Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T23:40:42.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Wilbur D. Mills: A Study in Congressional Influence*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

John F. Manley
John F. Manley*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

All leaders are also led; in innumerable cases, the master is the slave of his slaves. Said one of the greatest German party leaders referring to his followers: “I am their leader, therefore I must follow them.”

Georg Simmer

Political scientists studying Congress have shown the same disinclination for the study of individual leaders as that of the profession as a whole. Whatever the reasons for avoiding an analysis of social and political processes from the perspective of an individual—and there are several good ones—it is difficult to ignore, if not discount, the extreme emphasis placed on personalities by experienced participants and observers of the congressional process. One may decide, with Fenno, to underplay references to specific individuals in an effort “to show how much generalization is possible short of a heavy reliance on personality data.” But the fact remains that those closest to the legislative process do see it in terms of individuals and personalities; more important, much can be learned, as evidenced by Huitt's work, by focusing on individual legislators and the contexts within which they function. Whether it is Lyndon Johnson as Senate Majority Leader searching for the man who is the “key” to a particular bill, the differences between a Rayburn and a McCormack, or the skill of a Judge Smith, the individual looms large on Capitol Hill.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 63 , Issue 2 , June 1969 , pp. 442 - 464
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

I want to thank the APSA Study of Congress, the Brookings Institution, and the University of Wisconsin Research Committee for supporting the research on which this study is based. A number of friends and colleagues, while assuming no responsibility for the flaws in this study, kindly read an earlier version. My appreciation goes to Jonathan Casper, Lewis A. Dexter, Murray Edelman, Richard F. Fenno, Jr., Donald McCrone, Hugh Douglas Price, and Gilbert Y. Steiner. A draft of this article was first presented at the 1968 Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.

References

1 “On Superordination and Subordination,” Theories of Society, eds. Parsons, Talcott, Shils, Edward, Naegele, Kasper D., Pitts, Jesse R. (New York: Free Press, 1965), p. 542 Google Scholar.

2 Edinger discusses many of them. See Edinger, Lewis J., “Political Science and Political Biography: Reflections on the Study of Leadership (I),” Journal of Politics, 26 (05, 1964), 423–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Fenno, Richard F. Jr., The Power of the Purse (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1966), p. xxiii Google Scholar.

4 Huitt, Ralph K., “The Morse Committee Assignment Controversy: A Study in Senate Norms,” this Review, 51 (06, 1957), 313–329 Google Scholar; “Democratic Party Leadership in the Senate,” this Review, 55 (06, 1961), 333–344 Google Scholar; “The Outsider in the Senate: An Alternative Role,” this Review, 55 (09, 1961), 566–574 Google Scholar.

5 Homans, George C., The Human Group (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1950), p. 318 Google Scholar.

6 Ibid., p. 319.

7 Op. cit., p. 437.

8 Quoted in Duscha, Julius, “The Most Important Man on Capitol Hill Today,” New York Times Magazine, 02 25, 1968, p. 78 Google Scholar.

9 Seligman wrote one of the obituaries in 1950. See Seligman, Lester G., “The Study of Political Leadership,” this Review, 44 (12, 1950), 912–914 Google Scholar.

10 Gibb, Cecil A., “The Principles and Traits of Leadership,” Small Groups: Studies in Social Interaction, eds. Hare, A. Paul, Borgatta, Edgar F., and Bales, Robert F. (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1955), p. 91 Google Scholar. Likert comments: “To be effective and to communicate as intended, a leader must always adapt his behavior to take into account the expectations, values and interpersonal skills of those with whom he is interacting.” Likert, Rensis, New Patterns of Management (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961), p. 95 (italics his)Google Scholar.

11 A reporter who is very close to Mills and has studied him for ten years once observed to me, “I know Wilbur Mills better than anyone in this town, and I don't know him at all.” For a more complete account of the nature of Ways and Means, and some fragments on Mills which are used in the present study, see Manley, John F., “The House Committee on Ways and Means: Conflict Management in a Congressional Committee,” this Review, 59 (12, 1965), 927–939 Google Scholar.

12 Bales, Robert F. and Slater, Philip E., “Role Differentiation in Small Decision-Making Groups,” Family, Socialization and Interaction Process, Parsons, Talcott, et al., (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1956), pp. 279–306 Google Scholar. See also Philip E. Slater, “Role Differentiation in Small Groups,” in Hare, Borgatta and Bales (eds.), op. cit., pp. 498–515.

13 Thibaut, John W. and Kelley, Harold H., The Social Psychology of Groups (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1959), p. 282 Google Scholar. See also Verba's observation that in ongoing groups the development of a legitimate leadership structure replaces dual leadership. Verba, Sidney, Small Groups and Political Behavior (Princeton University Press, 1961), p. 171 Google Scholar.

14 Gouldner, Alvin W., Studies in Leadership (New York: Harper & Bros., 1950), p. 19 Google Scholar.

15 Quoted in Seib, Charles B., “Steering Wheel of the House,” New York Times Magazine, 03 18, 1962, p. 146 Google Scholar.

