Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies最新文献_第10页

The Rise of Multiple-Measures Rules in the House of Representatives 众议院多重措施规则的兴起

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-04-23 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1813842

Scott R. Meinke

{"title":"The Rise of Multiple-Measures Rules in the House of Representatives","authors":"Scott R. Meinke","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2020.1813842","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1813842","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Through most of the modern partisan era, the House Rules Committee adhered to a norm of One Measure, One Rule. Starting in the 1990s, majorities violated this norm on rare occasions, but after 2010, multiple-measures rules became commonplace. This paper argues that multiple, sometimes competing objectives—majority messaging, member position-taking opportunities, and managing limited floor time—motivate the majority’s use of this creative rule. Bills in multiple-measures rules since 2010 have been more majority-unifying and divisive between the parties, and bills appear more in these rules as some time constraints increase. Bills sponsored by rank-and-file members, as compared to committee chairs, are also more likely to be included in multiple-measures packages. A special case of the multiple-measures rule, the bifurcated rule, also governs measures with heightened partisan conflict, and it allows the majority to navigate coalition problems creatively under certain conditions. The multiple-measures trend highlights how the majority continues to evolve special rules to pursue multiple goals under constraints, and it raises important questions about the way these tactics limit floor consideration of procedure.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07343469.2020.1813842","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43543713","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Day of Fire: An Oral History Perspective on the Bush White House on 9/11 《火之日:布什政府在9/11事件中的口述历史》

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-04-13 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2021.1905106

Michael Nelson

引用次数: 1

The Collective “Congress” on the Ballot? A Voter and Aggregate-Level Analysis of Collective Responsibility in Congressional Elections 投票中的集体“国会”?国会选举中集体责任的选民与集体层面分析

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-04-13 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1814903

Carlos Algara

{"title":"The Collective “Congress” on the Ballot? A Voter and Aggregate-Level Analysis of Collective Responsibility in Congressional Elections","authors":"Carlos Algara","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2020.1814903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1814903","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The traditional view among scholars is that voters do not weigh job performance in their congressional voting decisions. Recent work challenges this notion and provides evidence that congressional job approval matters at the ballot box. However, scholars are divided as to which party benefits from positive job approval ratings. Moreover, the literature is unclear regarding the conditions under which voters hold individual candidates accountable for the collective performance of Congress. Analyzing individual and aggregate-level data, this study produces several key findings: (1) assessments of congressional job performance are directly tied to the electoral standing of the majority party; (2) positive approval ratings raise the level of support for majority party candidates among minority partisans and those closest to the minority in ideological proximity; and (3) majority party incumbents gain more from congressional approval than nonincumbents and suffer less of a loss from congressional disapproval. These findings provide a clearer narrative of how collective accountability works in congressional elections and the incentives for majority and minority party behavior in the contemporary Congress.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07343469.2020.1814903","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59919030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Organizing Staff in the U.S. Senate: The Priority of Individualism in Resource Allocation 美国参议院组织人员:个人主义在资源配置中的优先地位

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-03-10 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1817175

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":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1817175","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":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07343469.2020.1817175","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45393242","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Organizing at the Extreme: Hardline Strategy and Institutional Design 极限组织：强硬策略与制度设计

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-03-10 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1863519

Ruth Bloch Rubin

引用次数: 2

Gendered Priorities? Policy Communication in the U.S. Senate 性别优先级?美国参议院的政策沟通

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-03-10 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1841336

A. Russell

{"title":"Gendered Priorities? Policy Communication in the U.S. Senate","authors":"A. Russell","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2020.1841336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1841336","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Women running for Congress make different choices than men about how to connect with constituents on social media, but few studies investigate how these variable strategies shape in-office messaging, particularly those of U.S. senators. This article extends research on gendered congressional communication by looking at how women in the Senate build reputations on Twitter, specifically assessing whether they set themselves apart with the policy agendas they promote online. Senators take advantage of Twitter’s low-cost and user-driven messaging to cultivate a reputation with their legislative expertise, and this research shows that women are curating a more comprehensive and broad agenda than gender stereotypes would otherwise suggest. Senators’ legislative communication on Twitter shows that women on both sides of the aisle are expanding their policy agenda to reach beyond “female issues.” Women are often stereotyped as less policy-oriented and only capable in gender-specific policy areas, but women in the Senate are actively communicating about contested policy issues and articulating diverse agendas. By adopting a comprehensive policy agenda for their public image, women in the Senate are both meeting and defying expectations about the policy topics they are willing and ready to act on.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07343469.2020.1841336","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47361880","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Congressional Career Decisions in the 2018 Congressional Midterm Elections 2018年国会中期选举中的国会职业生涯决定

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-03-08 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1811424

Hanna K. Brant, L. Overby

{"title":"Congressional Career Decisions in the 2018 Congressional Midterm Elections","authors":"Hanna K. Brant, L. Overby","doi":"10.1080/07343469.2020.1811424","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07343469.2020.1811424","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although we prefer to think of congressional turnover as being electorally driven and based on the choices of voters, in recent decades retirements/resignations have been a larger contributor to change in the composition of both chambers of Congress than have electoral defeats of incumbents. In this article, we consider the impact of retirements (and other forms of non-electoral exits) on the 2018 congressional midterms, focusing primarily on the House of Representatives. After reviewing the relevant (and limited) literature, we provide a descriptive overview of congressional retirements (including the unusual retirement of a comparatively young speaker of the House and almost two dozen GOP committee and subcommittee chairs) then examine the extent of voluntary retirements in this electoral cycle against historical patterns, and explore the effects of different retirements (i.e., progressive ambition versus retirement from public life). Using multivariate models, we examine which factors correlate significantly with retirement decisions, test for a partisan differential in retirement rates, and compare the rates at which the parties are capable of replacing retirees with co-partisans. Our analysis allows us to consider the ongoing importance of members’ career decisions for the composition of and the partisan balance of power in the U. S. Congress. Within the context of 2018 specifically, these career decisions had substantial implications for partisan control of the House, experience and leadership within the House Republican conference, and entrance of female members into Congress and toward higher office.","PeriodicalId":41473,"journal":{"name":"Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2021-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/07343469.2020.1811424","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41880690","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Chervinsky, Lindsay M. The Cabinet: George Washington and the Creation of an American Institution 林赛·m·切文斯基《内阁:乔治·华盛顿与美国制度的创立

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1865075

Shirley Anne Warshaw

引用次数: 0

Han, Lori Cox. Advising Nixon: The White House Memos of Patrick J. Buchanan. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2019. 368 Pages. $39.95 (Hardcover) 韩，洛丽·考克斯。尼克松顾问：帕特里克·J·布坎南的白宫回忆录。堪萨斯州劳伦斯：堪萨斯大学出版社，2019年。368页$39.95（硬封面）

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1865079

J. P. Burke

引用次数: 0

Sides, John, Michael Tesler, and Lynn Vavreck. Identity Crisis: The 2016 Presidential Campaign and the Battle for the Meaning of America Sides，John，Michael Tesler和Lynn Vavreck。身份危机：2016年总统竞选与美国意义之争

IF 0.9

Congress & The Presidency-A Journal of Capital Studies Pub Date : 2021-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/07343469.2020.1865081

Jack D. Collens

引用次数: 3