ABOUT THIS BLOG

I shall post videos, graphs, news stories, and other material there. We shall use some of this material in class, and you may review the rest at your convenience. You will all receive invitations to post to the blog. (Please let me know if you do not get such an invitation.) I encourage you to use the blog in these ways:
To post questions or comments about the readings before we discuss them in class;
To follow up on class discussions with additional comments or questions.
To post relevant news items or videos.

There are only two major limitations: no coarse language, and no derogatory comments about people at the Claremont Colleges.


Search This Blog

Friday, September 16, 2016

Lobotomy on the Hill

Frank Baumgartner and Lee Drutman write at Vox that Congress is working fine ... for some.
So who are these select few? They are indeed a small group, but not an inconsequential one. They include party leaders who benefit from centralized control of policy and personnel resources, lobbying groups withpolicy capacity to lend, and anybody who doesn't want Congress to be able to produce new legislation or know much about it if it does. That's about it.
Congress has given itself a lobotomy over the past three decades. It has eliminated thousands of staff positionseviscerated its ability to carry out policy analysis, and generally has such low pay and difficult work environments that it relies on inexperienced and overstretched 20-somethings for the vast bulk of its work.

Before puzzling why any institution would do something so self-destructive and attributing the cause to irrationality or worse, we should consider perhaps that the system is now working just as many people would prefer.
Congress would significantly improve its problem-solving capacity under a reempowered committee system, with more and more professional staff to conduct policy analysis. Under such a system, committees have both the resources and the breathing space to tackle public problems. Congress would get more discovery on a range of problems, more information about potential policy solutions, and more capacity to solve problems.
By contrast, centralization of resources in party leadership means that information sourcesare tightly controlled, limited, and drawn into the zero-sum nature of partisan conflict. It's no wonder Congress is frequently incapacitated.

But change is hard.

Thursday, September 15, 2016

Leadership and LBJ




Committees and the Simulation

Hill leadership
Edmund Burke:
 In all bodies, those who will lead, must also, in a considerable degree, follow. They must conform their propositions to the taste, talent, and disposition, of those whom they wish to conduct: therefore, if an assembly is viciously or feebly composed in a very great part of it, nothing but such a supreme degree of virtue as very rarely appears in the world, and for that reason cannot enter into calculation, will prevent the men of talent disseminated through it from becoming only the expert instruments of absurd projects!
Speakership Elections (see Straus p. 45)

Factions and Member Organizations

Note:  even majorities of the president's party may split with the administration agenda.  See Democrats on trade in 1993 and 2014.

LBJ in Frank Underwood's office








The moment that made Newt

Gingrich on the difference between majority and minority:
In short, overnight I found myself in a job far bigger than most people, even Washingtonians, understand to this day. The Speaker is the third-ranking constitutional officer. That in itself might seem weighty enough. In addition, the day-to-day job requires him not only to preside over, but to attempt to lead, 435 strong-willed, competitive, and independent-minded people. (Some wag has likened this to an attempt to herd cats.) After all, if these people had not in the first place been heavily endowed with all three of these characteristics—will, competitiveness, and independence of mind—they would never have been able to get through the process of winning a primary, followed by a general election, followed by the requirement that they represent 600,000 of their fellow Americans in the nation's capital. So if they sometimes made difficulties for one another, and for me, that was one of the great strengths of the system.
All of this added up to the fact that, politically experienced as I was, everything seemed a little unfamiliar to me. I hadn't shifted from my old job to my new job fast enough. I hadn't shaken off some of the habits I had acquired being the minority whip. I'll give you an example. As the minority party, we were in the position of having to fight every day just to get some media attention. We tended to say and do things that were far more strident and dramatic than are prudent to do and say as the leaders of the majority who find themselves in front of the microphone every day. If you are seldom covered by the press, which was the case with House Republicans for forty years, you have a lot of leeway to make mistakes. But when you are in people's living rooms every evening, your mistakes are magnified.




Highlight from pg. 52 of Straus...

Tom Delay was extremely skilled at counting votes, but he was also successful because he had built a reservoir of goodwill by doing small favors, like providing barbecue chicken when the House met late in the evening (Baker 2000, 45).

FYI this is an open invitation to provide barbecue chicken or ribs from Freddy's BBQ Joint ;) during the simulation.

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Questions

I need a clarification from the reading. What are the ambitions of most LAs working for members? Do they eventually want to specialize and work for committees?

Party at Home and in Washington

Party at Home
Party Committees

Republican... RNC NRCC NRSC 
Democratic.. DNC DCCC* DSCC*

*Chair appointed by party leader

Paying your dues ... literally  (No formal dues for Senate committees)


Hill leadership

Sunday, September 11, 2016

Politico: Trump expands House battleground map

In class we've brought up the likelihood of the Democrats retaking the Senate, or at least the apparent likelihood of it happening; even though Dems need about 30 seats in the house to retake it, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi thinks it's possible--and of course Trump is a major factor.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/house-republicans-weathering-trump-storm-for-now-228011

Thursday, September 8, 2016

Christian Dominance in Congress and Younger Voter Turnout

On the note of the discussion of religion in Congress last class, the Christian dominance of Congress does not reflect that Christian affiliation is declining.

Each successive generation is increasingly secular. Younger voters have a lower turnout rate, especially in midterm elections. Low turnout might account for part of this congressional lag behind the downward trend in religious affiliation.

Blog Archive