local com politics

University of UtahWestern Political Science Association

Issues in Local Communist Politics: The Romanian CaseAuthor(s): Daniel N. NelsonReviewed work(s):Source: The Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Sep., 1977), pp. 384-396Published by: University of Utah on behalf of the Western Political Science AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/447938 .Accessed: 21/01/2013 16:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

University of Utah and Western Political Science Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to The Western Political Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:00:51 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ISSUES IN LOCAL COMMUNIST POLITICS: THE ROMANIAN CASE

DANIEL N. NELSON University of Kentucky

IT IS, perhaps, a truism of politics that capital cities do not reflect accurately the nature of political life in any country. Whether or not we can make that assumption for communist political systems is difficult to say, since local politics

in such countries has received relatively little attention. Until recently, our knowl- edge about central committees, politburos, and councils of ministers far exceeded what we knew about a citizen's contact and interaction with a communist government.1 Yet, it is at the local level where the meaning of communism for the citi- zenry is most directly and constantly apparent.

This paper has, first, a descriptive purpose as it reports findings about "issues" in local communist politics based upon extensive interviews with political participants in Romania. There has been extensive academic debate, particularly in the context of American politics, as to what constitutes an "issue," how "issues" relate to decisions about public policy, and many related points. Bachrach and Baratz, for instance, have criticized Robert Dahl for being not cognizant of individuals and organizations in whose hands rests the power to limit "the scope of actual decision-making to 'safe' issues"2 - that is, who controls the "agenda" for decisions by public officials. This control or influence, by which topics for policy making are limited to unimportant and even trivial issues, leads to the phenomenon of "nondecisions" whereby a political actor decides to take no action, to avoid involvement, etc.3

When Frederick Frey sought to clarify the lines of argument, he defined an "issue" as "a matter calling for or involving a decision"4 and "non-issues" as "the effective use of power by some actors in a political system to deter other actors in that system from even attempting to exert influence."5 In such definitions, Frey pinpoints something central to the study of political "issues" in communist states. Regardless of how one tries to measure the issues around which policy-making processes focus in communist systems, data are strongly affected by the phenomenon of "non-issues." Asking political actors in such states about local issues is not likely, then, to generate a complete portrayal of local controversies. Instead, one will re- ceive a picture of "issues" within the parameters allowed by the party. Most (if not all) political actors recognize the unacceptability of certain proposals or topics from the party's perspectives.

Identifying the "matters" which political actors think call for, or involve, decisions is complicated because the content of media is of limited utility due to obvious indoctrination functions in communist states. An alternative, namely per-

There are exceptions, of course, most notably Merle Fainsod's Smolensk Under Soviet Rule (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1958); Joel C. Moses, Regional Party Leader- ship and Policy-Making in the U.S.S.R. (New York: Praeger, 1974); and Jerry Hough, The Soviet Prefects (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969). Work undertaken by Jan F. Triska and Yugoslavian scholars promises to enlarge our understanding of citizen contacts with local government in Yugoslavia, while other scholars such as Bernard Frolic, Cal Clark, Victor Falkenheim, and many others conduct research on sub-national political phenomena in communist states.

2 Peter Bachrach and Morton S. Baratz, "Two Faces of Power," American Political Science Review 56 (December 1962): 952.

3 For a careful critique of Bachrach and Baratz see Raymond Wolfinger, "Nondecisions in the Study of Local Politics," American Political Science Review 65 (1971): 1063-80.

Frederick Frey, "On Issues and Non Issues in the Study of Power," American Political Sci- ence Review 65 (1971): 1088.

Ibid., p. 1092.


Issues. in Local Conmmunist Politics 385

sonal interviews witli political actors, was utilized in research for this paper. This more obtrusive measure of issues is not without limitations. The term "issue" itself, when used in a communist state, implies discord and disunity which are among "non-issues." The term "problem" was substituted during interviews in an effort to avoid such immediate political sensitivities.

In addition to a descriptive purpose, data reported here reflect upon much broader theoretical questions regarding the relationship between socioeconomic "development" or "modernization" and political change. Specifically, my concern focuses upon a common set of hypotheses in comparative literature which posit that political systems incur negative consequences (negative from their perspective) as socioeconomic development and modernization are pursued. The literature to which I refer is vast, including theoretical works by Huntington, Apter, Black, Pye, H-olt and Turner, Kautsky and others. Huntington is, perhaps, most blatant in his contention that modernization threatens political stability, arguing that various social and economic changes ".. undermine traditional sources of political authority and traditional political institutions...."6

This theme has been the concern of students of communist states as well. Peter Ludz, Richard Lowenthal, Alexander Eckstein, and others appear to expect in communist nations not only a covariance between socioeconomic and political variables, but that change in the latter will be distinctly contrary to the intentions of party leaders.7 Political decisions to push modernization/development are, then, seen to be likely causes of political consequences which the party leaders would rather avoid, e.g., a decline in elite cohesion, an increase in consumer-oriented de- mands, a rise in dissatisfaction with the performance of state or party organs, etc. Such attitudinal shifts would be, of course, more indicative of negative political consequences engendered by modernization/development in a communist state than would voting, public debating, etc., since these latter forms of political behavior are not realistic alternatives to citizens in such systems.

