Organizing Staff in the U.S. Senate: The Priority of Individualism in Resource Allocation

IF 0.9
Nicholas O. Howard, Mark Owens
{"title":"Organizing Staff in the U.S. Senate: The Priority of Individualism in Resource Allocation","authors":"Nicholas O. Howard, Mark Owens","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2020.1817175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Funding for legislative staff represents a valuable commodity to legislators. However it is a resource distributed to separate internal organizations. Previous studies show strong correlations between a legislator’s available institutional power and the benefits of having access to more staffing resources. Therefore, all individual legislators, committee chairs, and party leaders face incentives to direct a larger share of the Senate’s budget. However, we argue the Senate approaches staff allocations for each organization by giving attention to the previous workload of the chamber and resources allocated to other offices in the same bill. Using newly collected data on staff resource allocations between 1885 and 2018, we observe that the Senate’s internal organizations do not undermine each other, and that allocation decisions benefit each area separately. Results of a time series model show that increasing allocations for a staff area actually promotes greater allocations for other areas rather than undermining them, and that changes in membership and eras shape how senators collectively choose to allocate staff resources.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07343469.2020.1817175","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1817175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract Funding for legislative staff represents a valuable commodity to legislators. However it is a resource distributed to separate internal organizations. Previous studies show strong correlations between a legislator’s available institutional power and the benefits of having access to more staffing resources. Therefore, all individual legislators, committee chairs, and party leaders face incentives to direct a larger share of the Senate’s budget. However, we argue the Senate approaches staff allocations for each organization by giving attention to the previous workload of the chamber and resources allocated to other offices in the same bill. Using newly collected data on staff resource allocations between 1885 and 2018, we observe that the Senate’s internal organizations do not undermine each other, and that allocation decisions benefit each area separately. Results of a time series model show that increasing allocations for a staff area actually promotes greater allocations for other areas rather than undermining them, and that changes in membership and eras shape how senators collectively choose to allocate staff resources.
美国参议院组织人员:个人主义在资源配置中的优先地位
对立法者来说,为立法人员提供资金是一种宝贵的商品。然而,它是一种分配给不同内部组织的资源。先前的研究表明,立法者的可用制度权力与获得更多人力资源的好处之间存在着强烈的相关性。因此,所有立法者、委员会主席和政党领导人都面临着在参议院预算中占更大份额的激励。然而,我们认为,参议院通过关注众议院以前的工作量和同一法案中分配给其他办公室的资源来处理每个组织的工作人员分配问题。使用最新收集的1885年至2018年期间工作人员资源分配数据,我们观察到参议院的内部组织不会相互破坏,分配决定对每个领域都有好处。时间序列模型的结果表明,增加对工作人员领域的拨款实际上会促进对其他领域的更多拨款,而不是破坏这些拨款,而且成员和时代的变化决定了参议员集体选择如何分配工作人员资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信