Existing Theories of congressional retirement have developed in the cotext of the House of Representatives and thus do not consider important differences between the Senate and the House. Our empirical analysis of Senate retirement from 1962 to 2000 demonstrates that retirement decsions of Senators are not affected by the same things that affect their House colleagues' decisions; electoral safety and the value of formal insttutional positions influence Senators less than House members. Senate retirement decisions are affected by the age of the member and majoritparty status. We discuss implications of our results for the Senate's opeation and place in the constitutional system.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abramowitz, Alan I., and-Jeffrey A. Segal. 1992. Senate Elections. Ann Arbor: Unversity of Michigan Press.
2.
Ahuja, SurWl, Staci L. Beavers, Cynthia Berreau, Anthony Dodson, Patrick Hourgan, Steven Showalter, Jeff Walz, and John R. Hibbing. 1994. “Modern Cogressional Election Theory Meets the 1992 House Elections”. Political ResearchQuarterly 47: 909-921.
3.
Asher, Herbert B., and Herbert F Weisberg. 1978. “Voting Change in Congress: Some Dynamic Perspectives on an Evolutionary Process”. American Journal of Political Science22: 391-425.
4.
Axelrod, Robert. 1986. “An Evolutionary Approach to Norms”. American Political Science Review80: 1095-1111.
5.
Baker, Ross K.1995. House and Senate, 2nd ed.New York: Norton.
6.
Binder, Sarah A.1997. Politics or Principle? Filibustering in the United States Senate. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
7.
Brace, Paul. 1985. “A Probabilistic Approach to Retirement from the U.S. Cogress”. Legislative Studies Quarterly10: 107-123.
8.
Clarke, Harold D., Frank B. Feigert, Barry J. Seldon, and Mariapne C. Stewart. 1999. “More Time With My Money: Leaving the House and Going Home in 1992 and 1994”. Political Research Quarterly52: 67-85.
9.
Fenno, Richard F, Jr.1973. Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little, Brown.
10.
Fenno, Richard F, Jr.1982. The United States Senate: A Bicameral Perspective. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
11.
Frantzich, Stephen E.1978. “De-recruitment: The Other Side of the Congresional Equation”. Western Political Quarterly31: 105-126.
12.
Froman, Lewis A.1967. The Congressional Process. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
13.
Gilmour, John B., and Paul Rothstein. 1993. “Early Republican Retirement: A Cause of Democratic Dominance in the House of Representatives”. Legisltive Studies Quarterly18: 345-365.
14.
Gilmour, John B., and Paul Rothstein. 1996. “A Dynamic Model of Loss, Retirment, and Tenure in the U.S. House of Representatives”. Journal of Politics58: 54-68.
15.
Groseclose, Timothy, and Keith Krehbiel. 1994. “Golden Parachutes, Rubber Checks, and Strategic Retirements from the 102nd House”. American Journal of Political Science38: 75-99.
16.
Hall, Richard L., and Robert P Van Houweling. 1995. “Avarice and Ambition in Congress: Representatives' Decisions to Run or Retire from the U.S. House”. American Political Science Review89: 121-136.
17.
Hibbing, John R.1982a. “Voluntary Retirement from the U.S. House of Reresentatives: Who Quits?”American Journal of Political Science26: 467-484.
18.
Hibbing, John R.1982b. “Voluntary Retirements from the House in the Twentieth Cetury”Journal of Politics44: 1020-1034.
19.
Jacobson, Gary C.1997. The Politics of Congressional Elections, 4th ed.New York: Longman.
20.
Jacobson, Gary C., and Michael A. Dimock. 1994. “Checking Out: The Effects of Bank Overdrafts on the 1992 House Elections”. American Journal of Political Science38: 601-624.
21.
Kernell, Samuel. 1977. “Toward Understanding 19th Century Congressional Careers: Ambition, Competition, and Rotation”. American Journal of Political Science21: 669-693.
22.
Kiewiet, D. Roderick, and Langche Zeng. 1993. “An Analysis of Congressional Career Decisions, 1947-1986”. American Political Science Review87: 928-941.
23.
Livingston, Steven G., and Sally Friedman. 1993. “Reexamining Theories of Cogressional Retirement: Evidence from the 1980s”. Legislative Studies Quarterly18: 231-253.
24.
Matthews, Donald R.1960. U.S. Senators and Their World. New York: Vintage.
25.
Moore, Michael K., and John R. Hibbtng. 1998. “Situational Dissatisfaction in Congress: Explaining Voluntary Departures”. Journal of Politics60: 1088-1007.
26.
Oleszek, Walter J.1989. Congressional Procedures and the Policy Process, 3rd ed.Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
27.
Ornstein, Norman J., Thomas E. Mann, and Michael J. Malbin. 2000. Vital Statitics on Congress 1999-2000. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
28.
Ornstein, Norman J., Robert L. Peabody, and David W Rohde. 1997. “The U.S. Senate: Toward the Twenty-First Century.” In Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, eds., Congress Reconsidered, 6th ed.Washington, DC: CQ Press.
29.
Patterson, Samuel C.1990. “Party Leadership in the U.S. Senate.” In John Hibing, ed., The Changing World of the U.S. Senate. Berkeley, CA: IGS Press.
30.
Schansberg, D. Eric. 1994. “Moving Out of the House: An Analysis of Congresional Quits”. Economic Inquiry32: 445-456.
31.
Sinclair, Barbara. 1989. The Transformation of the U.S. Senate. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
32.
Smith, Steven. 1989. Call to Order: Floor Politics in the House and Senate. Wasington, DC: Brookings Institution.
33.
Smith, Steven S., and Christopher J. Deering. 1984. Committees in Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
34.
Theriault, Sean M.1998. “Moving Up or Moving Out: Career Ceilings and Cogressional Retirement”. Legislative Studies Quarterly23: 419-433.
35.
Young, James Sterling. 1966. The Washington Community, 1800-1828. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