Thus, this paper's second purpose is to explore the relationship between "modernization" or "development" and local "problems" as perceived by political participants.

Of the thirty-nine counties (judete) in Romania, four were selected for research on the basis of geographic separation and contrasting socioeconomic conditions. These four were Timi?, Cluj, Bra?ov, and Ia?i. Tables 1 and 2 suggest differences among the counties on social and economic variables. Broadly, these data indicate that Brasov is the most advanced county, while Iasi is least so. Tables 3 and 4, however, measure rates of change on several variables for which data are available. With respect to rates of change, lasi is clearly most rapidly developing, while Brasov is changing least quickly. These have, I believe, political importance -- a point to which I will return later.

Local government in communist states is conducted, ostensibly, through directly elected, representative assemblies called people's councils (or soviets). Such councils are elected at the county, city-town, and commune levels in Romania.8 People's councils or soviets symbolically constitute the broad contact with the masses necessary for ideological consistency in communist states; they encourage the party's claim that it governs from a democratic "base." The participation of citizens in

6X Samuel Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1968), p. 5.

7 See Peter Ludz, The Changing Party Elite in East Germany (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972); Richard Lowenthal, "Development vs. Utopia in Communist Policy," in C. Johnson, ed., Change in Communist Systems (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1970), pp. 33- 116; and Alexander Eckstein, "Economic Development and Political Change in Com- munist Systems," World Politics 22 (July 1970): 475-95.

s See a full description in Daniel Nelson, "The State in Romanian Politics," International andl Comparative Law Quarterly, July 1976.


386 Western Political Quarterly

TABLE 1. INDICES OF COMPARATIVE DEVELOPMENT/MODERNIZATION LEVELS

Braiov Cluj Timi Iaji I. % Population Urban ............................... 63.1 62.0 45.3 36.7

II. Infant Mortality (Deaths under 1 year per 1,000 live births) ...................... 36.1 30.3 37.3 43.1

III. % Roads Modernized (i.e., paved) ........ 27.7 12.1 9.5 9.5 IV. Road Density, Modernized km/1,0002 .... 70.3 40.3 35.9 42.0 V. % Labor Force Industrial ....................... 56.3 44.9 43.2 31.9 VI. Investment Level Per Capita .................. 4,980 2,900 2,880 2,160

lei lei lei lei and % of National Total .. ...4.................... 3.4 2.8 2.7 2.1

VII. Ratio of General Schools to Academic Lyceums ................................. 12.1:1 21.3:1 14.8:1 36.6:1

VIII. % of Pupils in Grades 9-12 ................... 19.3 18.7 17.6 9.2 IX. No. of Vocational

(professional) Schools .............................. 20 17 17 14 X. Televisions in use per

1,000 inhabitants ................-.......... . 130 92 126 59

Sources: Anuarul Statistic al Republicii Socialiste Romania 1970, 1972 (Bucuresti: Directia Centrala de Statistica, 1970, 1972); Judetele Patriei (Bucuregti: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste Romania, 1972); Judetele Romaniei Socialiste (Bucureqti: Editura Politica, 1969).

TABLE 2. SCALED RANKING OF COUNTIES BY INDICATORS OF MODERNIZATION/DEVELOPMENT

Bratov Cluj Timin lapi

I. Urban Population ............................. 4 3 2 1 II. Infant Mortality ............................................ 3 4 2 1

III. % Modern Roads ...........................4....... 4 3 1.5 1.5 IV. Road Density ............................................... 4 2 1 3 V. % Labor Force Industrial .......................... 4 3 2 1

VI. Investment Level (combined) .................... 4 3 2 1 VII. Ratio of General Schools to

Academic Lyceums .................4.................. 4 2 3 1 VIII. % Pupils in Grades 9-12 ....................... 4. 3 2 1

IX. No. of Vocational (professional) Schools .... 4 2.5 2.5 1 X. Televisions in use per 1,000 inhabitants .... 4 2 3 1

Mean Rank .... ............................ . 3.90 2.75 2.10 1.25 Modal Rank .......................................... 4 3 2 1

Scale 1-4 suggests least to most "developed"/"modernized." Source: Table 1.

people's councils as deputies, and through their votes in elections conducted for the councils, is necessary for all communist regimes as long as the image of representative assemblies is useful for the party. For this study, in-depth interviews were conducted with almost 200 deputies. The sample was weighted to correct for an urban-rural imbalance.9

Although symbolic importance is attached to people's councils, noncommunist observers have generally regarded these bodies as politically impotent, performing only a legitimizing function. To be sure, Romanian people's council deputies are constrained to behave within acceptable parameters as defined by the P.C.R. (Romanian Communist party), to which most deputies belong. Furthermore,

9This weighting procedure is described in Nelson, Local Politics in Romania (New York: Columbia University Press, forthcoming in the East European Monograph Series), Ap- pendix C.


