Origins and Development of Congress

17.251 Spring 2016

1

         Congressional Historical Eras and Electoral Discontinuities

A dawning new era?

Critical periods

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform

Congressional systems

2

   1789‐1812 (Experimental system)

Electoral dynamics Organizational dynamics

During critical period

During cong’l

system

Rules Comms. Party leadership

-Elite electorate (Table 3.2) -Feds vs. Reps.

-Floor supreme -”previous q” developed in the House

-Ad hoc select comms. dominate

-Loose formal organization

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

mental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform Experi3

         

  

      

1812‐20 (Transition from Experimental to Antebellum

systems)

• ‐Electorate expands • ‐Federalists discredited • ‐Slavery now an issue • ‐Napoleanic Wars end

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 4

 1820‐60

(Antebellum system) Organizational dynamics

Electoral dynamics Rules Comms. Party leadership -Mass electorate -Whigs vs. Dems.

Committees take agenda control

-Standings dominate selects -comm chairs compete w/ Speaker

-Van Buren tries to make Congress a partisan organ, but… -Regional divisions complicate Speakership selection (next slide) -Senate leadership remains weak

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 5

   

Balloting for Speaker Candidates receiving votes Cadidates receiving 10 or more votes

20

1800 1820 1840 1860 1880 1900 Year

5

0

Num

ber o

f can

dida

tes

15

10

6

   N

umbe

r of b

allo

ts

Balloting for Clerk 20

15

10

5

0 1780 1800 1820 1840 1860 1880 1900

Year

7

Winning Speaker Largest Party Year Cong. Ballots Name, State Party Name Pct. 1825 19 2 John W. Taylor, NY Adams Adams 51.2 1827 20 1 Andrew Stevenson, VA Jackson Jackson 53.1 1829 21 1 Andrew Stevenson, VA Jackson Jackson 63.8 1831 22 1 Andrew Stevenson, VA Jackson Jackson 59.2 1833 23 1 Andrew Stevenson, VA Jackson Jackson 59.6 1834 23 10 John Bell, Tenn. Jackson “ “ 1835 24 1 James K. Polk, Tenn. Jackson Jackson 59.1 1837 25 1 James K. Polk, Tenn. Dem. Democrat 52.9 1839 26 11 Robert M.T.

Hunter, VA Whig Democrat 51.7

1841 27 1 John White, KY Whig Whig 58.7 1843 28 1 John W. Jones, VA Dem. Democrat 65.9 1845 29 1 John W. Davis, IN Dem. Democrat 62.3 1847 30 3 Robert C. Winthrop, MA Whig Whig 50.4 1849 31 63 Howell Cobb, GA Dem. Democrat 48.5 1851 32 1 Linn Boyd, KY Dem. Democrat 54.5 1853 33 1 Linn Boyd, KY Dem. Democrat 67.1 1855 34 133 Nathaniel Banks, MA Amer. Opposition 42.7

8

         The Effect of the Balance Rule S

lave

ry

NN

NN

N

N WH(N)

Stylized House Stylized Senate

WS(N)S SS S

Sla

very

N

N N

Gov’t Activism Gov’t Activism

9

         The Effect of the Balance Rule

Sla

very

N WH(N)N

WS(N)

Gov’t Activism

10

           

            

1860‐1865 (Transition from Antebellum to Civil War

System

• South excluded from national elections • Party support highly regionalized

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 11

   

1865‐1896 (Civil War System)

Organizational dynamics Electoral dynamics Rules Comms. Party leadership

-Dems. v. Reps. -Dem. Strength in the South -Rep. strength in the North -Knife-edged partisan margins

-“Reed Rules” in the House

-Parties take control of committee rosters -Appr. devolution

-Party polarization -Party “strong” -Caucus organization in House -Steering committee in the Senate

