DOCSLIB.ORG

Specializing in Congress: Finding Your Niche

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Specializing in Congress: Finding Your Niche 41 CHAPTER THREE Specializing in Congress: Finding Your Niche CHAPTER THREE Specializing in Congress: Finding Your Niche embers who build successful careers in Congress do so by becom- M ing specialists. Both the House and the Senate offer a seemingly limitless array of areas, or niches, in which to specialize. One of your most critical decisions is to identify and select the niche that is most appropriate to your goals, interests, and opportunities. This chapter can assist you in making that decision. It focuses on: • Defining Niches • Picking a Niche • Constructing Niches – Committees – Leadership Positions – Caucuses – New Members’ Class Positions • Strategies for Effectiveness: Fitting Niches to New Members ✩ ✩ ✩ ✩ SETTING COURSE 42 The election of November 1994 marked the first time in 40 years the Republican Party controlled the United States House of Representatives, and the first time in a half of a century there was a Republican Congress and a Democratic president. As discussed in Chapter One, structural and procedural reforms were instituted that had a significant impact on the way Congress functions and the way its members operate. Our purpose here is to assess the niches available to new Members of the House and Senate, examine how you might mix and match the niches’ various components, and suggest the costs and benefits of pursuing different strategies, especially in light of these reforms. DEFINING NICHES Like all creatures, Members of Congress occupy niches within their congressional habitat. We define these niches as situations or sets of activities specially suited to the abilities and character of an individual Member of Congress; or the areas within the congressional habitat occu- pied by the Member. There is no question that niches exist. Rather, the question is whether the niche you choose will help you achieve your goals. Each congressional niche has several attributes. Some are highly visible; others almost invisible. Some carry national prestige; others involve hidden-hand channels of power. Some are known to the folks back home; others are not. Some Members need niches with great local visibility; others, perhaps with safer seats, venture into more politicized national arenas. Some Members want niches with high policy specializa- tion; others prefer to focus on leadership. Some Members try for media attention; others opt for long-term committee or subcommittee develop- ment. This variety is possible because there are many more formal and informal positions in Congress than there are Members. Thus constructing one’s niche involves acquiring one or more positions and fashioning them into a comfortable and productive fit. That fit is rarely achieved during a Member’s first term. Before requesting membership on a committee or subcommittee, you must address several questions. Is the committee or subcommittee good for you? Are you good for the committee? For first-term Members of Con- gress, the answer is sometimes cloudy. Prime committee assignments are usually scarce and therefore difficult to obtain; most freshmen are lucky to get their second and third choices. Leadership positions that carry a 43 CHAPTER THREE Specializing in Congress: Finding Your Niche modicum of real power are almost nonexistent. Experimentation, change, and adjustment are therefore the hallmarks of finding a comfortable niche within the institution. The remainder of this chapter examines what sort of considerations go into determining which niches fit best, where useful positions may be found, and how to go about achieving an appropriate personal mix. PICKING A NICHE With so many positions to fill, it is not difficult to find at least one that meets a need. If it does not meet your primary goal, then perhaps it meets a secondary goal; if it does not match your desired legislative impact, then it may provide constituency rewards. “It’s easy to be effective in a sense,” one freshman said. “Senior Members are spread thin. If you show up and stay, you can have an impact.” Members-elect should follow one of two general strategies in their first term. First, if you have a clear idea of your goals as a Member of Congress, move quickly to occupy the niche that will provide the achieve- ment of your goals. If it is your ambition to be a leader in your party, for example, seek out a niche where you can serve fellow party members. Second, if you do not know where or how you wish to specialize, avoid highly visible and risky ventures until you have a clear idea of your goals. It is better to spend a year or two exploring your options and learning the institution than to get locked into a poorly fitting niche. At some point early in your career, however, it is essential that you make hard choices. “You must specialize for two reasons,” one Member said. “First, it’s the only way that you can have influence in Congress, and second, it’s the only way other Members will take you seriously.” The critical step is making choices. Should you try for one of the power committees? Should you focus on a long-term specialization? Should you gamble on a key leadership post or the freshman class presidency? On a specific subcommittee or a general committee? The answers depend upon the three key factors discussed in the strategic planning section in the previous chapter and in Chapter Six: your personal interests, the interests of your district/state, and the political environment within which you are operating. If you know precisely where you want to go, or if your district or state has a few dominant interests, your best choices may be easy to identify. As one south Florida freshman said, “We know what’s important for our ✩ ✩ ✩ ✩ SETTING COURSE 44 district: crime and immigration. That’s why we went after Judiciary and International Relations. We’ve got heavy Cuban