Issues in Local Communist Politics 387

TABLE 3. AVERAGE ANNUAL RATES OF CHANGE FOR EIGHT INDICES OF MODERNIZATION/DEVELOPMENT BY COUNTY

Bra4ov Cluj Timif Iafi

Population Urban ('68) .......... 61.7% Population Urban ('71) .......... 63.1 Mean Change .......................... 467%/yr Infant Mortality ('68) ........... 48.4 Infant Mortality ('71) ............ 36.1 Mean Change . -...................... 4.1/yr

% Roads Modernized ('65) .... 22.5 % Roads Modernized ('71) .... 27.7 Mean Change ......................... 65%/yr Road Density ('65) ............... 63.6 km Road Density ('71) ............... 70.3km Mean Change ........... ..... 1.12 km/yr % Industrial Laborers ('67) .. 54.2% % Industrial Laborers ('71) .. 56.3 Mean Change .................. ... 53%/yr Ratio of General Schools to Academic Lyceums ('68) .... 12.6: 1 Ratio of General Schools to Academic Lyceums ('71) .... 12.1:1 Mean Change .......................... .17/yr % Pupils in Grades 9-12 ('68) ................. 10.6% % Pupils in Grades 9-12 ('71) ....... ..... 19.3 Mean Change ............ ..... . -.43%/yr

48.1% 52.0

.633%/yr 44.6 30.3 4.8/yr

14.2 12.1

.26%/yr 38.3 km 40.3 km

.33 km/yr

42.3% 44.9

.65%/yr

20.8:1

21.1:1 -.10/yr

19.1%

42.1% 45.3 1.067 %/yr

50.3 37.3 4.3/yr 8.2 9.5 .16%/yr

29.1 km 35.9 km 1.13 km/yr

39.7% 43.2

.88%/yr

14.3:1

31.5% 36.7 1.733%/yr

59.8 43.1 5.6/yr 8.5 9.5 .13%/yr

33.6 km 42.0 km 1.4 km/yr

28.0% 31.9

.98%/yr

31.6:1

14.8:1 36.6:1 -.17/yr -1.7/yr

16.4% 9.1%

18.7 17.6 9.2 -.13%/yr .40%/yr .03%/yr

Source: Anuarul Statistic al Republicii Socialiste Romania (Bucuresti: Directia Centrala de Stastica, 1969 and 1972).

TABLE 4. SCALED RANKINGS OF COUNTIES ACCORDING TO AVERAGE ANNUAL RATES OF CHANGE FOR SEVEN INDICES OF MODERNIZATION/DEVELOPMENT

Brafov Cluj Timi4 Iali

Population Urban ............................... ...... 1 3 2 4 Infant Mortality ................................ .............. 1 3 2 4 % Roads Modernized ..............3......... ...... .. 41 3 2 Road Density ............................................. 2 1 3 4 % Industrial Laborers .......................................... 1 2 3 4 Ratio of General Schools to Academic Lyceums .... 4 3 2 1 % Pupils in Grades 9-12 ...-....................... . ... . 1 2 4 3

Mean Rank ............................................. 2.00 2.14 2.71 3.14 Modal Rank ............................................... 1 3 2.5 4

Note: Source of 1 indicates least change, while a score of 4 indicates most change. Source: Table 3.

deputies have little opportunity to express opinions given that people's councils meet for only a dozen hours annually (in four sessions lasting about three hours each), during which most of the time is given over to reports. Finally, the recruit- ment of deputies involves an extensive screening procedure under the watchful



direction of the party via the Socialist Unity Front which assures that people's councils are filled with loyal, socialist citizens.'0

Notwithstanding these limitations on the independence of deputies and the councils to which they belong, I have found that Romanian deputies are clearly divided with respect to the problems they identify in their local jurisdiction, and their attitudes toward their own council. Moreover, these intra-national distinctions suggest a relationship with socioeconomic differences cited above. As a "win- dow" through which to view local politics, deputies' opinions are clearly only a single perspective and one with considerable limitations. Yet, as will be indicated below, the intra-national diversities found in Romanian sub-national units seem to transcend the limitations inherent to this source of data.

PROBLEMS FOR LOCAL ROMANIAN GOVERNMENT

People's council deputies were asked two questions which focused upon problems confronting their council. These questions were intended to seek evidence bearing directly on the nature of issues in sub-national politics. I was, then, in- terested not only in the qualitative diversity of problems among counties but also in the extent to which, in one county, matters of public concern are more prevalent than in another.

Because of these intentions, there was no attempt to structure responses to the first question which asked, "What are the most important problems for your council to resolve in the next 1-3 years?" I wanted to gain an approximate measure of how many "problems" existed in the deputies' opinions and did not, therefore, limit the number of "problems" mentioned or try to isolate responses in precon- ceived categories. Table 5 categorizes deputies' responses and compares the fre- quency with which they were mentioned in percentages. All categories in which 4 percent or more of the responses fell are listed.

