Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-04T23:51:56.416Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Strategic Agenda in Legislative Politics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2013

Calvin J. Mouw  and
Michael B. MacKuen
Calvin J. Mouw
Affiliation:
University of Missouri, St. Louis
Michael B. MacKuen
Affiliation:
University of Missouri, St. Louis
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We examine the politics of the strategic agenda. Abstracting a politics on the liberal-conservative dimension, we analyze Key Vote roll call data from the U.S. House of Representatives during the Eisenhower and Reagan administrations. The data suggest that politicians set the policy agenda in a strategic fashion. Because they consider such factors as long-term political goals, the changing institutional setting, and plebiscitary presidential politics, agenda-setters propose legislation that only imperfectly reflects their and the membership's wishes on the issue at hand. Thus, as the final stage in the political process, the strategic selection of an agenda provides a means by which factors other than policy preferences affect policy outcomes. The analyses affirm the strategic agenda as a core element in political life.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 86 , Issue 1 , March 1992 , pp. 87 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1992 

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

Arrow, Kenneth J. 1963. Social Choice and Individual Values. 2d ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Asher, Herbert B., and Weisberg, Herbert F.. 1978. “Voting Change in Congress: Some Dynamic Perspectives on an Evolutionary Process.” American Journal of Political Science 22:391–425.10.2307/2110622Google Scholar
Bach, Stanley, and Smith, Steven S.. 1988. Managing Uncertainty in the House of Representatives: Adaptation and Innovation in Special Rules. Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Black, Duncan. 1958. Theory of Committees and Elections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bond, Jon R., and Fleisher, Richard. 1980. “The Limits of Presidential Popularity As a Source of Influence in the U.S. House.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 5:69–78.10.2307/439442Google Scholar
Bond, Jon R., and Fleisher, Richard. 1984. “Presidential Popularity and Congressional Voting.” Western Political Quarterly 37:291–306.10.1177/106591298403700207Google Scholar
Calvert, Randall L. 1987. “Reputation and Legislative Leadership.” Public Choice 55:81–119.10.1007/BF00156812Google Scholar
Clausen, Aage R. 1973. How Congressmen Decide: A Policy Focus. New York: St. Martin's.Google Scholar
Congressional Quarterly. 1982. “Nuclear Freeze Rejected by House.” Congressional Quarterly Almanac. 113–125.Google Scholar
Congressional Quarterly. 1983. “House OKs, Senate Rejects Nuclear Freeze.” Congressional Quarterly Almanac. 205–213.Google Scholar
Davison, W. Phillips. 1983. “The Third Person Effect in Communication.” Public Opinion Quarterly 47:1–15.10.1086/268763Google Scholar
Denzau, Arthur T., and Mackay, Robert J.. 1981. “Structure-induced Equilibria and Perfect Foresight Expectations.” American Journal of Political Science 25:762–79.10.2307/2110762Google Scholar
Denzau, Arthur T., and Mackay, Robert J.. 1983. “Gatekeeping and Monopoly Power of Committees: An Analysis of Sincere and Sophisticated Behavior.” American Journal of Political Science 27:740–61.10.2307/2110891Google Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
Edelman, Murray. 1971. Politics as Symbolic Action Mass Arousal and Quiescence. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. III. 1976. “Presidential Influence in the House: Presidential Prestige As a Source of Presidential Power.” American Political Science Review 70:101–13.10.2307/1960326Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. III. 1980. Presidential Influence in Congress. San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. III. 1989. At the Margins: Presidential Leadership of Congress. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. III. 1990. Presidential Approval: A Source-book. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Enelow, James M. 1984. “A Generalized Model of Voting One Issue at a Time with Applications to Congress.” American Journal of Political Science 28:587–97.10.2307/2110906Google Scholar
Enelow, James M., and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1983a. “Voting One Issue at a Time: The Question of Voter Forecasts.” American Political Science Review 77:435–45.10.2307/1958927Google Scholar
Enelow, James M., and Hinich, Melvin J.. 1983b. “Voter Expectations in Multi-Stage Voting Systems: An Equilibrium Result.” American Journal of Political Science 27:820–70.10.2307/2110895Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. Jr., 1973. Congressmen in Committees. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. Jr., 1978. Home Style: House Members in Their Districts. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Gilmour, John B. 1990. “Bargaining between Congress and the President: The Bidding-up Phenomenon.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco.Google Scholar
Hammond, Thomas H., and Miller, Gary J.. 1987. “The Core of the Constitution.” American Political Science Review 81: 1155–74.10.2307/1962583Google Scholar
Kernell, Samuel. 1986. Going Public: New Strategies of Presidential Leadership. Washington: Congressional Quarterly.Google Scholar
Kiewiet, D. Roderick, and McCubbins, Matthew D.. 1985. “Congressional Appropriations and the Electoral Connection.” Journal of Politics 47:59–82.10.2307/2131066Google Scholar
Kiewiet, D. Roderick, and McCubbins, Matthew D.. 1988. “Presidential Influence on Congressional Appropriations Decisions.” American Journal of Political Science 32:713–36.10.2307/2111243Google Scholar
Kingdon, John W. 1984. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
