Suchergebnisse

Even when the stakes of party-building are high, political parties often find their members divided over a key policy position. In post-Reconstruction America, the hot-button issue of excluding Chinese immigrant workers strengthened Democratic cohesion while splitting the 'party of Lincoln'. Previous research has not completely investigated the role of party competition and cohesiveness in paving the way for passage of the Chinese exclusion laws. In this investigation of the legislative politics of banning the Chinese from 1879 to 1882, it is found that cross-pressured members sometimes facilitate party transformation. The evidence demonstrates that partisan responses to potential wedge issues are a previously unnoticed source of explanation of eventual party position changes. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

Even when the stakes of party-building are high, political parties often find their members divided over a key policy position. In post-Reconstruction America, the hot-button issue of excluding Chinese immigrant workers strengthened Democratic cohesion while splitting the 'party of Lincoln'. Previous research has not completely investigated the role of party competition and cohesiveness in paving the way for passage of the Chinese exclusion laws. In this investigation of the legislative politics of banning the Chinese from 1879 to 1882, it is found that cross-pressured members sometimes facilitate party transformation. The evidence demonstrates that partisan responses to potential wedge issues are a previously unnoticed source of explanation of eventual party position changes.

How do party members manage recurring and divisive foreign policy agendas? Do they stay the course or switch their position? The annual decision in Congress regarding the extension of China's most favored nation (MFN) status was a high-profile foreign policy battle between the anti-China coalition and its pro-China counterpart. To test theories of members' vote choice and change, this article analyzes the U.S. House of Representatives roll call votes over China trade policy from 1990 through 2000. Despite the conventional wisdom of voting stability over a recurring agenda, some members engaged in a substantial amount of vote switching. Changes in voting context such as party status, constituency interests, campaign finance, and seniority contributed to members' position shifts. The findings of this study suggest that cross-cutting domestic interests over foreign policy debates in the post—Cold War era lead party members to recalculate the benefits of vote stability and the costs of vote switching.