For each level of local government, a mean number of responses per deputy can be calculated. The mean number of problems mentioned offers a comparative gauge among the four counties as to the quantity of local problems or the extent to which deputies recognize tasks facing their local government. The resulting scores (in Table 6) are, quite simply, the average number of problems mentioned by deputies from the locale and level indicated. From these means one might infer that certain levels or areas of Romania do have more problems - or, at least, that deputies have that opinion.

We can, in addition, calculate a "grand mean" for each county. (Because of the sample's bias toward urban-based deputies, however, such a calculation is not merely the mean of three figures for each county as listed above. Instead, we must weight rural deputies' responses more than urban deputies' because of the dispro- portionate presence of the latter in the sample.) Such means are as follows: Timi;, 2.14; Cluj, 1.46; Bra?ov, 2.16; and Ia?i, 2.46.

In some respects, the raw averages for each level, as well as the weighted means above, represent expected results. One finds, for instance, that commune-level deputies consistently mentioned fewer problems than county or city-level council members. Furthermore, with the exception of Cluj, city deputies mentioned more problems than county deputies. Yet, it would be inappropriate to conclude im- mediately from such results that there are more problems in cities for local political institutions than in rural areas (althou gh one might suspect that such is the case). Mean scores of the sort indicated could have been produced by a difference in the "awareness" among deputies regarding local concerns and problems; that is, city deputies might mention more problems simply because they are knowledgeable about a greater number. If that were so, however, the least urbanized county (Tasi)

10 T have discussed the backgrounds of deputies in Nelson. ibid.. ch. IV.


TABLE 5. LOCAL PROBLEM-AREAS CITED BY DEPUTIES (as percent of total number mentioned in each county) *

Nt=97 N=127 N=117 N=171 Timni Cluj Bralov Ia-i

Education .............................. 27% Education .............................. 21% General Development Education ..........-.............. 28% & Modernization .....--........... 23%

Agriculture ........................... 22 Agriculture --........- ........ 16 Education .....................- 19 General Development & Modernization .................. 18

Roads & Public General Development Housing & Agriculture ............................ 14 Transportation ..-.....-....---... . 14 & Modernization .............---..... 14 Construction Quality ............ 13

Health & Sanitation .............. 12 Urban Planning .................... 13 Provisioning & Commerce .... 11 Health & Sanitation .............. 8

Public Services Roads & Public Urban Planning --. 6 Public Services & Maintenance ...................... 9 Transportation ...................... 7 & Maintenance .- .............. 8 '

Housing & Provisioning & Commerce .... 5 Roads & Public Industry ............................ 6 Construction Quality ............ 5 Transportation -............... 5 o

General Development Health & Sanitation .............. 4 Public Services Housing & & Modernization .................... 4 & Maintenance ...................... 5 Construction Quality ............ 5

* All percentages result from weighting raw data to correct for sample's bias toward urbasl-based deputies. t N, here, is the total number of problems cited by all deputies interviewed in each county; keep in mind, then, that one deputy might have mentioned three problemns, whlereas another

could think of only one; e.g., rural deputies would, occasionally, see "agriculture" as all-encompassing. ..

00

Jc3 (0D



TABLE 6

LOCATION BY COUNTY Level Timis Cluj Brapov lIai

Town-City ............................... 2.96 2.29 2.68 3.00 County ........................ ....... 2.33 3.00 2.10 2.68 Commune ............................... 2.00 1.22 2.00 2.40

should have lower mean scores, which it does not. Quite the contrary, the location with the lowest socioeconomic level and the smallest urban population has, overall, the highest grand mean score, denoting more problems mentioned by deputies on the average.

The strong suspicion arises, then, that a region such as Iasi County, experienc- ing socioeconomic change more rapidly than the other counties, does indeed have more problems that are recognized by people's council deputies. Moreover, it is significant that deputies from Ia?i County consistently mentioned more concerns for their people's councils than did Brasov deputies, regardless of location.

Aside from the above quantitative measures, this question produced a differen- tiation among researched counties as to the nature of problems facing sub-national political institutions. Not surprisingly, problems facing local government in one area of Romania differ from concerns expressed by deputies in another locality. For the most part, the results summarized in Table 5 tend to confirm otherwise intuitive assessments. Brasov, the most developed/modernized of the four researched counties, had very few deputies mentioning agriculture as a concern for their local people's council. For the other counties, agriculture remains a problem of real importance with which the councils must be concerned. That my inquiry brought such responses is reasonable given the smaller percentage of Brasov's labor force involved in agricultural pursuits.11

Brasov deputies also evinced some concern for urbanization and urban planning, as did Cluj County to an even greater extent, whereas Iasi and Timis deputies at all levels are less concerned with such issues. All this relates rather well with one's subjective impressions of Brasov County vis-a-vis Iagi; whereas the experience gained over time has probably impressed upon Brasov residents and deputies the need for planning such changes as urbanization and industrialization, Iasi County (outside the city of Ia?i) has had far less contact until recently with trends toward urbanization and industrialization.

