Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T10:30:32.527Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Legislative Obstruction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2010

David R. Mayhew
David R. Mayhew
Affiliation:
Yale University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Democrats dodged a bullet on health care in the spring of 2010, but the Senate filibuster is still with us. The 60-vote pivot, the cloture strategies, Senator Scott Brown (R-MA), the member “holds,” and the rest are as basic as anything these days to U.S. national policymaking.

Type
Review Essay
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 8 , Issue 4 , December 2010 , pp. 1145 - 1154
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beth, Richard S. 1994. “Filibusters in the Senate, 1789–1993.” Congressional Research Service Memorandum.Google Scholar
Binder, Sarah A., and Smith, Steven S.. 1997. Politics or Principle? Filibustering in the United States Senate. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Burdette, Franklin L. 1965. Filibustering in the Senate. New York: Russell & Russell.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., MacKuen, Michael B., and Stimson, James A.. 2002. The Macro Polity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 2005. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Fisk, Catherine, and Chemerinsky, Erwin. 1997. “The Filibuster.” Stanford Law Review 49 (1): 181–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freehling, William W. 2007. The Road to Disunion. II: Secessionists Triumphant. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gilmour, John B. 1995. “The Contest for Senate Cloture Reform, 1949–1975.” Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Gold, Martin B., and Gupta, Dimple. 2004. “The Constitutional Option to Change Senate Rules and Procedures: A Majoritarian Means to Overcome the Filibuster.” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 28 (1): 205–272.Google Scholar
Holt, Michael F. 2008. By One Vote: The Disputed Presidential Election of 1876. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Jeffery A. 2004. “Partisanship and Contested Election Cases in the House of Representatives, 1789–2002.” Studies in American Political Development 18 (2): 112–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Layman, Geoffrey C., Carsey, Thomas M., Green, John C., Herrera, Richard, and Cooperman, Rosalyn. 2010. “Activists and Conflict Extension in American Party Politics.” American Political Science Review 104 (2): 324–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, Frances E. 2010. “Senate Deliberation and the Future of Congressional Power.” PS: Political Science and Politics 43 (2): 227–229.Google Scholar
Mann, Robert. 2007. When Freedom Would Triumph: The Civil Rights Struggle in Congress, 1954–1968. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press.Google Scholar
Masket, Seth E. 2009. No Middle Ground: How Informal Party Organizations Control Nominations and Polarize Legislatures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, Donald. 1960. U.S. Senators and Their World. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 2000. America's Congress: Actions in the Public Sphere, James Madison Through Newt Gingrich. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 2003. “Supermajority Rule in the U.S. Senate.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (1): 31–36.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. N.d.. Partisan Balance: Why Political Parties Don't Kill the U.S. Constitutional System. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Forthcoming.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. 1961. The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nivola, Pietro S., and Brady, David W., eds. 2006. Red and Blue America? Characteristics and Causes of America's Polarized Politics. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
O'Leary, Kevin. 2009. “How California's Fiscal Woes Began: A Crisis 30 Years in the Making.” Time in Partnership with CNN. July 1. (http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,1907504.00.html), accessed July 4, 2009.Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, Bruce I. 1985. “Changing Time Constraints on Congress: Historical Perspectives on the Use of Cloture.” In Congress Reconsidered (3rd ed.), ed. Dodd, Lawrence C. and Oppenheimer, Bruce I.. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.Google Scholar
Remini, Robert V. 2010. At the Edge of the Precipice: Henry Clay and the Compromise That Saved the Union. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Riddick, Floyd M. 1974. Senate Procedure: Precedents and Practices. 93rd Cong., 1st sess., S. Doc. 93–21. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Smith, Steven S. 2010. “The Senate Syndrome.” In Issues in Governance Studies. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Wawro, Gregory J., and Schickler, Eric. 2006. Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar