This article examines the process of roll call voting when constituency pressures run counter to the desires of legislators. Previous research has emphasized concerns about reelection. Using votes on the congressional pay raise of 1989, I demonstrate that a variety of legislative goals are useful for explaining the roll call decisions made by members of the House of Representatives. Members turned to reelection, policy, power, and economic self-interest in deciding how to vote on the pay raise issue. Importantly, the contexts of the voting decisions help to explain both the behavior of individual legislators and the ultimate outcome of the legislative process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, John H., and Forrest D. Nelson .1984. Linear probability, logit and probit models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
Arnold, R. Douglas.1990. The logic of congressional action. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
3.
Bartlett, Robert V1979. The marginality hypothesis: Electoral insecurity, self-interest, and voting behavior. American Politics Quarterly7:498-508.
4.
Bauer, Monica, and John R. Hibbing .1989. Which incumbents lose House elections: A response to Jacobson's "The Marginals Never Vanished." American Journal of Political Science33:262-71.
5.
Bianco, William T.1992. Representatives and constituents in the postreform Congress: The problem of persuasion. In The postreform Congress , edited by Roger H. Davidson.New York: St. Martin's.
6.
—. 1995. Trust. Representatives and constituents. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7.
Born, Richard.1990. The shared fortunes of Congress and congressmen: Members may run from Congress, but they can't hide. Journal of Politics52:1223-41.
8.
Bragdon, Peter.1989. Though pay will be a'90 issue, most members have cover . Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report47:3324-6.
9.
Caldeira, Gregory A., John A. Clark, and Samuel C. Patterson .1993. Political respect in the legislature. Legislative Studies Quarterly18:3-28.
10.
Cherryholmes, Cleo H., and Michael J. Shapiro1969. Representatives and roll calls . Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill .
11.
Clark, John A., and Kevin T. McGuire .1994. Congressional response to Supreme Court decision making: The flag burning cases. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, Chicago, IL.
12.
Congressional districts in the 1980s. 1983. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
13.
Duncan, Phil, ed. 1989. Politics in America 1990. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
14.
Fenno, Richard F., Jr.1973. Congressmen in committees. Boston: Little, Brown.
15.
Fiorina, Morris P.1977. The case of the vanishing marginals: The bureaucracy did it. American Political Science Review71:177-81.
16.
Hagle, Timothy M., and Glenn E. Mitchell II.1992. Goodness-of-fit measures for probit and logit. American Journal of Political Science36:762-84.
17.
Hibbing, John R.1983Washington on 75 dollars a day: Members of Congress voting on their own tax break. Legislative Studies Quarterly8:219-30.
18.
Hibbing, John R., and Sue Thomas.1990. The United States Senate: What is accorded respect. Journal of Politics52:126-45.
19.
Hook, Janet.1989a. Congress wavering on 51 percent salary hike. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report47:203-4.
20.
—. 1989b. Members are looking hard at family finances. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report47:205-8.
21.
—. 1989c. How the pay-raise strategy came unraveled. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report47:264-7.
22.
—. 1989d. House, Senate differ markedly on pay and ethics package . Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report47:3129-31.
23.
—. 1994. Voters' hostility is shaping the business of Congress . Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report52:785-9.
24.
Jacobson, Gary C.1987. The marginals never vanished: Incumbency and competition in elections to the U.S House of Representatives, 1952-1982. American Journal of Political Science31:126-41.
25.
—. 1993. Deficit-cutting politics and congressional elections . Political Science Quarterly108:375-402.
26.
Kingdon, John W.1977. Models of legislative voting. Journal of Politics39:563-95.
Little, Thomas H., and Samuel C. Patterson .1993. The organizational life of congressional parties. American Review of Politics14:39-70.
29.
Loomis, Burdett A.1984. Congressional careers and party leadership in the contemporary House of Representatives. American Journal of Political Science28:180-202.
30.
Magleby, David B., Kelly D. Patterson, and Stephen H. Wirls .1994. Fear and loathing of the modem Congress: The public manifestation of constitutional design. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, April, Chicago, IL.
31.
Matthews, Donald R., and James A. Stimson .1975. Yeas and nays. New York: Wiley
32.
Mayhew, David R.1974. Congressional elections: The case of the vanishing marginals . Polity6:295-317.
Ornstein, Norman J., Thomas E. Mann, and Michael J. Malbin .1992. Vital statistics on Congress, 1991-1992. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
35.
Parker, Glenn R.1992. The distribution of honoraria income in the United States Congress: Who gets rents in legislatures and why? Public Choice73:167-81.
36.
Rieselbach, Leroy N.1994. Congressional reform: The changing modern Congress . Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
37.
Rohde, David W.1991. Parties and leaders in the postreform House. ChicagoUniversity of Chicago Press.
38.
Sinclair, Barbara.1992. The emergence of strong leadership in the 1980s House of Representatives. Journal of Politics54:657-84.
39.
—. 1995. Legislators, leaders, and lawmaking. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
40.
Smith, Steven S., and Christopher Deering .1990. Committees m Congress. 2d ed. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
41.
Weaver, R. Kent.1988. Automatic government: The politics of indexation . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution .
42.
Wilkerson, John D.1990. Reelection and representation in conflict: The case of agenda manipulation. Legislative Studies Quarterly15:263-82.
43.
Wolf, Richard.1989. 72% oppose pay raise for Congress. USA Today November17:A1.
44.
in 10 Americans oppose congressional pay raise. 1989. The Gallup Report February.6-8.