Of more generalized concern is education, which seems to be on the minds of many deputies in local Romanian political institutions. Yet, again, Iasi and Timis lead overall, particularly when compared to Brasov County percentages.

Timis deputies seem preoccupied with roads and public transportation, whereas in Brasov such things are of less concern. Even Iasi deputies, despite that county's lower socioeconomic level, are not as concerned with the need for more and better transportation. Cluj and Timis counties do, as a matter of fact, rank behind Brasov and Iasi with respect to "road density" leading to, one can reason- ably assume, a greater recognition of transportation needs in the former two districts.l2

Brasov deputies did not once mention health and sanitation problems as concerns for their people's councils, whereas in the other counties (particularly Iasi and Timis), higher percentages of deputies saw this category as important in the com-

" For a more thorough exploration of these socioeconomic differences, see ibid., ch. II. " Aggregate data can be derived from Judete Romaniei Socialiste (Bucureati-Editura Politica,

1969), or in the series Judete Patriei (Bucuresti-Editura Academile Republicii Social- iste Romania, various years).


Issues in Local Commrunist Politics 391

ing one to three years. This finding appears closely related to how these same counties rank in infant mortality statistics, where TIai has the worst rate among the four and Timi? County somewhat better.l3

Provisioning (connoting the supply of food and consumer products) is, iron- ically, most bothersome for urban deputies - which might suggest that the method of food distribution is less than satisfactory in Romania. Bra?ov County, the most "advanced" locale, had the most responses overall indicating concern for provisioning, although Cluj city deputies were worried about provisioning problems in their area. That such difficulties may exist in a country rapidly changing from peasant to industrial is no surprise, of course, and is not necessarily a function of a centrally planned economy any more than is the magnitude of change in the Romanian society and economy.

Of other "problem" categories, several deserve mention. Housing and the quality of construction appeared as a more pressing concern in Bra?ov, and less so in other counties. This result could be tentatively related to Brasov County's higher level of urbanization. In the "general development and modernization" category, Bra?ov deputies gave proportionately a greater indication of concern at the county and commune levels. Perhaps because there is a more widely spread regard for, or positive association with, those terms in a relatively more advanced area.

From both the quantitative and qualitative measures obtained by Question One, we can conclude that: (1) deputies within one level of one county express divergent opinions regarding problems that face their people's council; (2) that, as a corollary, deputies' opinions "represent" to a reasonable degree what one might expect given the socioeconomic conditions of their locality; and (3) that the extent or degree of concerns mentioned is not uniform intra-nationally, with Ia?i deputies at all levels consistently mentioning more problems for their people's council than deputies in other counties.

Another kind of measure is needed, however, of deputies' opinions regarding local problems - a measure based on limited responses. In a second question, I sought deputies' ideas as to the most pressing single concern for the people's council to which they belong. Their answers are summarized in Table 7 by coalescing responses into several broad categories.

TABLE 7. MOST IMPORTANT PROBLEM-AREA CITED BY PEOPLE'S COUNCIL DEPUTIES

N=37 N=47 N=50 N=64 Category of Timi! Cluj Bra4ov IaSi Answer % (weighted) % (weighted) % (weighted) % (weighted)

Economic* ....................... 30.6 15.2 11.8 19.9 Quality of Lifet .............. 28.1 47.5 34.1 33.8 Education ............... 40.7 17.8 21.1 23.3 General Development/

Modernization: ............ 0 19.1 29.2 22.2 Other? . ....................... .6 .4 3.8 .8

Totals ........................ 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%? Chi Square = 24.7645 N =198

(.05> = P>.01)

* Includes answers focused on agriculture or industry. f Includes answers focused on public services, housing, provisioning, health and sanitation, roads and

transportation, and urban planning. : Answers utilized such terms without offering a specific substantive area. ? Includes finance, parks, democratization, day care centers, etc.

13 Ibid., and surmmarized in Nelson, Local Politics in Romania, ch. II.



One should note that the "most important" problem indicated by deputies in their answers to this item did not, necessarily, correspond with answers to the first question. What might be a concern of overwhelming local importance could sub- sume, for an individual deputy, several of the problems indicated for his or her response to my first inquiry. While responses were generally consistent, such a combination did occur a few times such that we cannot infer that responses to the second question necessarily "arose," or were otherwise derived from answers to Question One.

