majority, he compares them to the DW-NOMINATE median of the chamber. Schickler finds that
the median correlates better than the homogeny and polarity positions, such that the closer the
chamber median is to the position of the majority the more favorable the rules are to the majority
power, and vice-versa.
Appropriation Ends
As Cox and McCubbins (1993) argue, the majority party leaders are much like the party
members that Arnold discusses in that they have limits on their time and must choose which
appropriations measures are important enough to push through in a timely manner. Importance to
who is a consideration, as Legislative Branch Appropriations are frequently taken care of with all
due expedient speed. Binder addresses one section of legislative content that is to be examined. Are
appropriations that deal ostensibly with domestic concerns pushed to the front of the line at the
expense of appropriations with an international component to them? Another level of analysis to be
explored encompasses whether a policy output is of a general benefit to everyone but of substantive
cost to no one. Here testing for whether the appropriations bill has a national defense component to
it that is considered to be of such a great importance that it is above the bickering that can
contribute to gridlock and of enough importance that it surmounts members’ blame-avoidance
concerns is important.
Intercameral Effects
In forming, reporting to the floor, and voting on appropriations bills the House majority
must take the views of the Senate, its party divisions, and ideological breakdown into account to
prevent it from stalling or becoming a part of a larger omnibus bill (presuming that it wants to
avoid such an omnibus). Similarly the Senate must make its own considerations in preparation for
7
Convention