Suchergebnisse

""Contents""; ""Introduction""; ""1. Understanding Leadership Behavior""; ""2. Agenda Control""; ""3. Interactions with Subcommittee Leaders""; ""4. The Chair and Ranking Minority Member""; ""5. Anticipating the Floor""; ""6. Leadership and Power in Committee""; ""Appendixes""; ""A. Evidence""; ""B. Participation in Committee""; ""References""; ""Index

This article is the first comprehensive treatment of countermajoritarian roll call outcomes in the U.S. Senate, 1789–2022. Divergences from majoritarian principles are rooted in part in malapportionment and equal representation by state. Roll calls where a majority of the chamber votes one way while the other side represents most of the U.S. population are frequent across Senate history, depending on the proportion of the population covered by the majority party and the degree of conflict in the agenda. Other departures from majoritarian principles derive from the presence of supermajority requirements within the chamber. Such decision thresholds likewise are prevalent across Senate history, with significant increases since the 1970s. Although the two sources of countermajoritarian potential tend to be mutually reinforcing, under certain conditions they work against one another. The partisan impact varies over time, but in the modern chamber, Republicans have benefited more from Senate countermajoritarianism than have Democrats.

AbstractAs a result of its size and close ties to the Tea Party movement, the freshman cohort of House Republicans elected in 2010 had a significant impact on the chamber. Compared to other Republicans, the districts the freshmen represented did not tilt more toward the GOP or the Tea Party, nor was their roll call ideology during 2011–2012 statistically distinguishable from that of their more senior colleagues. For votes that were Tea Party priorities, however, the effects of freshman status were often large. And the most consequential impact of the class was over party strategy and agenda. The role played by the 2010 House freshmen has implications for how we should think about party influence in Congress.

In recent decades, roughly 25 percent of major bills considered by the U.S. Congress have been omnibus measures—large, often unwieldy, legislative vehicles that touch on multiple policy areas. The 1981 reconciliation bill, which included much of President Reagan's economic agenda, is perhaps the best-known example. But many important policy proposals, from crime control to welfare reform, have passed as part of omnibus legislation.

IN THIS ESSAY, THE AUTHOR REVIEWS AND CRITIQUES THE SCHOLARLY LITERATURE ABOUT RULES AND OTHER STRUCTURAL ARRANGEMENTS IN CONGRESS. HIS FOCUS IS ON EMPIRICAL RESEARCH THAT HAS BEEN INFORMED BY RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY. HE EMPHASIZES THREE CATEGORIES OF RULES--COMMITTEE JURISDICTIONS, LEADERSHIP PREROGATIVES, AND FLOOR PROCEDURE. AN IMPLICATION IS THAT THE FORCES SHAPING PROCEDURAL POLITICS VARY DEPENDING ON THE ASPECT OF CONGRESSIONAL STRUCTURE UNDER CONSIDERATION.