Agriculture, included under the "economic" category, is a major preoccupa- tion of deputies from all counties. In a nation where half the population is peas- antry, this should surprise no one. That Bra?ov deputies are less concerned with agriculture relative to other problems (even at the commune level) is also to be expected, given that county's higher socioeconomic level. Yet, for much of Romania. agriculture is daily life and cannot be disassociated from the concerns of people's councils, irrespective of any desire to work for "industry," "urbanization," and other panaceas. As one Iasi commune-level deputy told me, "Our major concern has always been and will always be agriculture; the fields are our lives."14

Industry and industrialization are the province of urban-based deputies. Yet, given the great emphasis on increasing industrial production in Romania, such responses were surprisingly few. The economic "plan" is an omnipresent goal in Romania if one believes innumerable party announcements, decrees, etc., the achievement of which is alvays held up as a solution to whatever ails the country. A Five-Year Plan must not only be achieved, but a massive campaign urges each enterprise and individual worker to complete the Plan before schedule.'5 It is interesting, then, that local deputies are so little oriented toward the industrial aspect of "multilateral development" sought by central authorities.

Percentages in the "education" category indicate, rather convincingly, that this area of concern is quite important. In all cases, education ranks among the highest categories in terms of the percentage of deputies citing it as the problem for primary council concern. Components of this concern focused on expanding minimum education to the entire population - specifically, to the ten years now required as opposed to the previous minimum of eight grades. Material conditions of the schools - sufficient classrooms, books, etc. - were also part of the education "problem." In urban areas, the principal educational concern was material in nature, i.e., improving the quality of education. By contrast, rural deputies' primary concern was reaching the tenth-grade required level. Because Ia?i County has fewer young people who continue on to the higher secondary grades, the latter answer was more prevalent there than in the other counties, particularly, Brasov.

Provisioning and other "quality of life" indicators continue to be problems in Romania as in other socialist countries, not so much because of actual product shortages as because of poor distribution. In the city of Cluj, for instance, a number of deputies mentioned consumer products, generally, as a problem for their council, arguing that they personally knew of certain villages where items, in short supply in Cluj, were plentiful. Particularly traumatic, apparently, was the lack of beer (in a hot August), most of which was on the Black Sea coast destined for German or Italian tourists. lasi deputies and rural deputies generally indicated less concern for the supply of food and consumer items, whereas urban-based deputies tended to be more vocal in this regard.

Housing and construction appeared as a major concern in Brasov more than elsewhere, here subsumed under the category of "quality of life." A Brasov city

'4 Oral communication, October 1973. " See, for example, the communique issued by the Executive Committee of the Central Com-

mittee of the Romanian Communist party after its February 5, 1974, meeting in Romania: Documents -- Events, Vol. 4, No. 5 (January 1974).



deputy noted that "30 percent of the town is a big construction site," and another lamented that the completion of new "blocs" of apartments was not yet in view.16 The impatience underlying those statements contrasted with a commune-level Ia?i deputy who observed that "compared with twenty years ago, our homes are like villas today.'17

Several factors could account for the dichotomy between Iasi and Bra?ov deputies' opinions about housing. First, although Ia?i County is, overall, more densely populated, Bra?ov's population is more confined to towns and cities; even the mountainous topography of Bra?ov promotes the concentration of population. One can, then, speculate that the opinions of deputies mirror the concerns of a more highly concentrated (i.e., more often urban) populace for housing and construction quality.

Other reasons for the above-mentioned responses seem feasible as well. It may be, for instance, that subjective "trade-offs" are involved for Brasov County citizens by living in an area more developed/modernized. Life is clearly better in a material sense in contrast to, say, Iasi, but so too do inconveniences related to that higher standard of living seem larger. Perhaps a better way of putting this notion is that Bra?ov citizens may expect comforts, having had them longer, and therefore be relatively more irritated when construction is not completed or when an apartment's facilities do not work. Iasi citizens, by contrast, may be only too happy to see construction taking place, and be more tolerant of inoperative features in new build- ings that were new to them anyway.

General development and modernization, which I used as a "catch-all" category here, was of universal concern. That Timis County has no score in that category resulted from my attempt, in the early stages of research, to seek specific responses from all deputies.

In all of this, there is little to shake one's prior intuitive assessments. For our purposes, however, the thesis of intra-national diversity of opinions about public policy is again supported and, here, portrayed with statistically significant data in categories that more clearly show county-to-county distinctions. The most important conclusion that can be made is that deputies tend to be most concerned with day-to-day problems peculiar to their local area, not, it would seem, with broadly based national goals (e.g., of industrialization, social democracy, etc.). Instead, varying from area to area as one would expect, deputies' concerns reflect im- mediacy and a certain mundane quality -finishing housing and construction, assuring basic food and consumer supplies, having good roads and trams, and educating their children. If deputies to Romanian people's councils are aware of party-decreed aims such as "multilaterally developed socialist society," it must be a distinctly secondary awareness.

In a third question, my intention was to have the subjects reflect upon the accomplishments of their council in response to the question, "What is the most important kind of activity which the people's council performs for the public?" Answers were classified, and a summary of the data is presented in Table 8.

One should not, of course, attribute all these "good deeds" for the public to people's council activities alone, despite the deputies' assertations. Instead of mea- suring actual accomplishments by people's councils, then, the question sought another way of looking at council members' opinions regarding public policies.