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 12

 2n

d di

m. d

w-n

omin

ate

(mul

tiply

b

Ideological divisions .986

1.34

SS S

S

S

S SS S

D

D

SS

S

S

S

SS

D

D

RD

R

D

R

RR

D

R

RR

D

R

R

D

R

D

R

D

R

R

DR

R

R

R

RRR R

R

R

SS

SS S

SS

S

SS S

SS

SS

S

R RD

R R

D D

DR

D

R

RR

R

R

R

R R

R R

R

R

R

D

R R

R R

D

R

R

R R

R

R

R

R R

R

D

R

R

R

R R

R

R

R

R

R R

RR

R

D

D

D

R

D

D

D

R

D

R

R

S

S S

S

S

S

S

S

R

R

R

R

D D

D D

D

R

R

R

D D

R R

D

R

R

R

R

D

D

R

D

R

R

R

RR

R

R

R

R R

R

R

R

R

D D

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R D

R

SS

S

SSSS

R

R

R

D

R

R R

R

D

D

R

R D

D R

R

RR

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

RR

R

R

D D

D

D

R

R

R R

R R

D

D

D

DD

D

D D

D

D R

R

D D

R

D

DD

D

R

R

R

R

R

R

D

R

R R

R R

R

R

R

R

R

RR

R

S S

SS

S

S

S

S

SSS S

R

R

RRR

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

RR

R

R

D

R R

R

R

DD

D

R

R

R

D

D

D

D D

D

R

R

R

R

R

RR R

RR

RRR

R

RR

RR

R

R

R R

R

R

D

R

R

R

D

R

RD R

R R

R

DD

D

D

S S

S

SSS

R R

R

R

D

D

D

D

D

DD

D

S

S S

S

SS S

S

S S S

SSS

S

S

S

S

S S S

S

D

R

R

S S

S

S S S

S

S

S

S

R

D

RR

R

R

R R

R RD

D R

R R

R R

R R RR

R R

80th Cong. (1947-48)

-1.095 1.197

S S

S

S

S SS S

S

S

S

S

S

D

D

R

R

R

R

R

R

D

D

R

D D

S

SS S

S

SS

S

S

S

S

R

R

D

D

D

R

RR

D

D

R

D

D

D

D

D

D D

D

D

R

DD

D

D

D R

D

D

R

D

DD

D

D

D

R

D

D

D

R

R

D

R

R

R

R PP PPP

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

R

S S

S

S

S

S

R

R

R

R

DD D

D D

D

D

R

R

DD D

R

R

DD

R

D

D

D

D

R

R

R D

D

D

D

D

RD

R

D

D

P

SS

S

S

S

S

S

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

D

PP

R

D

D

R

R

D

D

DDD

D D

DD

D

DDDD DDD D

D

D

R

D

R

D

R

R

D

D

R

R

RD

R

D

R

D

D

R

S

R

S

S

S

S S

S

S

R

R

R D

D

D

D

D

D

D

R D R

D

D

D

D

D

D

R

R

R

D

R

R

R

D

R

R

R

D

D

D

R

D

R

D

R

R

R

D

R

D

R R R

R

D

D D

R

R

D

D DS

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

RR

R

R

D

DD

D

D DD

D

S

SS

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

R

R

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

S

R

D

D

D

D

D

D

D D

D

D D

R

D

R

-.859 .739 1st dimen. dw-nominate

2nd

dim

. dw

-nom

inat

e (m

ultip

ly b

-1.037

-1.334

52nd Cong. 1st dimen. dw-nominate

(1891-1893)

13

0 1

2 3

4 5

Den

sity

-.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

40th Congress (1867-1869)

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

60th Congress (1907-1909)

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

70th Congress (1927-1929)

0 .5

1

1.5

2 2.

5D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

80th Congress (1947-1949)

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-conservative

90th Congress (1967-1969)

0 .5

1

1.5

2 2.

5D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-conservative

100th Congress (1987-1989)

0 1

2 3

Den

sity

50th Congress (1887-1889)

110th Congress (2007-2009)

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-conservative

14

           

    

1896‐1912 (Transition from Civil War to Textbook

systems)

• Economic dislocations create Progressive/Populist movements

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 15

       

                       

                  

                   

        

A Word about Senate Elections

• State legislative elections often brought aboutchaotic balloting

• Stories of corruption in Senate elections led toProgressive calls for reform

• Rise of third parties gave major parties an incentive to create a duopoly of power

• 17th amendment: popular election ofsenators (1914)

• Still parties become more prominent

16

Courtesy of the Berryman Political Cartoon Collection, National Archivesand Records Administration. This image is in the public domain.

 The Process State election

(~ Nov.)

Nomination? (~mid-Jan.)

Bicameral balloting (2nd Tuesday of session)

Canvass

Bicameral majority?

No

No Yes

Winner

Joint ballot

Yes 17

         % joint ballot elections for Senate

Joint ballots --- all

1871

1873

1875 1877

1879 1881

1883

1885

1887

1889

1891

1893 1895

1897

1899

1901 1903

1905

1907

1909

1911

1913

1870s

1880s

1890s

1900s

1910s

0 10

20

30

40

50

60

P

ct.

1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 Year term begins

General elections Special elections

18

         

Counterfactual: What If No Popular Elections?

17th Amendment

Dem

ocra

tic s

enat

ors

- Rep

ublic

an s

enat

ors 40

20

0

-20

-40

Actual

Counterfactual

1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 Election year

19

         

Counterfactual: What If Popular Election before 1917?

