IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v185y2020i3d10.1007_s11127-019-00706-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of majority party agenda setting on roll calls

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua D. Clinton

    (Vanderbilt University)

Abstract

How well can roll calls detect the causal impact of majority party agenda setting in Congress? Estimating the counterfactual required to assess the effects of majority party agenda setting is complicated by time-varying differences in the political environment and the fact that measures commonly used to control for compositional changes may themselves depend on the extent of agenda control being exercised. Using techniques popularized by recent work focused on causal inference, I characterize whether agenda changes occuring during changes in majority party control in the US House of Representatives are consistent with predictions from models of majority party agenda control. Comparing how the same members in consecutive Congresses are affected by changes in party control and using fixed effects to account for time-varying differences between consecutive Congresses helps isolate the changes in the agenda attributable to agenda setting. The analyses highlight the challenge in consistently estimating the effects of agenda control and suggest that although recent transitions produce patterns consistent with the predictions of agenda setting theories, the average effect over the post-Reconstruction period is harder to interpret as being produced by agenda control.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua D. Clinton, 2020. "The effect of majority party agenda setting on roll calls," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 185(3), pages 459-483, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:185:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s11127-019-00706-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s11127-019-00706-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11127-019-00706-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11127-019-00706-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hirsch, Alexander V., 2011. "Theory Driven Bias in Ideal Point Estimates—A Monte Carlo Study," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 87-102, January.
    2. Feigenbaum, James J. & Fouirnaies, Alexander & Hall, Andrew B., 2017. "The Majority-Party Disadvantage: Revising Theories of Legislative Organization," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 12(3), pages 269-300, October.
    3. Keith Krehbiel & Adam Meirowitz & Jonathan Woon, 2005. "Testing Theories of Lawmaking," Studies in Choice and Welfare, in: David Austen-Smith & John Duggan (ed.), Social Choice and Strategic Decisions, pages 249-268, Springer.
    4. Tsebelis, George, 1994. "The Power of the European Parliament as a Conditional Agenda Setter," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 88(1), pages 128-142, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abdul G. Noury & Gérard Roland, 2002. "More power to the European Parliament? [‘Nice try: Should the Treaty of Nice be ratified’?]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 279-319.
    2. Mika Widgrén, 2008. "The Impact of Council's Internal Decision-Making Rules on the Future EU," Discussion Papers 26, Aboa Centre for Economics.
    3. Michal Ovádek, 2021. "Procedural Politics Revisited: Institutional Incentives and Jurisdictional Ambiguity in EU Competence Disputes," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(6), pages 1381-1399, November.
    4. Robert Inman & Daniel Rubinfeld, 2002. "Subsidiarity, governance, and EU economic policy," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 3(04), pages 3-11, October.
    5. Le Breton, Michel & Montero, Maria & Zaporozhets, Vera, 2012. "Voting power in the EU council of ministers and fair decision making in distributive politics," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 159-173.
    6. Thomas König & Daniel Finke, 2007. "Reforming the equilibrium? Veto players and policy change in the European constitution-building process," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 153-176, June.
    7. Stefan Napel & Mika Widgrén, 2011. "Strategic versus non-strategic voting power in the EU Council of Ministers: the consultation procedure," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(3), pages 511-541, September.
    8. Cesar Garcia Perez de Leon, 2012. "Does implicit voting matter? Coalitional bargaining in the EU legislative process," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(4), pages 513-534, December.
    9. Thomas König & Mirja Pöter, 2001. "Examining the EU Legislative Process," European Union Politics, , vol. 2(3), pages 329-351, October.
    10. Goerke, Laszlo & Piazolo, Kathrin, 1998. "Decision making under the EU's Social Chapter," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 217-237, June.
    11. James P. Cross, 2012. "Interventions and negotiation in the Council of Ministers of the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 13(1), pages 47-69, March.
    12. Christophe Crombez & Simon Hix, 2011. "Treaty reform and the Commission’s appointment and policy-making role in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 12(3), pages 291-314, September.
    13. repec:lic:licosd:21508 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Brian Efird & Gaspare M. Genna, 2002. "Structural Conditions and the Propensity for Regional Integration," European Union Politics, , vol. 3(3), pages 267-295, September.
    15. Justin Leinaweaver & Robert Thomson, 2014. "Testing models of legislative decision-making with measurement error: The robust predictive power of bargaining models over procedural models," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 43-58, March.
    16. Torsten J. Selck, 2004. "On the Dimensionality of European Union Legislative Decision-Making," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 16(2), pages 203-222, April.
    17. Thomas König & Thomas Bräuninger, 1996. "Power and Political Coordination in American and German Multi-Chamber Legislation," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 8(3), pages 331-360, July.
    18. Benoît Le Maux & Kristýna Dostálová & Fabio Padovano, 2020. "Ideology or voters? A quasi-experimental test of why left-wing governments spend more," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 182(1), pages 17-48, January.
    19. Schnapp, Kai-Uwe, 2000. "Ministerial bureaucracies as stand-in agenda setters? A comparative description," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions and Social Change FS III 00-204, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    20. Alan E. Wiseman & John R. Wright, 2008. "The Legislative Median and Partisan Policy," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 20(1), pages 5-29, January.
    21. Jonathan B Slapin, 2014. "Measurement, model testing, and legislative influence in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 15(1), pages 24-42, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agenda control; US Congress; Roll call voting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • H11 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - Structure and Scope of Government

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:185:y:2020:i:3:d:10.1007_s11127-019-00706-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.