Brasov deputies scored highest (relative to the four counties) in the category of "economics" because many replied that their council's most vital activity was in promoting industry. Meanwhile, Iasi's deputies had a wider dispersion of concerns, i.e., a higher percentage in the categories "education" and "other." These scores

'" Oral communications, both September 1973. "7 Oral communication, October 1973.



TABLE 8. MOST IMPORTANT PEOPLE'S COUNCIL ACTIVITIES FOR THE PUBLIC IN DEPUTIES' OPINIONS

N=37 N=47 N=50 N=64 Category of Timi? Cluj Bra4ov Iayi Answer % (weighted) % (weighted) % (weighted) % (weighted) Economic* ........................ 17.6 14.4 22.6 18.9 Education .......................... 15.0 18.9 .8 5.6

Quality of Lifet .............. 57.6 51.6 62.5 52.3 General Development/

Modernization ......-..-.. 9.2 9.4 11.2 11.5 Other ............................... .6 5.7 2.9 11.7

Totals ........................ 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Chi Square= 18.6108 N = 198

(P=.10) * Includes agriculture and industry. t Includes provisioning, housing quality and availability, public service and maintenance, urbanization,

and other responses generally connoting a better life and standard of living.

translate to mean that people's council deputies from counties as different as are Bra?ov and Iasi (particularly in terms of socioeconomic condition) see the accomplishments of that local state organ in dissimilar ways. From these data, of course, a significance level of P= .10 does not allow a confident statement to that effect.

PROBLEMS WITHIN PEOPLE'S COUNCILS

If deputies are not of one mind regarding the problems faced by local government, neither do they evaluate people's councils similarly. A question posed to all deputies interviewed sought their suggestions for "improving" the council of which they were members. Indirectly, then, I sought a measure of their satisfaction with the activities of people's councils and their own role as deputies.

Responses, recorded in Table 9, imply that Iasi County has fewer deputies who say that no changes (or, no improvements) are needed in their council, whereas Bra?ov County has, proportionately, the most deputies who indicate total satisfaction with their council.

TABLE 9. CHANGES NEEDED IN PEOPLE'S COUNCILS ACCORDING TO DEPUTIES

N=37 N=47 N=50 N=64 Category of Timis Cluj Brasov Iai Answer % (weighted) % (weighted) % (weighted) % (weighted)

No changes needed .......... 28 39.4 44.5 19.4 Changes, Intra-systemic*.. 64 25 33.8 28.7 Changes, Extra-systemict.. 8.1 35.7 21.7 52.0

Totals -.................... 100.1% 00.1% 100100.0% 100.1% Chi Square = 35.2436 N = 198

(P


More important are the types of improvements suggested. In administering the questionnaire, structured responses were listed first, and then an opportunity for unstructured answers was offered. The five structured replies are relatively in- nocuous for communist party politics and are classified as "intra-systemic." Among open-ended responses, several clusters become evident:

(1) give deputies and the people's council more power, more important work, or more responsibility;

(2) improve the quality of deputies, i.e., better preparation, more education or better attitudes toward their work;

(3) enlarge citizen involvement and participation; (4) improve expertise and competence of bureaucracy; (5) increase the number of candidates in each district; and (6) improve local leadership.

Each of these responses, quite clearly, implies a greater dissatisfaction with the system of local politics, and they are thus classified as "extra-systemic."

There is uniformly little sentiment for measures offered as structured responses such as increasing or decreasing the number of deputies or lengthening sessions. Better preparation for sessions received some support, as did suggested improvements in the activities of standing commissions of the people's council. Particularly in the latter case, it was a common complaint of deputies that recommendations from standing commissions went unheeded - more so in the less developed/ modernized counties than in the more "advanced" regions.

When a deputy chose to give an answer other than those verbally listed, a surprising proportion in Ia?i County and in the city of Cluj indicated that they thought more power and/or responsibilities should be given to deputies and the people's councils generally. Such a proposal connotes, of course, a departure from party-ordained procedures in local politics and is therefore categorized as "extra- systemic." One Cluj municipal deputy articulated this position better than most:

Deputies must have a stronger relationship with the Executive Committee, and have more influence with it. As it is now, we deputies just wait around for orders. I think, in my personal opinion, that we need to initiate things, not only respond."8

In Ia?i, some deputies called for a greater "delegation of authority" to deputies and the council from the permanent bureau and executive committee. Other subjects were more explicit:

Deputies cannot arrange anything now; if the people ask deputies to do anything, we must plead with the executive committee. Deputies need more authority. For example, we should be able to deal directly with pollution from a factory rather than go through the executive committee. Deputies should not be just intermediaries.l9

More succinctly, another Ia?i deputy said that there was "not much of importance" done in the people's council.

Despite these interesting statements, one must recall that relatively few deputies openly expressed thoughts contrary to the established mode of local politics, whether or not they might have agreed with the general statements. Only in Iasi did a bare majority favor significant changes in local politics.

