Although most of the legislative tasks of the European Parliament (EP) are performed in its committees, it is controversial how representative they are of the overall plenary. Distributive, informational and partisan theories suggest respectively that the committee assignments system is designed to (1) serve special interests outside the EP, (2) bring informational benefits to the plenary or (3) promote partisan interests. These propositions are examined via a representative sample of committees using an original data set of MEPs' profiles in the 6th European Parliament. The results show that, whereas information-driven committees attract mainly MEPs with relevant expertise, homogeneous special interests influence assignments to interest-driven and mixed committees, turning them into preference outlying committees. However, partisan considerations do not appear to influence individual assignments strategically.
Adler, Scott E. and John S. Lapinski (1997) `Demand-Side Theory and Congressional Committee Composition: A Constituency Characteristics Approach' , American Journal of Political Science41(3): 895-918.
2.
Bach, Sarah and Steven S. Smith (1988) Managing Uncertainty in the House of Representatives: Adaptation and Innovation in Special Rules. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
3.
Bartus, Tamás (2005) `Estimation of Marginal Effects Using Margeff' , Stata Journal5(3): 309-29.
4.
Benedetto, Giacomo (2005) `Rapporteurs as Legislative Entrepreneurs: The Dynamics of Codecision Procedure in Europe's Parliament', Journal of European Public Policy12(1): 67-88.
5.
Bowler, Shaun and David M. Farrell (1995) `The Organizing of the European Parliament: Committees, Specialization and Co-ordination', British Journal of Political Science25(2): 219-43.
6.
Carrubba, Clifford J., Matthew Gabel, Lacey Murrah, Ryan Clough, Elizabeth Montgomery and Rebecca Schambach (2006) `Off the Record: Unrecorded Legislative Votes, Selection Bias and Roll-Call Vote Analysis', British Journal of Political Science36(4): 691-704.
7.
Corbett, Richard, Francis Jacobs and Michael Shackleton (2005) The European Parliament , 6th edn. London: John Harper Publishing.
8.
Cox, Gary W. and Mathew D. McCubbins (1993) Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Berkeley: University of California Press.
9.
EP (2004) `Activity Report 1 May 1999 to 30 April 2004', URL (consulted May 2007): http://www.europarl.europa.eu/code/information/activity_reports/activity_report_2004_en.pdf .
10.
EP (2007) `Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament'; URL (consulted March 2008): http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getLastRules.do;jsessionid=3193B6C48F3E2C35F538B75E34C9FF8C.node2?language=EN&reference=TOC .
Farrell, David M., Simon Hix, Mark Johnson and Roger Scully (2006) `A Survey of MEPs in the 2004-09 European Parliament' , Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the American Political Science Association, August-September 2006, Philadelphia.
13.
Ferrara, Federico and J. Timo Weishaupt (2004) `Get Your Act Together: Party Performance in European Parliament Elections', European Union Politics5(3): 283-306.
14.
Gilligan, Thomas W. and Keith Krehbiel (1989) `Asymmetric Information and Legislative Rules with a Heterogeneous Committee', American Journal of Political Science33(2): 459-90.
15.
Gilligan, Thomas W. and Keith Krehbiel (1990) `Organization of Informative Committees by a Rational Legislature', American Journal of Political Science34(2): 531-64.
16.
Han, Jeong-Hun (2007) `Analysing Roll Calls of the European Parliament: A Bayesian Application', European Union Politics8(4): 479-507.
17.
Hardin, James and Joseph Hilbe (2007) Generalized Linear Models and Extensions, 2nd edn. Lakeway Drive, TX: Stata Press.
18.
Hausemer, Pierre (2006) `Participation and Political Competition in Committee Report Allocation: Under What Conditions Do MEPs Represent Their Constituents?' , European Union Politics7(4): 505-30.
19.
Hix, Simon (2001) `Legislative Behaviour and Party Competition in the European Parliament: An Application of Nominate to the EU', Journal of Common Market Studies39(4): 663-88.
20.
Hix, Simon (2002) `Parliamentary Behaviour with Two Principals: Preferences, Parties, and Voting in the European Parliament', American Journal of Political Science46(3): 688-98.
21.
Hix, Simon (2004) `Electoral Institutions and Legislative Behaviour: Explaining Voting Defection in theEuropean Parliament', World Politics56(1): 194-223.
22.