16 Duscha, op. cit., p. 76.

17 “Interview with Congressman Wilbur Mills,” for “Operation Government,” Westinghouse Broadcasting Company, October 11, 1967, p. 3. I am indebted to Stephen Horn of the Brookings Institution for a copy of the transcript.

18 Ibid., p. 3.

19 Ibid., p. 4.

20 Ibid., p. 5.

21 Ibid., p. 7.

22 This definition of power is, of course, taken from the definitions of Parsons, Dahl and Catlin. See Parsons, Talcott, “On the Concept of Influence,” Public Opinion Quarterly, 27 (Spring, 1963), 37–62 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dahl, Robert A., “The Concept of Power,” Behavioral Science, 2 (07, 1957), 201–215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Catlin, G. E. G., The Science and Method of Politics (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1927), pp. 222–223 Google Scholar.

23 Parsons, Ibid., p. 48.

24 For Coleman's critique see James S. Coleman, “Comment on ‘On the Concept of Influence,’” Ibid., pp. 63–82. For Parsons' rejoinder see Ibid., pp. 87–92.

25 Ibid., p. 67.

26 French, John R. P. Jr., and Raven, Bertram, “The Bases of Social Power,” Group Dynamics, eds. Cartwright, Dorwin and Zander, Alvin (Evanston, Ill.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1960), pp. 612–621 Google Scholar. These may not be the only bases of power which can be distinguished but they are more inclusive than other typologies, such as Weber's threefold classification of authority. For Weber's treatment of charismatic, rational-legal, and traditional authority see Weber, Max, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, ed. Parsons, Talcott, trans. Henderson, A. M. and Parsons, Talcott (New York: The Macmillan Co., Free Press, 1964), pp. 328–363 Google Scholar. I have substituted the term sanctions for Raven and French's “coercive” power because of the connotation of the latter, and their third base of power, legitimacy, is considerably different from the way it is used here. By legitimate power they mean internalized values which dictate that someone has a right to influence someone else. As used here legitimacy refers more to the decisions Mills can make because he is Chairman, and how these decisions affect his influence.

27 Blau, Peter M., Exchange and Power in Social Life (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1964), p. 201 Google Scholar.

28 Thibaut and Kelley, op. cit., p. 109.

29 Similar comments were received from staff members and executive branch specialists. The following is typical: “He has a memory like an elephant, never forgets a thing, and he can tell you more about the welfare administration than most people in this building.”

30 Homans, George C., Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms (New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961), p. 295 Google Scholar.

31 Blau, op. cit., p. 202.

32 Barnard, Chester I., The Functions of the Executive (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1956), pp. 167–70Google Scholar.

33 See Barnard's discussion of incentives, Ibid. pp. 139–149.

34 Parsons uses the term sanction to include rewards and punishments. Parsons, Talcott and Shils, Edward A. (eds.), Toward a General Theory of Action (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1962), p. 191 Google Scholar. Rewards and sanctions are distinguished here because the former increase the atrtactiveness of the giver, while the latter decrease his attractiveness. On this point see French and Raven, op. cit., p. 615.

35 On the importance of this function in a very different setting see Whyte, William Foote, “Corner Boys: A Study in Clique Behavior,” American Journal of Sociology, 46 (03, 1941), p. 661 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

36 This happened to Dan Rostenkowski during the 1965 debate on excise taxes when he happened to be close to Mills when the Chairman wanted to leave the microphone. See Congressional Record, July 2, 1965 (daily edition), p. 11891. Rostenkowski was pleased.

37 House, Committee on Ways and Means, Contributions by Self-Employed Individuals to Pension Plans, etc., 89th Cong., 2d Sess., 1966, H. Rept, 1557 to accompany H. R. 10. Congressional Record, June 6, 1966 (daily edition), pp. 11672–82.

38 In 1965 Mills lauded Joel Broyhill's contribution to the medicare bill. Broyhill, who was strongly criticized for leaving the District and Post Office committees for Ways and Means, might not have found it necessary to use Mills's statement in his campaign, but he could have if he wanted to. Congressional Record, April 7, 1965 (daily edition), p. 6959.

39 See French and Raven's treatment of coercive power, op. cit., pp. 614–615.

40 The comments on Barden are based on Fenno's analysis of him, Fenno, Richard F. Jr., “The House of Representatives and Federal Aid to Education,” in New Perspectives on the House of Representatives, eds. Peabody, Robert L. and Polsby, Nelson W. (Chicago: Rand McNally & Co., 1963), pp. 209–212 Google Scholar.

41 Sorensen, Theodore C., Kennedy (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), p. 343 Google Scholar.

42 The forty votes include votes reported in the Congressional Record, Congressional Quarterly, an unpublished doctoral dissertation on the 1964 Revenue Act written by Everett Cataldo, the public press, and, in some cases, by private sources.

43 Quoted in “Jobless Aid Plan Facing Reversal.” New York Times, 05 13, 1966, p. 21 Google Scholar.

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.