No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
What Might Bring Regular Order Back to the House?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 April 2010
Extract
It is not hard to find critics of how the U.S. Congress operates today. Two of the most prominent, Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, have bemoaned in particular Congress's failure to follow “regular order,” which in their 2006 book The Broken Branch they describe as a legislative process that incorporates “discussion, debate, negotiation, and compromise” (Mann and Ornstein 2006, 170).
- Type
- Symposium
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010
References
Bach, Stanley, and Smith, Steven S.. 1988. Managing Uncertainty in the House of Representatives: Adaptation and Innovation in Special Rules. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Eilperin, Juliet. 2006. Fight Club Politics: How Partisanship Is Poisoning the House of Representatives. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Fenno, Richard F. 1965. “The Internal Distribution of Influence: The House.” In The Congress and America's Future, ed. Truman, David B.. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc, chapter 3.Google Scholar
Kofmehl, Kenneth. 1964. “The Institutionalization of a Voting Bloc.” Western Political Quarterly 17 (2): 256–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomis, Burdett. 1988. The New American Politician: Ambition, Entrepreneurship, and the Changing Face of Political Life. New York: Basic Books, Inc.Google Scholar
Manley, John F. 1965. “The House Committee on Ways and Means: Conflict Management in a Congressional Committee.” American Political Science Review 59 (4): 927–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, Thomas E., and Ornstein, Norman J.. 2006. The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing American and How to Get it Back on Track. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mann, Thomas E., and Ornstein, Norman J.. 2009. “Is Congress Still the Broken Branch?” In Congress Reconsidered, 9th ed., Dodd, Lawrence C. and Oppenheimer, Bruce I.. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, chapter 3.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart. 1861. Considerations on Representative Government. London: Parker, Son, and Bourn.Google Scholar
Rohde, David W. 1991. Parties and Leaders in the Postreform House. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohde, David W., Ornstein, Norman J., and Peabody, Robert L.. 1985. “Political Change and Legislative Norms in the U.S. Senate, 1957–1974.” In Studies of Congress, ed. Parker, Glenn R.. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, chapter 7.Google Scholar
Romano, Lois. 2009. “A Blue Dog with Time and Clout on His Side.” Washington Post, July 30.Google Scholar
Schickler, Eric. 2000. “Institutional Change in the House of Representatives, 1867–1998: A Test of Partisan and Ideological Power Balance Models.” American Political Science Review 94 (2): 269–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schickler, Eric, and Rich, Andrew. 1997. “Controlling the Floor: Parties as Procedural Coalitions in the House.” American Journal of Political Science 41 (4): 1340–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 2006. Party Wars: Polarization and the Politics of National Policy Making. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 2008. “Orchestrators of Unorthodox Lawmaking: Pelosi and McConnell in the 110th Congress.” The Forum 6 (3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southwick, Thomas P. 1976. “DSG Adopts Proposals to Overhaul House Procedures.” Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, October 2.Google Scholar
Wolfensberger, Donald R. 2002. “The House Rules Committee under Republican Majorities: Continuity and Change.” Paper prepared for delivery at the 34th Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar