Slide 1Article I of the ConstitutionConstitutional RequirementsElectoral SystemCongressional ElectionsGerrymanderingSlide 7Slide 8Slide 9Slide 10Slide 11Slide 12Slide 13Slide 14Slide 15Rules for RedistrictingIs Gerrymandering All Bad?The Incumbency AdvantageSlide 19Mid-Term #1Grading ScaleWhen America Had 437 Congressional DistrictsPork Barrel PoliticsPresidential PorkThe Electoral ConnectionThe Fenno ParadoxSlide 27Representational Style, ReduxSubconstituenciesPolarizationOther Influences on Member Behavior in CongressParty Influence in CongressSetting the AgendaThe Development of Congressional PartiesLeadership in the U.S. HouseLeadership in the U.S. SenateOther Forms of Congressional Organization—CommitteesSchoolhouse RockThe Legislative Process (The Slightly More Complicated Version)To the Rules CommitteeThe Senate Side of ThingsConference CommitteeThe FilibusterSome ExamplesCongressSeptember 24, 2014Article I of the ConstitutionThe legislative branch (Congress) received by far the most attention in the ConstitutionBroad set of enumerated powersBicameral (two houses or chambers)Senate was believed to be more “aristocratic” and insulated from popular pressures—would look to the long-term interests of the nationThe people’s house (House of Reps) controlled the purse stringsConstitutional Requirements Minimum age to serve in the House: 25Senate: 30Length of U.S. Citizenship in the House: 7 yearsSenate: 9Length of a House term: 2 yearsSenate: 6 (staggered by class)Electoral SystemSingle-member districts in the US—a single person is elected to a given officePlurality rule “first-past-the-post”—whoever receives the most votes wins (in most cases)Contrasted with PR—proportional representation systems, such as the UKConspires to limit the number of effective parties (Duverger’s Law)Primary elections often drive congressional candidates to the extremes ideologicallyCongressional ElectionsOnce thought to be strictly party-line affairs, legislators now work hard to cultivate a “personal vote”In the 19th century, congressional elections were responsive to top of the ticket (presidential) contestsManufactured responsivenessParty ballotsEfficient gerrymandersGerrymanderingAfter every census, Congress is reapportioned to adjust for population changesBy convention every decade, although there is no formal institution preventing between-census redistricting (Texas example)Pre-Reynolds v. Sims (1964) malapportionment (population differences) was commonEqual population today, but the process is still not without controversyCreation of majority-minority districts through redistrictingRules for RedistrictingCan’t dilute minority voting powerContiguousCompact (?)Keeps “Communities of Interest” togetherSame population Political gerrymandering is “not justiciable”Is Gerrymandering All Bad? Brief experiment with the purposive creation of majority-minority experiments provided an opportunity to examine questions concerning representationConsensus that minorities in Congress represent minority communities more effectivelySame finding with regard to women—of all partiesThe Incumbency AdvantageHaving served in Congress before affords enormous advantages on the campaign trailWhy is that?Congress is a re-election machine—affords members all the resources necessary to gain re-electionExample: franking privilege Case workPork-barrel legislationCongress, ContinuedSeptember 26th, 2014Mid-Term #1Class average: C (including several who elected not to take the exam)Just about a perfect normal distributionNo curve, yetCounted several answers as correct for a number of questionsRemember, you can drop your lowest exam scoreLet’s go over itIf you have more questions, come see meGrading Scale A = 92-100% IA- = 90-91% IB+ = 88-89% IBI = 82-87% IB- = 80-81% IC+ = 78-79% ICI =I 72-77% IC- =I 70-71% ID+ =I 68-69% IDI =I 60-67% IFI =I 59% and belowWhen America Had 437 Congressional DistrictsWith the admission of Hawaii and Alaska to the union after the House was fixed at 435 districts, two new seats were temporarily established until the House could be reapportionedPork Barrel PoliticsCertainly has a bad nameCitizen interest groups complain about it (Citizens Against Government Waste produces a yearly “Pig Book”)Counts lots of different kinds of spending as pork—money simply has to be earmarked for a particular state or districtSome items might actually be in the interest of the greater good“Greases the wheels”Nevertheless, Congress has passed a moratorium on earmarksPresidential PorkCongress effectively delegated the distribution of federal money to the presidentStill going to particular districts as dictated by political concernsFor instance, stimulus money has gone to districts that supported the president and states that play into electoral college strategiesThe Electoral ConnectionMuch of what members do in Congress can be attributed to the re-election imperative Mayhew’s (1974) theoryAssumes that members of Congress have multiple goals (policy, good governance, etc.), but that one is of primary concern: the need to be re-electedMembers do three things: advertising, position-taking, and credit-claiming Parties play little or no role in this theoryThe Fenno ParadoxWhy do we hate Congress so much if we love our member of Congress?Running for Congress by running against CongressEvaluations of Congress have been shown to hurt majority party candidates at the pollsCongress, ConcludedSeptember 29th, 2014Representational Style, ReduxTrustees and DelegatesChief determinant of trust: the difficulty of the issueSubconstituencies Geographic constituencyRe-election constituencyPrimary constituencyPersonal constituencyPolarizationSimply not the case that parties are unimportant todayParties in Congress are ideologically homogeneous Quite a bit of separation between the parties as wellStems from the re-alignment of the parties that began after the national Democratic Party embraced civil rightsSouthern Democrats (Dixiecrats) left the partyOther Influences on Member Behavior in CongressConstituency matters—even one vote out of step can be disastrous electorallyInterest groups have both direct and indirect effects on legislator behaviorInterest groups subsidize information costs Two-way street: can also inform voters of member actions on certain bills Legislators think about traceabilityMore likely to vote for something that goes against what their constituents want if costs