The Dynamics of Legislative Gridlock, 1947–96
- 1 September 1999
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Political Science Review
- Vol. 93 (3) , 519-533
- https://doi.org/10.2307/2585572
Abstract
David Mayhew'sDivided We Govern(1991) sparked an industry of scholars who alternately challenge or confirm the work on theoretical and empirical grounds. Still, we lack a definitive account of the proportions and causes of legislative gridlock. I revisit the effects of elections and institutions on policy outcomes to propose an alternative theory of gridlock: The distribution of policy preferences within the parties, between the two chambers, and across Congress more broadly is central to explaining the dynamics of gridlock. To test the model, I construct a measure that assesses legislative output in proportion to the policy agenda. Using newspaper editorials to identify every salient legislative issue between 1947 and 1996, I generate Congress-by-Congress gridlock scores and use them to test competing explanations. The results suggest that intrabranch conflict—perhaps more than interbranch rivalry—is critical in shaping deadlock in American politics.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Explaining Government ProductivityAmerican Politics Quarterly, 1998
- Divided Government and the Passage of Partisan Legislation, 1947-1990Political Research Quarterly, 1998
- Political Parties and Public Policy: Social Welfare Policy from Carter to BushPolity, 1997
- The Legislative Impact of Divided GovernmentAmerican Journal of Political Science, 1997
- Divided We Govern? A ReassessmentPolity, 1993
- TrumanForeign Affairs, 1992
- The Justification of BicameralismInternational Political Science Review, 1992
- An Essay on Sequence, Position, Goals, and Committee PowerLegislative Studies Quarterly, 1988
- The Cycles of American HistoryThe American Historical Review, 1988
- The Short Session of CongressAmerican Political Science Review, 1919