The twelve years following the Republican revolution provide ideal ground to test existing theories of congressional behavior and organization. The authors examine the incidence of individual roll rates in the U.S. House to “unpack” the degree to which the 1994 election produced a change in agenda control and examine how it affected roll rates. Then, to understand differences in agenda control, we compare majority and minority party roll rates before and after the election. The results confirm majority party influence over the House agenda and show that the Republican leadership exhibited remarkably similar behavior to the Democrats prior to 1995.
Aldrich, John H.1995. Why parties? The origin and transformation of party politics in America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2.
Aldrich, John H., and David W. Rohde .1997-98. The transition to Republican rule in the House: Implications for theories of congressional politics. Political Science Quarterly112:541-67.
3.
Aldrich, John H., and David W. Rohde .2000. The Republican revolution and the House Appropriations Committee. Journal of Politics62 (February): 1-33.
4.
Aldrich, John H. and David W. Rohde.2001. The logic of conditional party government: Revisiting the electoral connection. In Congress reconsidered , eds. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, 269-92. 7th ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
5.
Aldrich, John H., and David W. Rohde .2005. Congressional committees in a partisan era. In Congress reconsidered, ed. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, 249-70. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
6.
Bond, Jon R., and Richard Fleisher .2000. Polarized politics: Congress and the president in a partisan era. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
7.
Chiou, Fang-Yi, and Lawrence S. Rothenberg .2003. When pivotal politics meets partisan politics. American Journal of Political Science47:503-22.
8.
Cox, Gary C., and Mathew D. McCubbins .1993. Legislative Leviathan: Party government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press.
9.
Cox, Gary W., and Mathew D. McCubbins .2002. Agenda power in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1877 to 1986. In Party, process, and political change in Congress: New perspectives on the history of Congress , ed. David Brady and Mathew D. McCubbins, 107-45. Palo Alto, CA : Stanford University Press.
10.
Cox, Gary W., and Mathew D. McCubbins .2005. Setting the agenda: Responsible party government in the US House of Representatives. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11.
Cox, Gary C., and Mathew D. McCubbins . n.d. Individual roll rates. Typescript, University of California, San Diego.
12.
Cox, Gary W., and Keith T. Poole .2002. On measuring partisanship in roll-call voting: The U.S. House of Representatives, 1877-1999. American Journal of Political Science46:477-89.
13.
Den Hartog, Chris.2005a. The Jeffords switch and party members’ success in the U.S. Senate. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, D.C.
14.
Den Hartog, Chris.2005b. The powers and limits of parties in the U.S. Senate. Typescript, University of California, San Diego.
15.
Dodd, Lawrence C., and Bruce I. Oppenheimer .2005. A decade of Republican control: The House of Representatives, 1995-2005. In Congress reconsidered , ed. Lawrence C. Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer, 23-54. Washington, DC : CQ Press.
16.
Fenno, Richard F.1966. Power of the purse: Appropriations politics in Congress . Boston: Little, Brown.
17.
Fenno, Richard F.1997. Learning to govern: An institutional view of the 104th Congress. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
18.
Finocchiaro, Charles, and David Rohde.2008. War for the floor: Partisan theory and agenda control in the U.S. House of Representatives. Legislative Studies Quarterly33 (1): 35-62.
19.
Groseclose, Tim, and James M.Snyder J.r. 2003. Interpreting the coefficient of party influence: Comment on Krehbiel. Political Analysis11:104-7.
20.
Jacobson, Gary C.2000. Party polarization in national politics: The electoral connection. In Polarized politics: Congress and the president in a partisan era, ed. Jon R. Bond and Richard Fleisher, 9-30. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
21.
Jenkins, Jeffery A., Michael H. Crespin, and Jamie L. Carson .2005. Parties as procedural coalitions in Congress: An examination of differing career tracks. Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (3): 365-89.
22.
King, Gary.1989. Unifying political methodology: The likelihood theory of statistical inference. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Krehbiel, Keith.1991. Information and legislative organization. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
24.
Krehbiel, Keith.1996. Institutional and partisan sources of gridlock: A theory of divided and unified government. Journal of Theoretical Politics8:7-40.
25.
Krehbiel, Keith.2003a. Asymmetry in party influence: Reply. Political Analysis11:108-9.
26.
Krehbiel, Keith.2003b. The coefficient of party influence. Political Analysis11:95-103.
27.
Krehbiel, Keith, and Jonathan Woon. n.d. Selection criteria for roll call votes. Typescript.
28.
Lawrence, Eric D., Forrest Maltzman, and Steven S. Smith .2006. Who wins? Party effects in legislative voting. Legislative Studies Quarterly31:33-69.
29.
Mann, Thomas E., and Norman J. Ornstein .2006. The broken branch. New York: Oxford University Press.
30.
McCarty, Nolan, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal .2001. The hunt for party discipline in Congress. American Political Science Review95:673-88.
31.
Oleszek, Walter J.2004. Congressional procedures and the policy process. 6th ed. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
32.
Palmquist, Bradley.1999. Analysis of proportion data. Paper prepared for the annual meeting of the Political Methodology Society , College Station, TX.
33.
Prentice, R.L.1986. Binary regression using and extended beta-binomial distribution, with discussion of correlation induced by covariate measurement errors. Journal of the American Statistical Association81:321-27.
34.
Roberts, Jason M.2005. Minority rights and majority power: Conditional party government and the motion to recommit in the House. Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (2): 219-34.
35.
Roberts, Jason M., and Steven S. Smith .2003. Procedural contexts, party strategy, and conditional party voting in the U.S. House of Representatives, 1971-2000. American Journal of Political Science47:305-17.
36.
Rohde, David W.1991. Parties and leaders in the postreform House. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
37.
Sinclair, Barbara.1983. Majority leadership in the U.S. House. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
38.
Sinclair, Barbara.2000. Unorthodox lawmaking: New legislative processes in the U.S. Congress. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: CQ.
39.
Snyder, James M., Jr., and Tim Groseclose.2000. Estimating party influence in congressional roll-call voting. American Journal of Political Science44:193-211.
40.
Snyder, James M., Jr., and Tim Groseclose.2001. Estimating party influence on roll call voting: Regression coefficients versus classification success. American Political Science Review95:689-98.
41.
Stonecash, Jeffrey M., Mark D. Brewer, and Mack D. Mariani .2003. Diverging parties: Social change, realignment, and party polarization. New York: Westview.
42.
Theriault, Sean M.2008. Party polarization in Congress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43.
Trochim, William M. K.2001. The research methods knowledge base. Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog.
44.
Yoshinaka, Antoine.2005. House party switchers and committee assignments: Who gets "what, when, how"?Legislative Studies Quarterly30 (3): 348-64.
