Eric Schickler
Jeffrey & Ashley McDermott Professor of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley
Chapter Member: Bay Area SSN
Areas of Expertise:
Connect with Eric
About Eric
Schickler’s research focuses on the U.S. Congress; public opinion; and political parties. He has written about the Senate filibuster; assessing its impact on policy-making and potential pathways to filibuster reform. He has also studied the role of the mass public in guiding and responding to the development of the New Deal welfare state in the 1930s-40s. Schickler’s current project seeks to understand the relationship between New Deal economic liberalism and racial liberalism in giving rise to the civil rights “realignment” in the 1930s-60s.
Contributions
The Past and Future of the Senate Filibuster
Key Findings Brief,
In the News
Quoted by Katy Steinmetz in "The GOP Could Reclaim a House Seat Left Open by a Nude Photo Scandal," Time, February 13, 2020.
Opinion: "Investigations Usually Hurt a President's Public Reputation – But Trump isn't Usual," Eric Schickler (with ), The Conversation, October 8, 2019.
Opinion: "Investigations Usually Hurt a President’s Public Reputation – But Trump Isn’t Usual," Eric Schickler (with ), The Conversation, October 8, 2019.
Quoted by Duncan Sinfield in "Researchers Discuss "Parties and Partisanship in the Era of Twitter and Trump"," KTVU San Francisco, April 21, 2018.
Quoted by Jana Katsuyama in "NRA under Fire: Organization Weighs in on Gun Debate," KTVU, February 22, 2018.
Quoted by Haruka Senju and Bo Kovitz in "Bernie Sanders Rally in Berkeley Draws Large Coalition of Participants," Daily Californian, September 18, 2015.
Publications
"Public Opinion, Organized Labor, and the Limits of New Deal Liberalism, 1936-1945" (with ). Studies in American Political Development 25 (2011): 1-28.
Assesses how the mass public responded to the New Deal in the 1930s and considers the role of public concern about labor union power / tactics in giving rise to the conservative coalition in the late 1930s.
"What the Filibuster Tells Us about the Senate" (with ). Forum 9, no. 4 (2011).
Assesses why the Senate has retained the filibuster despite the major changes in how it is used.
New Deal Liberalism and Racial Liberalism in the Mass Public, 1937-1968New Deal Liberalism and Racial Liberalism in the Mass Public, 1937-1968 University of California, Berkeley, 2010-02-28.
Uses early public opinion polls to show that Democratic partisanship, economic liberalism, and racial liberalism began to come into alignment among northern whites by the late 1930s.
"Shifting Partisan Coalitions: Support for Civil Rights in Congress from 1933-1972" (with ). Journal of Politics 72, no. 3 (2010): 672-689.
Shows that northern Democrats were more supportive of bringing civil rights measures to the House floor than their Republican counterparts by the early-mid 1940s.
Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the United States Senate (with ). (Princeton University Press, 2006).
Traces the development of the filibuster, with a focus on how the Senate operated in the absence of a cloture rule (prior to 1917) and how the Senate has been affected by the rise of rampant obstructionism.