely by Republicans in a rump Reconstruction Congress in which the Southern states were denied representation; it would never have made it through Congress had all of the elected Senators and Representatives been permitted to vote. And it was ratified not by the collective assent of the American people, but rather at gunpoint. The Southern states had been placed under military rule, and were forced to ratify the Amendment—which they despised—as a condition of ending military occupation and rejoining the Union. The Amendment can therefore claim no warrant to democratic legitimacy through original popular sovereignty. It was added to the Constitution despite its open failure to obtain the support of the necessary supermajority of the American people.
    [Show full text]
  • Amending the U.S. Constitution by State-Led Convention
    AMENDING THE U.S. CONstItutION BY StatE -LED CONVENTION INDIANA’S MODEL LEGIslatION DIstRIbutED BY: INDIANA SENatE PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE DAVID LONG AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION BY STATE‐LED CONVENTION: BACKGROUND INFORMATION U.S. CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE V: The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate. AMENDING THE U.S. CONSTITUTION: Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two paths for amending the Constitution: Path 1: o Step 1: Two-thirds of both houses of Congress pass a proposed constitutional amendment. This sends the proposed amendment to the states for ratification. o Step 2: Three-fourths of the states (38 states) ratify the proposed amendment, either by their legislatures or special ratifying conventions. Path 2: o Step 1: Two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) ask for Congress to call “a convention for proposing amendments.” o Step 2: States send delegates to this convention, where they can propose amendments to the Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitution of the United States [PDF]
    THE CONSTITUTION oftheUnitedStates NATIONAL CONSTITUTION CENTER We the People of the United States, in Order to form a within three Years after the fi rst Meeting of the Congress more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Constitution for the United States of America. Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut fi ve, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland Article.I. six, Virginia ten, North Carolina fi ve, South Carolina fi ve, and Georgia three. SECTION. 1. When vacancies happen in the Representation from any All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Sen- Election to fi ll such Vacancies. ate and House of Representatives. The House of Representatives shall chuse their SECTION. 2. Speaker and other Offi cers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment. The House of Representatives shall be composed of Mem- bers chosen every second Year by the People of the several SECTION.
    [Show full text]
  • Marc Short Chief of Staff, Vice President Pence
    MARC SHORT CHIEF OF STAFF, VICE PRESIDENT PENCE u Life in Brief Quick Summary Hometown: Virginia Beach, VA Lifelong conservative GOP operative who rose through party ranks to become a trusted Mike Current Residence: Arlington, VA Pence confidante. Utilizes expansive network of Koch allies, White House staff, and congressional Education ties to push Administration priorities • BA, Washington & Lee, 1992 • MBA, University of Virginia, 2004 • Polished and pragmatic tactician who plays a behind-the-scenes role advising Vice President Family: Pence and other senior leaders • Married to Kristen Short, who has • Early conservative political views shaped By his worked for Young America’s Foundation, father, Dick Short, a wealthy GOP donor well- Freedom Alliance, and the Charles G. connected to Virginia GOP circles Koch Foundation • Extensive experience with Freedom Partners and • Three school-aged children the Koch Brothers exposed him to large network of GOP donors and influencers Work History • Earned reputation as smart strategist on the Hill • Chief of Staff to the Vice President of the working closely with then-Rep. Mike Pence United States, 2019-Present • Provided GOP estaBlishment credentials and • Senior Fellow at UVA Miller Center of congressional experience to Trump White House PuBlic Affairs, 2018-19 to advance Administration’s early agenda, • Contributor for CNN, 2018-19 including on 2017 tax cuts and Neil Gorsuch’s • Partner at Guidepost Strategies, 2018-19 confirmation to the Supreme Court • White House Director of Legislative •
    [Show full text]
  • The Weekly Standard…Don’T Settle for Less
    “THE ORACLE OF AMERICAN POLITICS” — Wolf Blitzer, CNN …don’t settle for less. POSITIONING STATEMENT The Weekly Standard…don’t settle for less. Through original reporting and prose known for its boldness and wit, The Weekly Standard and weeklystandard.com serve an audience of more than 3.2 million readers each month. First-rate writers compose timely articles and features on politics and elections, defense and foreign policy, domestic policy and the courts, books, art and culture. Readers whose primary common interests are the political developments of the day value the critical thinking, rigorous thought, challenging ideas and compelling solutions presented in The Weekly Standard print and online. …don’t settle for less. EDITORIAL: CONTENT PROFILE The Weekly Standard: an informed perspective on news and issues. 18% Defense and 24% Foreign Policy Books and Arts 30% Politics and 28% Elections Domestic Policy and the Courts The value to The Weekly Standard reader is the sum of the parts, the interesting mix of content, the variety of topics, type of writers and topics covered. There is such a breadth of content from topical pieces to cultural commentary. Bill Kristol, Editor …don’t settle for less. EDITORIAL: WRITERS Who writes matters: outstanding political writers with a compelling point of view. William Kristol, Editor Supreme Court and the White House for the Star before moving to the Baltimore Sun, where he was the national In 1995, together with Fred Barnes and political correspondent. From 1985 to 1995, he was John Podhoretz, William Kristol founded a senior editor and White House correspondent for The new magazine of politics and culture New Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • Widgets Weekly: the Art of Covering Congressional Minutiae
