Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T18:50:50.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Reevaluation of Realignments in American Politics: Evidence from the House of Representatives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 1985

David W. Brady
David W. Brady*
Affiliation:
Rice University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article reevaluates American realignment literature based on Clubb, Flanigan, and Zingale's (1980) admonition to focus on control of government and political leadership rather than electoral results. I put forward a theory of policy change in the House of Representatives which shows, like Sinclair (1977), that the effect of electoral realignments is to create a strong and unified majority party in the Congress. However, unlike other work that focuses on electoral courses, I show that structural features of elections created the new majority party in both the Civil War and the 1890s realignments. Specifically, I argue that in these two realignments a strong regional seats-to-votes distortion created the Republican majorities that enacted the policy changes associated with these realignments.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , March 1985 , pp. 28 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. E. Public policy making. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1979.Google Scholar
Beck, P. A. The electoral cycle and patterns of American politics. British Journal of Politics, 1919,9, 129–156.10.1017/S0007123400001691CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, D. W. Congressional elections and clusters of policy changes in the U.S. house, 1886-1960. In Campbell, B. A. & Trilling, R. R. (Eds.). Realignment in American politics: toward a theory. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1980.Google Scholar
Brady, D. W. Congressional voting in a partisan era. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Brady, D. W. Critical elections, congressional parties and clusters of policy changes. British Journal of Political Science, 1978, 8, 79–99.10.1017/S0007123400001228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, D. W., & Althoff, P. Party voting in the house of representatives, 1890-1910: elements of a responsible party system. Journal of Politics, 1974, 36, 753–773.10.2307/2129254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brady, D. W. & Stephens, H. W. Elections and major policy shifts in Britain and the U.S. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Social Science History Association, Bloomington, Indiana, October 15, 1983.Google Scholar
Brady, D. W., & Stewart, J. Congressional party realignment and transformations of public policy in three realignment eras. American Journal of Political Science, 1982, 26, 333–360.10.2307/2111043CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, W. D. The changing shape of the American political universe. American Political Science Review, 1965, 59, 7–28.10.2307/1976117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, W. D. Critical elections and the mainsprings of American politics. New York: Norton, 1970.Google Scholar
Burnham, W. D. Theory and voting research: some reflections on Converse's ‘change in the American electorate.’ American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 1002–1023.10.2307/1959143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, D., & Stokes, D. E. Political change in Britain: Forces shaping electoral choice. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Clausen, A. R. How congressmen decide: A policy focus. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1973.Google Scholar
Clubb, J. M., Flanigan, W. H., & Zingale, N. H. Partisan realignment: Voters, parties and government in American history. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1980.Google Scholar
Converse, P. E. Comment on Burnham's ‘theory and voting research.’ American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 1024–1027.10.2307/1959144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, P. E., & Markus, G. B. Plus ca change…: the new C.P.S. Election Study Panel. American Political Science Review, 1979, 73, 32–49.10.2307/1954729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. Congress in organizational perspective. In Dodd, L. C. & Oppenheimer, B. I. (Eds.). Congress reconsidered. New York: Praeger, 1977.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. The origins of the standing committees and the development of the modern house. Houston: Rice University Studies, 1970.Google Scholar
Cooper, J., & Brady, D. W. Institutional context and leadership style: the house from Cannon to Rayburn. American Political Science Review, 1980, 74, 411–425.Google Scholar
Dahl, R. A preface to democratic theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956.Google Scholar
Elazar, D. American federalism: A view from the states. New York: Crowell, 1972.Google Scholar
Fenno, R. Congressmen in committees. Boston: Little, Brown, 1973.Google Scholar
Fenno, R. The power of the purse: appropriations politics in congress. Boston: Little, Brown, 1966.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, J. A. Pork barrel politics: rivers and harbors legislation, 1947-1968. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1974.Google Scholar
Flanigan, W. H., & Zingale, N. H. Measures of electoral competition. Political Methodology, 1974, 1, 31–60.Google Scholar
Ginsberg, B. Elections and public policy. American Political Science Review, 1976, 70, 41–49.10.1017/S0003055400263971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginsberg, B. Critical elections and the substance of party conflict: 1844-1968. Midwest Journal of Political Science, 1972, 16, 603–625.10.2307/2110379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, G. The little legislatures: committees of congress. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 1970.Google Scholar
Holt, M. F. The political crisis of the 1850's. New York: Wiley, 1978.Google Scholar
Huitt, R. K. The congressional committee: a case study. American Political Science Review, 1954, 48, 340–365.10.2307/1951200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huitt, R. K. The Morse committee assignment controversy: A case study. American Political Science Review, 1957, 51, 313–329.10.2307/1952194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huitt, R. K. The outsider in the senate: an alternative role. American Political Science Review, 1961, 55, 566–575.10.1017/S0003055400125195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huntington, S. P. Congressional responses to the twentieth century. In Truman, D. B. (Ed.). The congress and America's future. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1965.Google Scholar
Jones, C. O. The minority party in congress. Boston: Little, Brown, 1970.Google Scholar
Jones, C. O., Cannon, J. G., & Smith, H. An essay on the limits of leadership in the House of Representatives. Journal of Politics, 1968, 30, 617–646.10.2307/2128798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V. O. Politics, parties and pressure groups. New York: Crowell, 1964.Google Scholar
Key, V. O. A theory of critical elections. Journal of Politics, 1955, 17, 3–18.10.2307/2126401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leuchtenberg, W. Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal: 1932-1940. New York: Harper and Row, 1963.Google Scholar
Mann, T. E. Unsafe at any margin: interpreting congressional elections. Washington, D.C.: American Enterprise Institute, 1978.Google Scholar
Mann, T. E., & Wolfinger, R. Candidates and parties in congressional elections. American Political Science Review, 1980, 74, 617–632.10.2307/1958145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, J. T. Political parties and the pork barrel: party conflict and cooperation in house public works committee decision making. American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 169–185.10.2307/1959749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orfield, G. Congressional power: Congress and social change. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Janovitch, 1975.Google Scholar
Polsby, N. The institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives. American Political Science Review, 1968, 62, 144–168.10.2307/1953331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polsby, N., Gallaher, M. & Rundquist, B. The growth of the seniority system in the U.S. House of Representatives. American Political Science Review, 1969, 63, 787–807.10.1017/S0003055400258590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rusk, J. E. Comment: the American electoral universe: Speculation and evidence. American Political Science Review, 1974, 68, 1028–1049.10.2307/1959145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rusk, J. The effects of the Australian ballot reform on split ticket voting: 1876-1908. American Political Science Review, 1970, 64, 1220–1238.10.2307/1958367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepsle, K. The giant jigsaw puzzle: Democratic committee assignments in the modern House. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.Google Scholar
Shepsle, K. Institutional arrangements and equilibrium in multidimensional voting models. American Journal of Political Science, 1919, 23, 27–59.10.2307/2110770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silbey, J. A respectable minority: the democratic party in the civil war era: 1860-1868. New York: Norton, 1977.Google Scholar
Sinclair, B. From party voting to regional fragmentation: the House of Representatives from 1933-1956. American Politics Quarterly, 1978, 6, 125–146.10.1177/1532673X7800600202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, B. Party realignment and the transformation of the political agenda: the house of representatives: 1925-1938. American Political Science Review, 1977, 71, 940–953.Google Scholar
Sorauf, F. Party Politics in America. Boston: Little, Brown, 1968.Google Scholar
Sundquist, J. The dynamics of the party system: Alignment and realignment of political parties in the United States. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1973.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. The relationship between seats and votes in two-party systems. American Political Science Review, 1973, 67, 540–544.10.2307/1958782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.