and Jewish populations and needed to represent their interests.” Another Member had a more forlorn view: “Listen, if you’re from my state, you don’t select the Agriculture Committee, you’re sentenced to it.” If your interests and those of your district/state are many and varied, or if the political environment is murky or in flux, you may wish to follow the wait-and-see approach. Chapter Six has information and worksheets specifically designed to help you find their niche by working through a strategic planning process for making critical decisions. CONSTRUCTING NICHES There is a popular story on Capitol Hill that is attributed to several prominent senior Members and retold by many others. It recounts the lament of a senior Member traveling the halls of Congress, never quite able to recall the names of all his numerous colleagues. Not wishing to risk embarrassment, the Member fell upon the strategy of greeting all Members as “Mr. Chairman.” The task of accounting for the vast number and variety of committees, subcommittees, caucuses, groups, task forces, positions in new Members’ class organizations, and party organizations would, no doubt, challenge the best of the big six accounting firms. Additionally, the profusion of chairs, co-chairs, vice-chairs, and ranking Members on Capitol Hill is nearly overwhelming. Thus, almost from the outset, nearly every Member of the Senate and House holds at least one and generally several of these positions during his career. For the purposes of understanding party and committee organization, it is best to think of Congress as a four-party system rather than as a two-party system. Each party in each chamber has sufficiently different structures and procedures to warrant this division. Current Members construct their congressional niches from compo- nents that generally fall into one of four categories: committees and subcommittees; formal party structures; informal groups or caucuses; and the new Members’ class. Niche Category 1: Committees The reforms and changes early in the 104th Congress had a major impact on how the House of Representatives functioned. One of the most noticeable reforms occurred in the committee system and structure. The 45 CHAPTER THREE Specializing in Congress: Finding Your Niche centralization undertaken by Speaker Gingrich dramatically altered the committee system. He effectively appointed all chairs of House Commit- tees by nominating them and getting them through on the party line vote. Proxy voting in House committees was banned, and term limits of six years were placed on all chairmanships, thus limiting their power. In addition, the Speaker effectively made all freshman committee assignments – something not done during the last 40 years; and he placed some on the high-powered committees such as Rules, Ways and Means, Appropria- tions, and Commerce – something previously almost unheard of. The GOP reforms mainly affect niche building through the number of committees and subcommittees, since the total number of seats available was reduced in the 104th Congress. Three committees were abolished, and subcommittees were reduced by 20 percent, leading to fewer seats for Members and thus fewer opportunities. Still, the most readily available and most important components of congressional niches come from the House and Senate committee systems. Yes, There are Lots of Committees At the beginning of the 104th Congress, there were 789 seats available on House standing (i.e. permanent) committees and more than 300 seats available on Senate standing committees. Thus, the “average” Represen- tative had 1.8 committee assignments and the “average” Senator had 3.3 committee assignments. Committee leadership positions were similarly bountiful. At the outset of the 104th Congress, there were 195 Special, Select, and Standing committees and subcommittees in the two chambers of Congress. Of that number, 20 committees and 66 subcommittees were in the Senate, and 20 committees and 87 subcommittees were in the House of Representatives. There were also four Joint Committees. Because no Member could chair more than one legislative subcommit- tee, 116 of the 258 House majority party members (45 percent) headed a committee or subcommittee.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Session from Hell by Arnold Hamilton These Are the Raw Numbers: the Lawmakers Consider Sacrosanct: Cor- Legislature’S 101 House Members Porate Welfare
    $2.50 25,000 Blue Chip Readers VOL. 42, NO. 2 An Independent Journal of Commentary JANUARY 25, 2010 Wingnuts And Corporatists Session From Hell By Arnold Hamilton These are the raw numbers: The lawmakers consider sacrosanct: cor- Legislature’s 101 House members porate welfare. and 48 senators filed 2,235 bills and The state has created a cornucopia 59 resolutions in advance of the 2010 of tax exemptions – including sales session that opens Feb. 1. taxes on newspapers – that benefit Toss in the 1,051 bills and 86 res- the supposedly free-market Chamber olutions left over from last year and crowd. When GOP Sen. Mike Mazzei lawmakers could take up as many as of Tulsa tried to repeal them and start 3,431 measures this year – or one for over, he discovered neither Republi- just about every little Oklahoma town cans nor Democrats were much inter- the size of Medford or Fairland, Wister ested in disappointing wealthy busi- or Hydro. ness interests and deep-pocketed As impressive – or depressing – as campaign donors. the sheer magnitude of legislative Don’t be surprised if the GOP lead- creativity may be, there’s really only ership targets education, despite lip one number that is important to know service to the contrary. The corporat- heading into this session: 1.3 billion. ists in charge are not beyond using That’s the size of the projected hole the crisis to attempt to bring their – in dollars – in the 2010-11 budget, arch-enemies, the state’s teachers down from a $7.1 billion spending unions, to their knees.