    Widgets Weekly: The Art of Covering Congressional Minutiae To compile this chart of trade press organizations, The Politico reviewed the lists of all credentialed print media that covered the 109th Congress. The lists are compiled by the House and Senate press galleries. (The list for the current Congress will not be available for several months.) For the purposes of this list, we defined the trade press narrowly, excluding congressional newspapers such as The Hill and Roll Call. (We also would have excluded ourselves, but The Politico began publishing during this session of Congress.) We also excluded most of the financial press unless the publication was tailored to bond traders or another very specific sector. Finally, we included what's referred to as the newsletter press, such as BNA. Please let us know in the comments section - or write directly to us mailto: [email protected] - if we excluded one that should be included or included one we should have left out. Source: Congressional Press Galleries Credentialed Trade Publications National Journal’s Technology Daily IDG News Service Telecommunications Reports Institutional Investor American Banker Internewsletter Atlantic Information Services Interpreter Releases Penton Media Inc. Liability & Insurance Week Food Chemical News Linn's Stamp News Research Institute of America Group LP/Gas Washington Technology Mail on Sunday Bond Buyer Mass Transit Lawyer CQ Researcher Medical Devices Report IMAS Publishing Multichannel News Inside Mortgage Finance National Law Journal Inside Washington Publishers Natural Gas Week McGraw-Hill Co. Oberle Communications Army Times Publishing Co. Oil & Gas Journal Energy Daily Pesticide Report Federal Employees News Digest Pharmaceutical Executive Government Contractor PR Week Human Events Public Lands News Natural Gas Intelligence Radio & Records U.
    [Show full text]
  • POLITICAL REPORTING in the AGE of INFOTAINMENT Melissa
    POLITICAL REPORTING IN THE AGE OF INFOTAINMENT Melissa Oribhabor Jennifer Rowe, Committee Chair August 2014 Introduction The effects of infotainment have been felt by the news industry since politicians started appearing on talK shows and comedy shows, hoping to humanize themselves to the voting public. One of the earliest examples was in 1968 when presidential candidate Richard Nixon appeared on “Rowan and Martin’s Laugh-In” (Xenos 198). Even earlier than that, John F. Kennedy appeared on the “The Tonight Show” with Jack Paar in 1960. But with the 24-hour news cycle and the Internet drawing the public away from traditional forms of news, infotainment has become even more prevalent during the past 30 years. Infotainment can be seen easily on television, with programs such as “The Daily Show” and CNN’s “RidicuList” with Anderson Cooper; however, infotainment in terms of print journalism has not been studied as in- depth. This research not only looks at infotainment in print journalism but more specifically how it affects political journalists. Literature Review Moy, Xenos and Hess in their 2005 article “Communication and Citizenship: Mapping the Political Effects of Infotainment” define infotainment as the convergence of news and entertainment. The paper states that in recent years news programs started developing more elements of entertainment, and entertainment programs started to disseminate the news. The term “infotainment” is largely used in reference to entertainment programs that have elements of news (Moy et. al. 2005, 113). “Soft news” and “infotainment” are often used interchangeably in research on this topic. Soft news includes sensationalized stories, human-interest stories, and stories that focus more on entertainment over serious hard news content (Jebril et.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitution of the United States of America, As Amended
    110TH CONGRESS DOCUMENT " ! 1st Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES No. 110–50 THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA As Amended Unratified Amendments Analytical Index E PL UR UM IB N U U S PRESENTED BY MR. BRADY OF PENNSYLVANIA July 25, 2007 • Ordered to be printed UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON: 2007 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-001 [ISBN 978–0–16–079091–1] VerDate Aug 31 2005 11:11 Dec 10, 2007 Jkt 036932 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5229 Sfmt 5229 E:\HR\OC\36932.XXX 36932 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING E:\seals\congress.#15 House Doc. 110–50 The printing of the revised version of The Constitution of the United States of America As Amended (Document Size) is hereby ordered pursuant to H. Con. Res. 190 as passed on July 25, 2007, 110th Congress, 1st Session. This document was compiled at the di- rection of Chairman Robert A. Brady of the Joint Committee on Printing, and printed by the U.S. Government Printing Office. (ii) VerDate Aug 31 2005 11:19 Dec 10, 2007 Jkt 036932 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 7601 Sfmt 7601 E:\HR\OC\932.CC 932 cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING CONTENTS Historical Note ......................................................................................................... v Text of the Constitution .......................................................................................... 1 Amendments
