Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T13:25:10.874Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Congressional Party Leaders and Standing Committees*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Randall B. Ripley
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Within Congress there are a number of forces that push toward decentralization of influence over the substantive legislative product and lack of coordination of the various legislative enterprises that are being conducted simultaneously. Chief among these forces most of the time are the standing committees of the two houses. There are also a few centralizing forces. Chief among these most of the time are the formal party leaders in the House and Senate, especially those of the president's party if the president views himself as a major figure in the legislative process and behaves aggressively in attempting to implement that self-image.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , July 1974 , pp. 394 - 409
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1974

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

1 On committee assignments see Masters, Nicholas A., “Committee Assignments in the House of Representatives,” American Political Science Review, LV (06, 1961), 345–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the impact of seniority see Hinckley, Barbara, The Seniority System in Congress (Bloomington, Indiana, 1971)Google Scholar.

2 For the data supporting this example see Ripley, Randall B., Power in the Senate (New York, 1969), pp. 62–63, 71–72.Google Scholar

3 See Fenno, Richard F. Jr, Congressmen in Committees (Boston, 1973)Google Scholar, for a comparison of six House committees on many points, including partisanship. For additional detail on partisanship in the committees mentioned in the text see Munger, Frank and Fenno, Richard F. Jr, National Politics and Federal Aid to Education (Syracuse, New York, 1962) on Education and LaborGoogle Scholar; Manley, John F., The Politics of Finance (Boston, 1970)Google Scholar; on Ways and Means; and Fenno, Rechard F. Jr, The Power of the Purse (Boston, 1966)Google Scholar on Appropriations.

4 On the impact of majority and minority status on congressional parties and party leaders see Jones, Charles O., The Minority Party in Congress (Boston, 1970)Google Scholar; and Ripley, Randall B., Majority Party Leadership in Congress (Boston, 1969)Google Scholar.

5 The term subgovernments to describe this phenomenon comes from Cater, Douglass, Power in Washington (New York, 1964)Google Scholar. The term whirlpools for the same phenomenon comes from Griffith, Ernest S., Congress: Its Contemporary Role (New York, 1961)Google Scholar.

6 For an analysis of the Republican Policy Committee in the early 1960's see Jones, Charles O., Party and Policy-Making (New Brunswick, N.J., 1964).Google Scholar

7 This pattern is described in Ripley, Power in the Senate.