    [Show full text]
  • The Charter the Bylaws
    THE CHARTER & THE BYLAWS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES As Amended by The Democratic National Committee August 25, 2018 CONTENTS CHARTER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES 1 PREAMBLE 1 ARTICLE ONE ........................................ The Democratic Party of the United States of America 2 ARTICLE TWO ....................................... National Convention 3 ARTICLE THREE ................................... Democratic National Committee 5 ARTICLE FOUR ..................................... Executive Committee 5 ARTICLE FIVE ....................................... National Chairperson 6 ARTICLE SIX.......................................... Party Conference 6 ARTICLE SEVEN ................................... National Finance Organizations 6 ARTICLE EIGHT..................................... Full Participation 7 ARTICLE NINE ....................................... General Provisions 9 ARTICLE TEN ........................................ Amendments, Bylaws, and Rules 9 RESOLUTION OF ADOPTION BYLAWS Adopted Pursuant to the Charter of the Democratic Party of the United States 11 ARTICLE ONE ........................................ Democratic National Convention 11 ARTICLE TWO ....................................... Democratic National Committee 20 ARTICLE THREE ................................... Executive Committee 22 ARTICLE FOUR ..................................... National Finance Organizations 22 ARTICLE FIVE ....................................... Amendments i CHARTER CHARTER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF THE
    [Show full text]
  • A Growing Diversity
    A Growing Diversity 1993–2017 In late April 1975, eight-year-old Anh (Joseph) Cao’s long and improbable odyssey to the halls of Congress began as North Vietnamese communists seized the southern capital city of Saigon.1 The trajectory of the soft-spoken, bookish Cao toward Capitol Hill stands out as one of the most remarkable in the modern era, even as it neatly encapsulated post-1965 Asian immigration patterns to the United States. Still, the origins of Cao’s story were commonplace. For three decades, conflict and civil war enveloped his country. After the Vietnamese threw off the yoke of French colonialism following World War II, a doomed peace accord in 1954 removed the French military and partitioned Vietnam. The new government in South Vietnam aligned with Western world powers, while North Vietnam allied with communist states. Amid the Cold War, the U.S. backed successive Saigon regimes against communist insurgents before directly intervening in 1965. A massive ground and air war dragged on inconclusively for nearly a decade. More than 58,000 American troops were killed, and more than three million South and North Vietnamese perished.2 Public opposition in the United States eventually forced an end to the intervention. America’s decision to withdraw from Vietnam shattered Joseph Cao’s family just as it did many thousands of others as communist forces soon swamped the ineffectual government and military in the South. In 2011 Japanese-American veterans received the Congressional Gold Medal for their valor during World War II. The medal included the motto of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, “Go for Broke.” Nisei Soldiers of World War II Congressional Gold Medal Obverse © 2011 United States Mint 42940_08-APA-CE3.indd 436 2/13/2018 12:04:16 PM 42940_08-APA-CE3.indd 437 2/13/2018 12:04:17 PM Just days before Saigon fell, Cao’s mother, Khang Thi Tran, spirited one of her daughters and two sons, including Anh, to a U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Suburbanization of the Democratic Party, 1992–2018
    The Suburbanization of the Democratic Party, 1992–2018 David A. Hopkins Boston College [email protected] Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, August 29, 2019. 1 Abstract Over the past three decades, the Democratic Party has become mostly suburban in both the residence of party supporters in the mass public and the composition of its congressional caucus. This transformation reflects migration patterns among American citizens, partisan shifts among some suburban voters, and a serious relative decline over time in the party’s rural strength. The trend of suburbanization has made the party’s elected officials more ideologically unified, especially on cultural issues, but it also works to preclude the partywide adoption of an ambitious left-wing economic agenda. Suburbanization has occurred alongside a growth in the racial heterogeneity of the Democratic mass membership and elite leadership alike, encouraged by the demographic