    [Show full text]
  • The Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: a Defense
    The Constitutionality of Legislative Supermajority Requirements: A Defense John 0. McGinnist and Michael B. Rappaporttt INTRODUCTION On the first day of the 104th Congress, the House of Representatives adopted a rule that requires a three-fifths majority of those voting to pass an increase in income tax rates.' This three-fifths rule had been publicized during the 1994 congressional elections as part of the House Republicans' Contract with America. In a recent Open Letter to Congressman Gingrich, seventeen well-known law professors assert that the rule is unconstitutional.3 They argue that requiring a legislative supermajority to enact bills conflicts with the intent of the Framers. They also contend that the rule conflicts with the Constitution's text, because they believe that the Constitution's specific supermajority requirements, such as the requirement for approval of treaties, indicate that simple majority voting is required for the passage of ordinary legislation.4 t Professor of Law, Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School. tt Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law. The authors would like to thank Larry Alexander, Akhil Amar, Carl Auerbach, Jay Bybee, David Gray Carlson, Lawrence Cunningham, Neal Devins, John Harrison, Michael Herz, Arthur Jacobson, Gary Lawson, Nelson Lund, Erela Katz Rappaport, Paul Shupack, Stewart Sterk, Eugene Volokh, and Fred Zacharias for their comments and assistance. 1. See RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EFFECTIVE FOR ONE HUNDRED FOURTH CONGRESS (Jan. 4, 1995) [hereinafter RULES] (House Rule XXI(5)(c)); see also id. House Rule XXI(5)(d) (barring retroactive tax increases). 2. The rule publicized in the Contract with America was actually broader than the one the House enacted.
    [Show full text]
  • Jonathan Rauch
    Jonathan Rauch Jonathan Rauch, a contributing editor of National Journal and The Atlantic, is the author of several books and many articles on public policy, culture, and economics. He is also a guest scholar at the Brookings Institution, a leading Washington think-tank. He is winner of the 2005 National Magazine Award for columns and commentary and the 2010 National Headliner Award for magazine columns. His latest book is Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America, published in 2004 by Times Books (Henry Holt). It makes the case that same-sex marriage would benefit not only gay people but society and the institution of marriage itself. Although much of his writing has been on public policy, he has also written on topics as widely varied as adultery, agriculture, economics, gay marriage, height discrimination, biological rhythms, number inflation, and animal rights. His multiple-award-winning column, “Social Studies,” was published in National Journal (a Washington-based weekly on government, politics, and public policy) from 1998 to 2010, and his features appeared regularly both there and in The Atlantic. Among the many other publications for which he has written are The New Republic, The Economist, Reason, Harper’s, Fortune, Reader’s Digest, U.S. News & World Report, The New York Times newspaper and magazine, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, The New York Post, Slate, The Chronicle of Higher Education, The Public Interest, The Advocate, The Daily, and others. Rauch was born and raised in Phoenix, Arizona, and graduated in 1982 from Yale University.
    [Show full text]
  • Washington in the Information Age: ǂb an Insider's Guide to Media
    Washington in the Information Age An Insider’s Guide to Media Consumption and Collaboration Inside the Beltway © 2009 National Journal Group A Note on Use of These Materials This document has been prepared by and comprises valuable proprietary information belonging to National Journal Group. It is intended for educational purposes only. Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database retrieval system without the prior written permission of National Journal Group. The use of copyrighted materials and/or images belonging to unrelated parties and reproduced herein is permitted pursuant to license and/or 17 USC § 107. Questions concerning use of these materials should be directed to: Alisha Johnson Associate Publisher National Journal Group The Watergate 600 New Hampshire Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20037 Phone: 202-266-7312 Fax: 202-266-7320 Email: [email protected] © 2009 National Journal Group All Rights Reserved. Washington in the Information Age i Statement of Purpose In 2002 and again in 2007, National Journal Group’s Washington in the Information Age chronicled how “Washington Insiders” were navigating the fast-changing media landscape. The 2002 study focused on the impact of the Internet on Washington’s media-consumption habits, while the 2007 report explored the Internet’s role as a gateway to content originating in other media platforms, such as television, radio and print. If anything, the pace of change in the media has accelerated in the two years since the completion of the 2007 report.
    [Show full text]