Institutional Variation and Political Career Patterns: A Look at the Influence of Chamber Size in State Legislatures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-7781.2008.29.0.49-63Abstract
State legislators routinely run for the state Senate after having served in the state House; however, this rarely occurs in the other order. Do members simply look to move up based on the conventional view of the political ambition ladder? Alternatively, do institutional reasons exist that make the Senate the preferred chamber? I examine the differences between the state legislative chambers and discuss institutional reasons why members may prefer the Senate to the House. Overall, I find chamber size is an important intra-institutional variable in explaining this variation along with the professionalism of the legislatures and term limits.References
Baker, Ross K. 2001. House and Senate, 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Berkman, Michael B. 1994. State Legislators in Congress: Strategic Politicians, Professional Legislatures, and the Party Nexus. American Journal of Political Science 38:1025-1055. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111731
Brams, Steven J. 1989. Are the Two Houses of Congress Really Coequal? In The Federalist Papers and the New Institutionalism. New York: Agathon Press.
Caldeira, Gregory A., and Samuel C. Patterson. 1987. Political Friendship in the Legislature. Journal of Politics 49:953-975. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130779
Fowler, Linda L., and Robert D. McClure. 1989. Political Ambition: Who Decides to Run For Congress. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Francis, Wayne L. 1985. Costs and Benefits of Legislative Service in the American States. American Journal of Political Science 29:626-642. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2111146
Francis, Wayne L. 1993. House to Senate Career Movement in the U.S. States: The Significance of Selectivity. Legislative Studies Quarterly 18:309-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439828
Francis, Wayne L., and Lawrence W. Kenny. 1997. Equilibrium Projections of the Con-sequences of Term Limits Upon Expected Tenure, Institutional Turnover, and Membership Experience. The Journal of Politics 59:240-252. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2998225
Hibbing, John R. 1999. Legislative Careers: Why and How We Should Study Them. Legislative Studies Quarterly 24:149-171. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440308
Jewell, Malcolm E., and Samuel C. Patterson. 1985. The Legislative Process in the United States, 4th ed. New York: Random House.
King, James D. 2000. Changes in Professionalism in U.S. State Legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly 25:327-343. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/440374
Konig, Thomas, and Thomas Brauninger. 1996. Power and Political Coordination in American and German Multi-Chamber Legislation. Journal of Theoretical Politics 8:331-360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0951692896008003002
Lee, Frances E., and Bruce I. Oppenheimer. 1999. Sizing Up the Senate: The Unequal Consequences of Equal Representation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms in Thirty-Six Countries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
National Conference of State Legislators. 2001. 2001 State Legislator Compensation and Living Expense Allowances During Session.
Ostrom, Vincent. 1987. The Political Theory of a Compound Republic: Designing the American Experiment. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Patterson, Samuel C. 1972. Party Opposition in the Legislature: The Ecology of Legislative Institutionalization. Polity 4:344-366. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3233966
Polsby, Nelson W. 1968. The Institutionalization of the U.S. House of Representatives. American Political Science Review 62:144-268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055400115692 http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1953331
Ray, David, and John Havick. 1981. A Longitudinal Analysis of Party Competition in State Legislative Elections. American Journal of Political Science 25:119-128. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110916
Rogers, James R. 1998. Bicameral Sequence: Theory and State Legislative Evidence. American Journal of Political Science 42:1025-1060. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2991848
Rohde, David R. 1979. Risk-bearing and Progressive Ambition: The Case of the United States House of Representatives. American Journal of Political Science 23:1-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110769
Rosenthal, Alan. 1996. The Legislature: Unraveling of Institutional Fabric. In The State of the States, 3rd ed. Washington DC: CQ Press.
Sarbaugh-Thompson, Marjorie, Lyke Thompson, Charles D. Elder, John Strate, and Richard C. Elling. 2004. The Political and Institutional Effects of Term Limits. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781403980250
Schlesinger, Joseph A. 1966. Ambition and Politics. Chicago: Rand McNally.
Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Barry R. Weingast. 1984. When Do Rules of Procedure Matter? Journal of Politics 45:206-221. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2130440
Soule, John W. 1969. Future Political Ambitions and the Behavior of Incumbent State Legislators. Midwest Journal of Political Science 13:439-454. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2110233
Squire, Peverill. 1988. Career Opportunities and Membership Stability in Legislatures. Legislative Studies Quarterly 13:65-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/439945
Squire, Peverill. 1992. The Theory of Legislative Institutionalization and the California Assembly. Journal of Politics 54:1026-1054. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2132107
Squire, Peverill, and Keith E. Hamm. 2005. 101 Chambers: Congress, State Legislatures, and the Future of Legislative Studies. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
State Legislative Election Returns, 1967-2003, Thomas M. Carsey, William D. Berry, Richard G. Niemi, Lynda W. Powell, and James M Snyder, Release Version 3.
Tucker, Harvey J. 1989. Legislative Calendars and Workload Management in Texas. Journal of Politics 51:631-645. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2131498
Uslaner, Eric, and Ronald Weber. 1981. Patterns of Decision-Making in State Legislatures. New York: Praeger.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with American Review of Politics agree to the following terms:
The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
Attribution: other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
Non-Commercial: the materials may not be used for commercial purposes;
Share Alike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (see The Effect of Open Access). Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
The Author represents and warrants that:
the Work is the Author’s original work;
the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
the Work has not previously been published;
the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.