diversification of American suburbs. Democratic suburban growth has been especially concentrated in the nation’s largest metropolitan areas, reflecting the combined presence of both relatively liberal whites (across education levels) and substantial minority populations, but suburbs elsewhere remain decidedly, even increasingly, Republican in their collective partisan alignment. Rather than stimulating a broad national pro-Democratic backlash across suburban communities in general, as is sometimes suggested by political observers, the election of Donald Trump has instead further magnified this existing divergence—leaving American suburbia, like the nation itself, closely and deeply divided between the two major parties. Introduction Political analysts, including academics, are fond of describing the current era of American politics as primarily distinguished by deep and stable partisan loyalties.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Maximizing Documentation of the Legislative Process
    I. MAXIMIZING DOCUMENTATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS I. A. Committee Records The responsibility to document the activities of Congress and pre- serve records that are of use to Senate and House committees pre- sents a serious challenge in the modern “information age.” Congressional staff, scholars, and archivists all recognize that the fragmentation and dispersal of congressional records inhibit the coordinated records management and archiving of records that are necessary for the present and future study of Congress. Although committees maintain and preserve their official records in greater quantity today than in the past, the quality and completeness of this documentation has yet to be established. Unpublished records cre- ated within the last two or three decades (depending on Senate or House access rules) have not been described systematically by the Center for Legislative Archives staff because they are still closed to research. The mounting volume of records and the demise of cen- tralized filing systems within committee offices, coupled with the increasing use of modern information technologies, have raised the concern that the records may not sufficiently document the legisla- tive process and the history of today’s Congress. This issue concerns committees as users of their own records as well as future researchers. To address these concerns, the Advisory Committee asks the Center for Legislative Archives to undertake a systematic archival description of modern committee records series in order to assess the informational value of the records preserved. The Center should report its findings to the Advisory Committee at the 1996 fall meet- ing in preparation for a full discussion of modern record-keeping practices in Congress and an exploration of the appropriate mea- sures to ensure that the legislative process is fully documented in the official records of Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis
    Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress: Perspectives and Contemporary Analysis Updated October 6, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R40504 Contingent Election of the President and Vice President by Congress Summary The 12th Amendment to the Constitution requires that presidential and vice presidential candidates gain “a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed” in order to win election. With a total of 538 electors representing the 50 states and the District of Columbia, 270 electoral votes is the “magic number,” the arithmetic majority necessary to win the presidency. What would happen if no candidate won a majority of electoral votes? In these circumstances, the 12th Amendment also provides that the House of Representatives would elect the President, and the Senate would elect the Vice President, in a procedure known as “contingent election.” Contingent election has been implemented twice in the nation’s history under the 12th Amendment: first, to elect the President in 1825, and second, the Vice President in 1837. In a contingent election, the House would choose among the three candidates who received the most electoral votes. Each state, regardless of population, casts a single vote for President in a contingent election. Representatives of states with two or more Representatives would therefore need to conduct an internal poll within their state delegation to decide which candidate would receive the state’s single vote. A majority of state votes, 26 or more, is required to elect, and the House must vote “immediately” and “by ballot.” Additional precedents exist from 1825, but they would not be binding on the House in a contemporary election.