17th Amendment

Dem

ocra

tic s

enat

ors

- Rep

ublic

an s

enat

ors 40

20

0

-20

-40

Actual

Counterfactual

1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 Election year

20

 1912‐1968

(Textbook system) Organizational dynamics

Electoral dynamics Rules Comms. Party leadership

-Regional support for parties -Dems pick up progressives and cities

Battles over filibuster prominent in the Senate

-Comms. dominate legislating & careers -consol. in 1946

-Party cohesion diminishes -party leaders brokers

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 21

 Regional parties

Courtesy of Kenneth C. Martis. Used with permission.

22

 Regional parties

Courtesy of Kenneth C. Martis. Used with permission.

23

        Rise of careerism: The House P

ct

.8

.6

.4

.2

0

1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 Year

Data Lowess fit

Update of Figure 3.5 24

   Rise of careerism .8

.2

.4

.6

Pct

0 1926 1800 1850 1900

Year 1950 2000

Data Lowess fit

Update of Figure 3.5 25

   Rise of careerism .8

1958 1964 1974 1994 2010

.2

.4

.6

Pct

0

1800 1850 1900 Year

1950 2000

Data Lowess fit

Update of Figure 3.5 26

   Rise of careerism

.2

.4

.6

.8

Pct = state HOR

0

1800 1850 1900 Year

1950 2000

Data Lowess fit

Update of Figure 3.5 27

        Rise of careerism: The Senate P

ct

50

40

30

20

10

1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 Year

Data Lowess fit

28

       Senate & House Careerism Compared P

ct

.8

.6

.4

.2

0

1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 Year

Senate House

29

         

              

                    

   

1968‐1974 (Transition from Textbook to Post‐Reform

system • Anti‐war sentiment divorces supporters ofstrong defense from Dems.

• Civil Rights movement divorces southernWhites from Dems, but reinforces Blackaffiliation with Dems.

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 30

 1974‐now

(Post‐Reform System Organizational dynamics

Electoral dynamics Rules Comms. Party leadership

-Reps conservative,Dems. Liberal-Regionalism per sedeemphasized

Floor proceedings open up

-Commsimportant,but….

-Parties resurgent-Leaders moreassertive(Republicans esp.)

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1968

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook Post-Reform 31

       

                                      

Loss of regionalism in parties 80th Congress 114th Congress

(1947-1948) (2015-2016)(Note the color reverse)

Courtesy of Kenneth C. Martis. Used with permission.

© Kurykh. All rights reserved. This content is excludedfrom our Creative Commons license. For more information,see https://ocw.mit.edu/help/faq-fair-use/.

Source: Historical Atlas of Congressional Parties in the United States Congress by Kenneth Martis

Composition of the House by district (2014 election results). Light red are pick‐ups by Republicans, Light blue are pick‐ups by Democrats. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/114th_United_States_Congress#/media/File:US_House_2014.svg

32

0 1

2 3

4 5

Den

sity

-.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

40th Congress (1867-1869)

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

50th Congress (1887-1889)

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

60th Congress (1907-1909)

0 1

2 3

4 D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

70th Congress (1927-1929) 100th Congress (1987-1989)

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-conservative

0 .5

1

1.5

2 2.

5D

ensi

ty

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-Conservative

80th Congress (1947-1949)

0 1

2 3

Den

sity

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-conservative

110th Congress (2007-2009)

90th Congress (1967-1969)

-1 -.5 0 .5 1 Liberal-conservative

Den

sity

0

.5

11.

52

2.5

Den

sity

0

12

34

33

            

Pct

.

Rise of Party Unity Voting (Update of Figure 3.4)

100

80

60

40

20

1850 1900 1950 2000 Year

Data Lowess smoothing

34

          

Decline of Conservative Coalition (Update of Figure 3.7)

House

Senate

0 10

20

30

1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Year

35

      

      

      

           

 

   

New Electoral Environment? New Organizational Environment?

• Election – Voters more partisan – Districts more partisan – Party committees play greater role

• Organization – Party leaders more prominent & partisan

– Committee membership more partisan

• Chairs • Seats • Link to finance

36

         Congressional Historical Eras and Electoral Discontinuities

A dawning new era?

Critical periods

1800 1850 1900 1950 2016

1812-20 1860-65 1896-1912 1964-1994

Experimental Democritizing Civil War Textbook New Partisan Congressional systems

37

MIT OpenCourseWarehttps://ocw.mit.edu

17.251 Congress and the American Political System IFall 2016

For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: https://ocw.mit.edu/terms.