Critical of their compatriots, a number of deputies suggested that people's councils could be improved if people elected as deputies were of higher quality.

' Oral communication, August 1973. 19 Oral communication, October 1973.



Specific references were made to: (1) the need for higher educational levels, and (2) the necessity of committed attitudes on the part of council members. At least some of the responses in this category dealt with other council members in a con- descending tone, such as one Cluj deputy who judged some of his fellow deputies as "not too bright"; as he continued, the deputy noted that among over 200 deputies in his council, "some do not know much now."20 Other answers placed in this category were of a considerably different sort, asserting that not all deputies prac- ticed a "socialist mentality." Most responses that referred to attitudinal improvements, however, seemed aimed at deputies who are nominal members at best, having little time or inclination to play the role of deputy outside people's council sessions.

A degree of concern is in evidence in all counties for citizen-people's council relations or contacts. There does not seem to be any significant difference county to county in this regard, however, except insofar as Brasov city deputies register greater concern for citizen involvement in local goverment than do urban areas in less developed/modernized areas.

Thus, in Ia?i where socioeconomic change is most rapid from a low level, fewer deputies are satisfied with the people's council or, at least, a higher proportion think that something could be done to improve their council. Second, we have found that Ia?i has a relatively high score for suggested improvements that connote major systemic changes - that is, counter to party control of local political institutions.

CONCLUSION

Data presented in this paper suggest, first, that the issues of sub-national politics in communist states are, indeed, local. Despite the centralization of policy making, the principal concerns of citizens who participate in local politics center around problems highly parochial in nature, which only incidentally reflect the goals of national elites.

Moreover, we can tentatively draw the inference from these data that such problems are, indeed, "issues." There is no uniformity of opinion among sub- national political actors across Romania or within any one county. Different problems are recognized, as the first question discovered, and priorities clearly differ in terms of what problem is most important to deputies, and what activities of local government are seen to be most commendable (questions two and three focused on these points). Even local organs of government, themselves, are foci of disagree- ments insofar as evaluation of people's councils are clearly contradictory.

What these phenomena may mean for a communist political system is not altogether clear. We might, however, expect that any outward manifestation of local political issues (e.g., more discussion leading to debate) would be opposed through periodic, localized "crack-downs." On the other hand, there is nothing in communist ideology to say discussion of issues cannot occur within the ranks of the party; indeed, if the Romanian regime can manage the nascent conflict these data suggest, differences of opinion might well serve as a source of strength, siphoning off antagonisms which could otherwise be more damaging.

But should the party's pursuit of development and modernization be related to an increase in the quantity of issues as perceived by political participants, and a greater inclination to be dissatisfied with local institutions of state or one's role in such organs (as these data seem to imply), then the management of internal con- flicts may grow more difficult with the socioeconomic "successes" of the regime.

' Oral communication, August 1973.


Article Contentsp. [384]p. 385p. 386p. 387p. 388p. 389p. 390p. 391p. 392p. 393p. 394p. 395p. 396

Issue Table of ContentsThe Western Political Quarterly, Vol. 30, No. 3 (Sep., 1977), pp. 305-450Front Matter [pp. 305-309]Abstracts [pp. 310-312]Economic Metaphors, Behavioralism, and Political Theory: Some Observations on the Ideological Uses of Language [pp. 313-328]Burke, Bristol, and the Concept of Representation [pp. 329-341]Recognition and Productivity among American Political Science Departments [pp. 342-350]Theories of Collective Goods Reexamined [pp. 351-362]Conflict Reduction in the Post-Election Period: A Test of the Depolarization Thesis [pp. 363-376]Federal Categorical Aid to Cities: Who Needs It versus Who Wants It [pp. 377-383]Issues in Local Communist Politics: The Romanian Case [pp. 384-396]Influencing the Selection of Judges: The Variety and Effectiveness of State Bar Activities [pp. 397-400]Constituency Response to Congressional Behavior: The Impact of the House Judiciary Committee Impeachment Votes [pp. 401-410]Religious Forces and "Morality" Policies in the American States [pp. 411-417]Legislative Information Systems: A Review and Analysis of Recent Experience [pp. 418-430]Book ReviewsReview: untitled [pp. 431-433]Review: untitled [pp. 433-434]Review: untitled [pp. 434-435]Review: untitled [pp. 435-436]Review: untitled [pp. 436-437]Review: untitled [pp. 437-438]Review: untitled [pp. 438-439]Review: untitled [pp. 439-440]Review: untitled [pp. 440-441]Review: untitled [pp. 441-442]Review: untitled [pp. 442-443]Review: untitled [pp. 443-444]Review: untitled [pp. 444-445]Review: untitled [pp. 445-446]Review: untitled [pp. 446-447]Review: untitled [pp. 447-448]Book NotesReview: untitled [pp. 448]Review: untitled [pp. 448-449]Review: untitled [pp. 449]Review: untitled [pp. 449]Review: untitled [pp. 449-450]Review: untitled [pp. 450]

Back Matter