All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Wait Until Next Year: Congressional Policy Making and the Reauthorization Calendar
Unformatted Document Text:  Introduction When do legislators work on particular policy issues? When do committees pursue policy changes? Textbooks and much of the research on legislative activity portrays the policymaking process as if Congress starts from scratch every two years. The impression given is that, although legislative entrepreneurs face significant competition for attention, the agenda is wide open and ready to be exploited by the most creative and determined legislators. But how open is Congress’ agenda, and how much opportunity do individual legislators really have to author successful legislation? A critical element of this conventional wisdom about policy making is that lawmakers and committees are relatively unconstrained to introduce and promote the policy changes they see fit. That is, although members and committees make calculations about political feasibility, political and financial costs, etc. of a bill when promoting and pursuing it in the legislative arena, there is nothing structural impeding that activity. There are few constraints, the notion goes, on a member’s efforts to promote her favorite policy changes. Indeed, many reasons are offered for why members should frequently sponsor legislation despite its apparently dim prospects (Mayhew 1974). In an earlier paper (Adler, Feeley and Wilkerson 2003) we proposed that Congress’ agenda is much less open, and opportunities for success are much more constrained than the existing literature on legislative effectiveness would lead us to believe. As evidence we showed that two variables often associated with legislative effectiveness, majority party membership and referral committee membership, were not simply contributing factors. They were virtual necessary conditions for the progress of legislation. We argued that this reflected the fact that decisions about which of many bills is to become the legislative vehicle for policy change rests in the hands of the leadership. Thus, we questioned whether the standard measure of effectiveness – the progress of a particular member’s bill – tells us very much about that member’s abilities when compared to others.

Authors: Wilkerson, John. and Harbridge, Laurel.
first   previous   Page 2 of 28   next   last



background image
Introduction
When do legislators work on particular policy issues? When do committees
pursue policy changes? Textbooks and much of the research on legislative activity
portrays the policymaking process as if Congress starts from scratch every two years. The
impression given is that, although legislative entrepreneurs face significant competition
for attention, the agenda is wide open and ready to be exploited by the most creative and
determined legislators. But how open is Congress’ agenda, and how much opportunity do
individual legislators really have to author successful legislation?
A critical element of this conventional wisdom about policy making is that
lawmakers and committees are relatively unconstrained to introduce and promote the
policy changes they see fit. That is, although members and committees make
calculations about political feasibility, political and financial costs, etc. of a bill when
promoting and pursuing it in the legislative arena, there is nothing structural impeding
that activity. There are few constraints, the notion goes, on a member’s efforts to
promote her favorite policy changes. Indeed, many reasons are offered for why members
should frequently sponsor legislation despite its apparently dim prospects (Mayhew
1974).
In an earlier paper (Adler, Feeley and Wilkerson 2003) we proposed that
Congress’ agenda is much less open, and opportunities for success are much more
constrained than the existing literature on legislative effectiveness would lead us to
believe. As evidence we showed that two variables often associated with legislative
effectiveness, majority party membership and referral committee membership, were not
simply contributing factors. They were virtual necessary conditions for the progress of
legislation. We argued that this reflected the fact that decisions about which of many bills
is to become the legislative vehicle for policy change rests in the hands of the leadership.
Thus, we questioned whether the standard measure of effectiveness – the progress of a
particular member’s bill – tells us very much about that member’s abilities when
compared to others.


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 2 of 28   next   last

©2008 All Academic, Inc.