    [Show full text]
  • UNCLASSIFIED US Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc
    Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162980 Date: 09/26/2018 Re: Office of Civil Rights To: Cheryl Mills RELEASE IN PART 86 86 Subject: Re: Office of Civil Rights He could but I doubt he would. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162980 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162981 Date: 09/26/2018 Can I call Harold Koh and Eric Goosby? To: Cheryl Mills ...______ ____, RELEASE IN PART 86 B6 Subject: Can I call Harold Koh and Eric Goosby? I'll be home in ten minutes if you want to talk. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162981 Date: 09/26/2018 Obtained via FOIA by Judicial Watch, Inc. UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2016-07895 Doc No. C06162982 Date: 09/26/2018 Office of Civil Rights From: Cheryl Mills RELEASE IN PART 86 86 To: Hillary Clinton [email protected] Subject: Office of Civil Rights Before I mention to D as something perhaps worth exploring- do you think this is a role he can fulfill? Office of Civil Rights At the Department of State, diversity is not just aworthy cause: it is abusiness necessity. Diversity of experience and background helps Department employees in the work of diplomacy. The Secretary believes that diversity is extremely important in making the State Department an employer of choice.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    NEWS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Tracy Hager 303.764.4090 [email protected] or Stephanie Moore 216.430.2939 [email protected] BakerHostetler Adds Bipartisan Senior Advisors to Expanding Federal Policy Team Former United States Congressman Heath Shuler and government affairs veteran Jim Murphy bolster the firm’s respected Washington team WASHINGTON — Jan. 5, 2017 — BakerHostetler today announced that it has added bipartisan team members, former Congressman Heath Shuler, D-N.C., and government affairs consultant James Murphy, as senior advisors to the growing roster of the firm’s Federal Policy team. Led by former U.S. Congressman Michael Ferguson, who joined the firm in June, Shuler and Murphy join a distinguished team of former government officials and senior advisors in the Washington office. “No matter which party leads Washington, generating bipartisan support for our clients’ initiatives in Congress is critically important,” Ferguson said. “Heath enjoyed a solid record of accomplishment in Congress, working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and he adds significant depth to BakerHostetler’s existing bipartisan government affairs capabilities. Jim’s longtime experience, both in Washington and in numerous states, furthers BakerHostetler’s reach and our ability to serve clients’ federal and state government affairs needs.” Shuler Shuler served as a member of Congress for six years, representing North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District from 2007 to 2013, where he was the Democratic Caucus senior whip. He also served as the co-chair and coalition whip to the fiscal conservative caucus the Blue Dog Coalition, co-chaired the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Congressional Caucus, and was founder and co-chair of the House Professional Sports Caucus.
    [Show full text]
  • X RIMYLAN ENTERPRISES, LLC, PROJECT Index No
    SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------X RIMYLAN ENTERPRISES, LLC, PROJECT Index No. APPLECART, LLC, TORMIMA, LLC, and MININO PRODUCTIONS, LLC, COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, -against- NO LABELS, INC., FORWARD NOT BACK, INC., UNITED FOR PROGRESS, INC., UNITED TOGETHER, INC., CITIZENS FOR A STRONG AMERICA, INC., GOVERN OR GO HOME, INC., AMERICANS COMMITTED FOR PROGRESS, INC., CITIZENS FOR AMERICA, INC., PROGRESS TOGETHER, INC., PATRIOTIC AMERICANS PAC, INC., NO LABELS ACTION, INC., PROGRESS TOMORROW, INC., and NANCY JACOBSON, Defendants. -----------------------------------------------------------------X Rimylan Enterprises, LLC (“Rimylan”), Project Applecart, LLC (“PAL”), Tormima, LLC (“Tormima”), and Minino Productions, LLC (“Minino”) by their undersigned counsel, as and for their Complaint against Defendants No Labels, Inc. (“No Labels”), Forward Not Back, Inc. (“Forward Not Back”), United For Progress, Inc. (“United For Progress”), United Together, Inc. (“United Together”), Citizens For A Strong America, Inc. (“Citizens For A Strong America”), Govern or Go Home, Inc. (“Govern or Go Home”), Americans Committed For Progress, Inc. (“Americans Committed For Progress”), Citizens for America, Inc. (“Citizens for America”), Progress Together, Inc. (“Progress Together”), Patriotic Americans PAC, Inc. (“Patriotic Americans”), No Labels Action, Inc. (“No Labels Action”), Progress Tomorrow, Inc. (“Progress Tomorrow”), and Nancy Jacobson (“Jacobson”), allege as follows: 1 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT No Labels owes Rimylan $3,708,214.26. Under a Binding Term Sheet, effective as of December 3, 2016, Rimylan agreed to provide political data and analytic services exclusively to No Labels in connection with the 2018 congressional primary elections. In exchange No Labels agreed to order and pay for $5 million in services from Rimylan during the 2018 election cycle – that is, before November 6, 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Procedure of the United States Congress