Koford, Kenneth. 1989. “Dimensions in Congressional Voting.” American Political Science Review 83:949–62.10.2307/1962068Google Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1987. “Sophisticated Committees and Structure-induced Equilibria in Congress.” In Congress: Structure and Policy, ed. McCubbins, Mathew and Sullivan, Terry. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1988. “Spatial Models of Legislative Choice.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 13:259–319.10.2307/439787Google Scholar
Kritzer, Herbert M. 1978. “Ideology and American Political Elites.” Public Opinion Quarterly 42:484–502.10.1086/268475Google Scholar
Loomis, Burdett. 1988. The New American Politician. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
McKelvey, Richard D. 1976. “Intransitivities in Multidimensional Voting Models and Some Implications for Agenda Control.” Journal of Economic Theory 12:472–82.10.1016/0022-0531(76)90040-5Google Scholar
Neustadt, Richard. 1960. Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Peterson, Mark A. 1990a. “Developing the President's Program: The President As a Strategic Player.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Peterson, Mark A. 1990b. Legislating Together: The White House and Capitol Hill from Eisenhower to Reagan. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Polsby, Nelson W. 1978. “Interest Groups and the Presidency: Trends in Political Intermediation in America.” In American Politics and Public Policy, ed. Burnham, Walter Dean and Weinbey, Martha Wagner. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Daniels, R. Steven. 1985. “Ideology, Party, and Voting in the U.S. Congress.” American Political Science Review 79:373–99.10.2307/1956655Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1985. “A Spatial Model of Legislative Roll Call Analysis.” American Journal of Political Science 29:357–68.10.2307/2111172Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1987. “Analysis of Congressional Coalition Patterns: A Unidimensional Spatial Model.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 12:55–75.10.2307/440045Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 1991. “Patterns of Congressional Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 35:228–78.10.2307/2111445Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Smith, Richard A.. 1986. “A Spatial Analysis of Winning and Losing Motions in the U.S. Senate, 1979–1981.” Carnegie-Mellon University. Type-script.Google Scholar
Riker, William H. 1962. The Theory of Political Coalitions. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Riker, William H. 1980. “Implications from the Disequilibrium of Majority Rule for the Study of Institutions.” American Political Science Review 74:432–46.10.2307/1960638Google Scholar
Riker, William H. 1986. The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Romer, Thomas, and Rosenthal, Howard. 1978. “Political Resource Allocation, Controlled Agendas, and the Status Quo.” Public Choice 33:27–43.10.1007/BF03187594Google Scholar
Salisbury, Robert, and Shepsle, Kenneth A.. 1981. “U.S. Congressman As Enterprise.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 6:559–76.10.2307/439385Google Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A. 1979. “Institutional Arrangements and Equilibrium in Multidimensional Voting Models.” American Journal of Political Science 23:27–59.10.2307/2110770Google Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A. 1989. “The Changing Textbook Congress.” In Can the Government Govern?, ed. Chubb, John E. and Peterson, Paul E.. Washington: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Weingast, Barry R.. 1981. “Structure-induced Equilibrium and Legislative Choice.” Public Choice 36:221–37.Google Scholar
Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Weingast, Barry R.. 1987. “The Institutional Foundations of Committee Power.” American Political Science Review 81:85–104.10.2307/1960780Google Scholar
Shull, Steven A. 1983. Domestic Policy Formation: Presidential-Congressional Partnership? Westport, CT: Greenwood.Google Scholar
Shull, Steven A., and Vanderleeuw, James M.. 1987. “What Do Key Votes Measure?” Legislative Studies Quarterly 12: 573–82.10.2307/439750Google Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 1982. Congressional Realignment, 1925–1978. Austin: University of Texas Press.10.7560/703605Google Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 1989. “House Majority Party Leadership in the Late 1980s.” In Congress Reconsidered, 4th ed., ed. Dodd, Lawrence C. and Oppenheimer, Burce I.. Washington: Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
Smith, Eric R. A. N., Herrera, Richard, and Herrera, Cheryl L.. 1990. “The Measurement Characteristics of Congressional Roll Call Indexes.” Legislative Study Quarterly 25:283–95.10.2307/440130Google Scholar
Smith, Steven S. 1989. Call to Order: Floor Politics in the House and Senate. Washington: Brookings.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Terry. 1988a. “Headcounts, Expectations, and Presidential Coalitions in Congress.” American Journal of Political Science 32:567–89.10.2307/2111237Google Scholar
Sullivan, Terry. 1988b. “The Bargaining Approach to Presidential Leadership in Congress.” Presidential Research 10:12–22.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Terry. 1990a. “Bargaining with the President: A Simple Game and New Evidence.” American Political Science Review 84:1167–95.10.2307/1963258Google Scholar
Sullivan, Terry. 1990b. “Explaining Why Presidents Count: Signaling and Information.” Journal of Politics 52:939–62.10.2307/2131833Google Scholar
Walker, Jack L. 1977. “Setting the Agenda in the U.S. Senate: A Theory of Problem Selection.” British Journal of Political Science 7:423–45.10.1017/S0007123400001101Google Scholar
Weisberg, Herbert F. 1978. “Evaluating Theories of Congressional Roll Call Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 22:554–78.10.2307/2110461Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.