Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-gr6zb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-18T22:29:34.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Careerism, Committee Assignments, and the Electoral Connection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Jonathan N. Katz  and
Brian R. Sala
Jonathan N. Katz
Affiliation:
California Institute of Technology
Brian R. Sala
Affiliation:
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Most scholars agree that members of Congress are strongly motivated by their desire for reelection. This assumption implies that members of Congress adopt institutions, rules, and norms of behavior in part to serve their electoral interests. Direct tests of the electoral connection are rare, however, because significant, exogenous changes in the electoral environment are difficult to identify. We develop and test an electoral rationale for the norm of committee assignment “property rights.” We examine committee tenure patterns before and after a major, exogenous change in the electoral system—the states' rapid adoption of Australian ballot laws in the early 1890s. The ballot changes, we argue, induced new “personal vote” electoral incentives, which contributed to the adoption of “modern” congressional institutions such as property rights to committee assignments. We demonstrate a marked increase in assignment stability after 1892, by which time a majority of states had put the new ballot laws into force, and earlier than previous studies have suggested.

Type
Articles
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 90 , Issue 1 , March 1996 , pp. 21 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1996

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Abram, Michael, and Cooper, Joseph. 1968. “The Rise of Seniority in the House of Representatives.” Polity 1:53–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albright, Spencer D. 1942. The American Ballot. Washington: American Council on Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Aldrich, John H. 1995. Why Parties? The Origin and Transformation of Party Politics in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alexander, DeAlva S. 1916. History and Procedure of the House of Representatives. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Brady, David W. 1973. Congressional Voting in a Partisan Era: A Study of the McKinley Houses and a Comparison to the Modern House of Representatives. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Brady, David W. 1980. “Elections, Congress, and Public Policy Changes: 1886–1960.” In Realignment in American Politics, ed. Campbell, Bruce A. and Trilling, Richard J.. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Brady, David W., Cooper, Joseph, and Hurley, Patricia A.. 1979. “The Decline of Party in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1887–1968.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 4:381–407.Google Scholar
Budgor, Joel, Capell, Elizabeth, Flanders, David, Polsby, Nelson, Westlye, Mark, and Zaller, John. 1981. “The 1896 Election and Congressional Modernization.” Social Science History 5:53–90.Google Scholar
Cain, Bruce, Ferejohn, John, and Fiorina, Morris. 1987. The Personal Vote: Constituency Service and Electoral Independence. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Bruce A., and Trilling, Richard J., eds. 1980. Realignment in American Politics: Toward a Theory. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Stimson, James A.. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Cox, Gary W., and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Evans, Eldon C. 1917. A History of the Australian Ballot System in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. 1978. Home Style: House Members and Their Districts. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1977. Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P., Rohde, David, and Wissel, Peter. 1975. “Historical Change in House Turnover.” In Ornstein, Norman J., ed., Congress in Change: Evolution and Reform. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Follett, Mary Parker. 1896. The Speaker of the House of Representatives. New York: Longman's, Green.Google Scholar
Fredman, L. E. 1968. The Australian Ballot: The Story of an American Reform. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.Google Scholar
Galloway, George, and Wise, Sidney. 1976. History of the House of Representatives. 2d ed. New York: Crowell.Google Scholar
Goodwin, George. 1959. “The Seniority System in Congress.” American Political Science Review 53:412–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, George. 1970. The Little Legislatures: Committees of Congress. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Heckman, James, and Singer, Burton. 1984. “A Method for Minimizing the Impact of Distributional Assumptions in Econometric Models for Duration Data.” Econometrica 51:271–320.Google Scholar
Jones, Charles O. 1968. “Joseph G. Cannon and Howard W. Smith: An Essay on the Limits of Leadership in the House of Representatives.” Journal of Politics 30:617–46.Google Scholar
Kernell, Samuel. 1977. “Toward Understanding Nineteenth-Century Congressional Careers: Ambition, Competition, and Rotation.” American Journal of Political Science 21:669–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiefer, Nicholas M. 1988. “Economic Duration Data and Hazard Functions.” Journal of Economic Literature 26:646–79.Google Scholar
King, Gary, James Alt, Nancy Burns, and Laver, Michael. 1990. “A Unified Model of Cabinet Dissolution in Parliamentary Democracies.” American Journal of Political Science 34:846–71.Google Scholar
Kousser, J. Morgan. 1974. The Shaping of Southern Politics: Suffrage Restrictions and the Establishment of the One-Party South, 1880–1910. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Ludington, Arthur C. 1911. American Ballot Laws, 1888–1910. New York State Education Department Bulletin No. 448. University of the State of New York, Albany.Google Scholar
McConachie, Lauros. 1973. Congressional Committees. New York: Franklin Reprints.Google Scholar
Martis, Kenneth. 1980. The Historical Atlas of Political Parties in the United States Congress, 1789–1989. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mayer, George H. 1967. The Republican Party, 1854–1966. 2d ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 1974. Congress: The Electoral Connection. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, H. Wayne. 1969. From Hayes to McKinley: National Party Politics, 1877–1896. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Munger, Michael C. 1988. “Allocation of Desirable Committee Assignments: Extended Queues Versus Committee Expansion.” American Journal of Political Science 32:317–44.Google Scholar
Nardulli, Peter. 1995. “The Concept of a Critical Realignment, Electoral Behavior, and Political Change.” American Political Science Review 89:10–22.Google Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1991. “The Republican Presidential Advantage in the Age of Party Disunity.” In Cox, Gary W. and Kernell, Samuel, eds. The Politics of Divided Government. Boulder: Westview.Google Scholar
Polsby, Nelson W. 1968. “The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives.” American Political Science Review 62:144–68.Google Scholar
Polsby, Nelson W., Gallaher, Miriam, and Rundquist, Barry S.. 1969. “The Growth of the Seniority System in the U.S. House of Representatives.” American Political Science Review 63:787–807.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1993. “Spatial Realignment and the Mapping of Issues in American History: The Evidence from Roll Call Voting.” In Riker, William, ed., Agenda Formation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Price, H. Douglas. 1971. “The Congressional Career—Then and Now.” In Congressional Behavior, ed. Polsby, Nelson W.. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Price, H. Douglas. 1975. “Congress and the Evolution of Legislative ‘Professionalism’.” In Congress in Change, ed. Ornstein, Norman J.. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Price, H. Douglas. 1977. “Careers and Committees in the American Congress: The Problem of Structural Change.” In The History of PaHiamentary Behavior, ed. Aydelotte, William. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Rusk, Jerrold. 1970. “The Effect of the Australian Ballot Reform on Split Ticket Voting: 1876–1908.” American Political Science Review 64:1220–38.Google Scholar
Stewart, Charles H. III. 1992a. “The Growth of the Committee System, from Randall to Gillett.” In The Atomistic Congress, ed. Hertzke, Allen D. and Peters, Ronald M. Jr.Armonk, NY: Sharpe.Google Scholar
Stewart, Charles H. III. 1992b. “Committee Hierarchies in the Modernizing House, 1875–1947.” American Journal of Political Science 36:835–56.Google Scholar
Sueyoshi, Glen T. 1991. “A Class of Binary Response Models for Grouped Duration Data.” University of California, San Diego. Mimeo.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.