In January 1973, for the first time in American history, principal participants in a major election met to discuss the science and the art of campaign strategy: the planning, calculation, contrivance, miscalculation, and mischance that determine what the electorate sees. Here campaign managers, pollsters, and journalists met to compare notes on their techniques and tactics and on their successes and failures as they reviewed the events of the primaries and election:

the poor decisions made in the face of complex state primary laws;

the decline of Muskie and the rise of McGovern;

the significance of issues versus Nixon's image;

the effects of party reform on the Democratic convention;

the credentials fights;

the twists of strategy during the final months of the campaign;

the way the press covered the campaign and how reporters were treated by the various staffs;

the lessons for 1976 drawn by reporters and campaign people.

The straightforward exchanges took place at the Harvard Conference on Campaign Decision-Making. Eighteen key people participated, including those in the campaigns of Nixon, McGovern, Wallace, Muskie, Humphrey, Jackson, and McCloskey. Four political correspondents--David Broder, James Naughton, Al Otten, and James Perry--expertly guided the conversation, probing for additional insights.

The transcript of the conference--oral history at its best--has been carefully edited and makes absorbing reading. Included are brief sketches of the participants, a chronology of major events of the campaign, tables of campaign statistics, and a full index.

Campaign consultants are arguably now as famous in the United States as the politicians themselves. During the past decade, those who know the names Bill Clinton, George Bush, Newt Gingrich, and Christine Todd Whitman also recognize the names James Carville, Mary Matalin, Frank Luntz, and Ed Rollins. Professional consultants, once part of the privileged inner circle of presidential and gubernatorial candidates, are increasingly found at all levels of politics. Indeed, more than half of congressional candidates hire campaign consultants. These professional have become as important to a candidate's success as money. In this innovative study, Stephen K. Medvic explores all aspects of political consultancy and develops an empirically based theory that ensures the impact consultants have on elections.

Political Consultants in U.S. Congressional Elections answers two simple questions: What do professional political consultants do? and How successful are they? Medvic analyzes the way consultants shape political dialogue and uses empirical data to show the benefits—and limits—of a consultant's involvement in a campaign. He focuses on issues as diverse as vote shares, outcomes, and fundraising. Finally, the author demonstrates how the adversarial nature of campaigns fosters the kind of electioneering advocated by most political consultants and argues that this process may not be as harmful for the country as is often suggested.