Doing Archival Research in Political Science By Scott A. Frisch, ...

deletion and removal of documents even more challenging. Recently retired senator Tom Daschle’s papers, housed at South Dakota State University, provide a case in point. The physical material alone accounts for two thousand linear feet—a large collection by any standard. But, in addition to the physical paper contained in the collection, there is an additional terabyte of digital data.⁸ Second, both the Senate and House historical offices have developed detailed guidelines for record management and programs of instruction for staffers of new members. The guidelines and training are designed to train congressional staff in the importance of proper handling, storage, and maintenance of an office’s records.⁹ This type of attention to congressional office record keeping is only likely to improve the scope and breadth of records that are maintained for future researchers and, at the very least, mitigate any serious efforts to cleanse records before their donation and preservation.

Reason Two: Political Papers Do Not Reflect Verbal Transactions

There is an old saying in politics: “Why write it down if you can say it? Why say it if you can wink?” The quote is meant to express the feelings of many political operators that one wants to minimize the “paper trail” when it comes to political decisions. Some critics of an archival approach argue that much of the archival record is missing due to the verbal nature of political operators. Are face-to-face discussions and telephone calls excluded from the archival record? In large part they are, but it is not unusual to find memos that summarize discussions or the occasional transcription of a phone call. And, when it comes to particularly important requests—for instance, requests for committee assignments, support for a political proposal, and so forth—both the person making the request and the person receiving it prefer to have it in writing to minimize disputes after the fact. Thus, much of the verbal culture of politics is reflected in the written record. The second face of power—the things that happen behind the scenes and out of public sight—is always hard to observe. Archives are not the perfect answer, but they come closer than nearly any other form