<section name="raw">
    <SEQUENTIAL>
      <record key="001" att1="001" value="160962" att2="160962">001   160962</record>
      <field key="037" subkey="x">englisch</field>
      <field key="050" subkey="x">E-Paper</field>
      <field key="076" subkey="">Politikwissenschaft</field>
      <field key="079" subkey="y">http://www.ihs.ac.at/publications/lib/ep2.pdf</field>
      <field key="079" subkey="z">Follesdal, Andreas - et al., Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik (pdf)</field>
      <field key="100" subkey="">Follesdal, Andreas</field>
      <field key="103" subkey="">University of Oslo</field>
      <field key="104" subkey="a">Hix, Simon</field>
      <field key="107" subkey="">London School of Economics and Political Science</field>
      <field key="200" subkey="b">(Connecting Excellence on European Governance (CONNEX) (Ed.))</field>
      <field key="204" subkey="b">(New Modes of Governance (NewGov) (Ed.))</field>
      <field key="331" subkey="">Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik</field>
      <field key="335" subkey="">EUROGOV is funded by the EU's 6th Framework Programme, Priority 7</field>
      <field key="403" subkey="">1. Ed.</field>
      <field key="425" subkey="">2005, March</field>
      <field key="433" subkey="">27 pp.</field>
      <field key="451" subkey="">European Governance Papers; No. C-05-02</field>
      <field key="451" subkey="h">Fossum, John Erik (Ed.) ; Falkner, Gerda (Ed.) ; Scherhaufer, Patrick (Ed.) ; et al.</field>
      <field key="461" subkey="">EUROGOV</field>
      <field key="517" subkey="c">from the Table of Contents: Introduction; The 'Standard Versio' of the Democratic Deficit, c. 2005; Defence of the Titans: Majone</field>
      <field key="and" subkey="">Moravcsik; Points of Agreement and Disagreement; Why Constrained Democracy is Better than Pareto Authoritarianism; Why the EU</field>
      <field key="is" subkey="U">ndemocratic, and What Could be Done About It; Conclusion;</field>
      <field key="542" subkey="">1813-6826</field>
      <field key="544" subkey="">EP2</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Democracy</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">European elections</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Legitimacy</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Non-majoritarian institutions</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Normative political theory</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Political parties</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Public opinion</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Constitution for Europe</field>
      <field key="720" subkey="">Agenda-setting</field>
      <field key="753" subkey="">Abstract: In a series of recent papers, Giandomenico Majone and Andrew Moravcsik have 'raised the bar' in the debate over the</field>
      <field key="so-" subkey="c">alled 'democratic deficit' in the European Union. These two influential scholars both contend that much of the</field>
      <field key="exi" subkey="s">tinganalysis is flawed and that the EU is as democratic as it could, and even should, be. We accept many of Moravcsik?s and</field>
      <field key="Maj" subkey="o">ne?s arguments. However, we disagree about one key element: that a democratic polity requires contestation for political</field>
      <field key="lea" subkey="d">ership and public argument over the direction of the policy agenda. This aspect is an essential element of even the</field>
      <field key="'th" subkey="i">nnest' theories of democracy, yet is conspicuously weak in the EU.;</field>
    </SEQUENTIAL>
  </section>