    LEGISLATIVE PROCEDURE OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS I. OVERVIEW This document explains the legislative procedures of the United States Congress. The information may be useful to NGOs seeking to inform Members of Congress about issues and understand the legislative process. The material is drawn from the House web site1 as well as the observations of a former Legislative Director for the House. √ The best way to become involved in the legislative process is at the committee or subcommitee level, particularly during the markup (amendment process). The committee members with the most influence are the chairmen (majority party) or ranking members (the most senior member of the minority party).2 They are in the best position to move and influence legislation. With respect to the appropriations process, the same is true: each subject area is the responsibility of a appropriations subcommittee chairman, who has vast influence over the process.3 √ It is important to have an appreciation of the political dynamics of each house, including which party is in the majority and which is in the minority.4 The majority can tightly control the agenda of the floor and the committees, particularly in the House. √ It is also helpful to appreciate the importance of issue politics, ethnic voting blocks, and district constituencies in the United States. A member of Congress may be more willing to listen on an issue if approached by a trade association, civic group, or interest group from his district. Many international issues have their best appeal as “local issues,” for example, a member of Congress with a strong Hispanic voting population may be more interested in issues that affect Latin America.
    [Show full text]
  • Informal Legislative Membership Groups in Cross-National Perspective: Congressional Membership Organizations and European Parliament Intergroups Compared
    Informal Legislative Membership Groups in Cross-National Perspective: Congressional Membership Organizations and European Parliament Intergroups Compared John David Rausch, Jr., Ph.D. Teel Bivins Professor of Political Science West Texas A&M University Canyon, Texas, USA [email protected] Mary Scanlon Rausch Head Catalog Librarian West Texas A&M University Canyon, Texas, USA [email protected] Prepared for delivery at the 11th Congress of the Association Française de Science Politique (French Political Science Association) at Institut d’Etudes Politiques in Strasbourg, August 31 – September 2, 2011. Informal Legislative Membership Groups in Cross-National Perspective: Congressional Membership Organizations and European Parliament Intergroups Compared Abstract This paper compares congressional membership groups in the United States Congress with Intergroups in the European Parliament. This research seeks to better understand why members of legislative bodies choose to create regularized informal groups to consider policy options that cannot or will not be considered by formal party groups. In the United States Congress, representatives and senators create membership organizations (CMOs), usually referred to as “caucuses” around issues like race and ethnicity (the Congressional Black Caucus) or industry (the Congressional Steel Caucus) or issue area (the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus). Members of the European Parliament organize Intergroups to consider similar issues. These groups include the European Parliament Intergroup on LGBT Rights, the Health Intergroup, and the Youth Intergroup. CMOs are well-studied by academics and journalists. The methods used to study CMOs may be applied to European Parliament Intergroups to determine if there are common explanations for the creation of these informal groups in two different legislative bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Caucus and Conference: Party Organization in the U.S. House of Representatives
    Caucus and Conference: Party Organization in the U.S. House of Representatives by Ronald M. Peters, Jr. Department of Political Science and Carl Albert Congressional Research and Studies Center University of Oklahoma Prepared for delivery at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, Illinois April 25-28, 2002 Abstract The House Democratic Caucus and the House Republican Conference have witnessed both similarities and differences over the course of their respective histories. This paper traces the evolution of the two party organizations and examines their current operation. It is concluded that today they differ from each other in fundamental respects. The Democratic Caucus is a discussion forum. It is coalitional and internal in its focus. The Republican Conference is a public relations firm. It is ideological and external in its focus. Both party caucuses are affected by contextual variables. These include majority/minority status and party control of the White House. The most important factor shaping the two party organizations is party culture, which is shaped by each legislative party's previous history and by the two parties' respective constituency base. This examination of the two party caucuses has implications for theory. On the one hand, similarities in the pattern of meetings, participation by members, and occasional sponsorship of retreats and task forces lend credence to positive theories that seek nomothetic explanations of congressional behavior. On the other hand, the evident differences in the day-to-day operation of the two party organizations, the functions that these organizations perform, and the relationship in which they stand to the party leadership, suggest that any explanation will have to take into account inter-party variation.
    [Show full text]