Hix, Simon, Abdul Noury and Gérard Roland (2006) `Dimensions of Politics in theEuropean Parliament', American Journal of Political Science50(2): 494-511.
23.
Hix, Simon, Abdul Noury and Gérard Roland (2007) Democratic Politics in the European Parliament . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
24.
Hix, Simon, Tapio Raunio and Roger Scully (2003) `Fifty Years on: Research on theEuropean Parliament', Journal of Common Market Studies41(2): 191-202.
25.
Hoyland, Bjorn (2006a) `Allocation of Codecision Reports in the Fifth European Parliament', European Union Politics7(1): 30-50.
26.
Hoyland, Björn (2006b) `A Second Look at Roll Call Voting in the European Parliament', Paper presented at the meeting of the European Legislative Politics Research Group, 20-21 October 2006, Uppsala.
27.
Kaeding, Michael (2004) `Rapporteurship Allocation in theEuropean Parliament', European Union Politics5(3): 353-71.
28.
Kaeding, Michael (2005) `The World of Committee Reports: Rapporteurship Assignment in theEuropean Parliament', The Journal of Legislative Studies11(1): 82-104.
29.
Katz, Richard S. (1999) `Role Orientations in Parliaments', in Richard S. Katz and Bernhard Wessels (eds) The European Parliament, the National Parliaments and European Integration, pp. 61-86. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30.
Kiewiet, D. Roderick and Mathew D. McCubbins (1991) The Logic of Delegation . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
Krehbiel, Keith (1991) Information and Legislative Organization. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press .
32.
Krehbiel, Keith (2004) `Legislative Organization', Journal of Economic Perspectives18(1): 113-28.
33.
Kreppel, Amie (2002) The European Parliament and Supranational Party System: A Study of Institutional Development. New York : Cambridge University Press.
34.
Long, Scott J. (1997) Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage .
35.
McElroy, Gail (2001) `Committees and Party Cohesion in the European Parliament', EPRG Working Paper No. 8.
36.
McElroy, Gail (2006) `Committee Representation in theEuropean Parliament', European Union Politics7(1): 5-29.
37.
McElroy, Gail (2007) `Forum Section: Legislative Politics as Normal? Voting Behaviour and Beyond in theEuropean Parliament', European Union Politics8(3): 433-48.
38.
Mamadouh, Virginie and Tapio Raunio (2002) `Allocating Reports in the European Parliament: How Parties Influence Committee Work', EPRG Working Paper No. 7.
39.
Mamadouh, Virginie and Tapio Raunio (2003) `The Committee System: Powers, Appointment and Report Allocation', Journal of Common Market Studies41(2): 333-51.
40.
Marsh, Michael (1998) `Testing the Second-Order Election Model after FourEuropean Elections', British Journal of Political Science28(4): 591-607.
41.
Neuhold, Christine (2001) `The "Legislative Backbone" of Keeping the Institution Upright? The Role of European Parliament Committees in the EU Policy-Making Process', European Integration online Papers (EIoP) 5(10); URL (consulted December 2006): http://eiop.or.at/eiop/texte/2001-010a.htm.
42.
Poole, Keith and Howard Rosenthal (1997) Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
43.
Rasmussen, Anne (2008) `The EU Conciliation Committee: One or Several Principals?', European Union Politics9(1): 87-113.
44.
Raunio, Tapio (1997) The European Perspective: Transnational Party Groups in the 1989-1994 European Parliament. Aldershot: Ashgate.
45.
Reif, Karlheinz and Hermann Schmitt (1980) `Nine Second-Order Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results', European Journal of Political Research8(1): 3-45.
46.
Shepsle, Kenneth (1978) The Giant Jigsaw Puzzle. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
47.
Shepsle, Kenneth and Barry Weingast (eds) (1995) Positive Theories of Congressional Institutions. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
48.
Strøm, Kaare (1998) `Parliamentary Committees in European Democracies' , Journal of Legislative Studies4(1): 21-59.
49.
Weingast, Barry R. and William Marshall (1988) `The Industrial Organization of Congress', Journal of Political Economy96(1): 132-63.
50.
Whitaker, Richard (2001) `Party Control in a Committee-Based Legislature? The Case of theEuropean Parliament', Journal of Legislative Studies7(4): 63-88.
51.
Whitaker, Richard (2005) `National Parties in theEuropean Parliament', European Union Politics6(1): 5-28.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
