1995•Journal of Legislative StudiesRequires access

Legislative recruitment to upper houses: The Australian senate and house of representatives compared

David M. Farrell, Ian McAllister

Open publisher page 17 citations

Abstract

Although a majority of liberal democracies are bicameral, only four – Australia, the United States, Germany and Switzerland – have upper houses which have any significant legislative authority. However, it is unclear to what extent upper house members differ – in their backgrounds and beliefs – from their lower house counterparts. This article applies multivariate methods to survey data collected among 1993 Australian federal election candidates to examine patterns of legislative recruitment and political attitudes among Australian Senate and House of Representatives candidates. The results show that Senate candidates differ significantly in their personal : and political backgrounds when compared to House of Representatives candidates, although there are few, if any, differences in political views. The findings confirm the strong discipline that the major parties exercise over the Senate, particularly by selecting candidates who are more party – oriented than their lower house counterparts. This is anomalous given that the original purpose of the upper house was to defend the interests of the smaller states and territories. Finally, the article discusses the implications of this increasing partisan control of upper houses for responsible party government.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Although a majority of liberal democracies are bicameral, only four – Australia, the United States, Germany and Switzerland – have upper houses which have any significant legislative authority. However, it is unclear to what extent upper house members differ – in their backgrounds and beliefs – from their lower house counterparts. This article applies multivariate methods to survey data collected among 1993 Australian federal election candidates to examine patterns of legislative recruitment and political attitudes among Australian Senate and House of Representatives candidates. The results show that Senate candidates differ significantly in their personal : and political backgrounds when compared to House of Representatives candidates, although there are few, if any, differences in political views. The findings confirm the strong discipline that the major parties exercise over the Senate, particularly by selecting candidates who are more party – oriented than their lower house counterparts. This is anomalous given that the original purpose of the upper house was to defend the interests of the smaller states and territories. Finally, the article discusses the implications of this increasing partisan control of upper houses for responsible party government.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 17 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Although a majority of liberal democracies are bicameral, only four – Australia, the United States, Germany and Switzerland – have upper houses which have any significant legislative authority. However, it is unclear to what extent upper house members differ – in their backgrounds and beliefs – from their lower house counterparts. This article applies multivariate methods to survey data collected among 1993 Australian federal election candidates to examine patterns of legislative recruitment and political attitudes among Australian Senate and House of Representatives candidates. The results show that Senate candidates differ significantly in their personal : and political backgrounds when compared to House of Representatives candidates, although there are few, if any, differences in political views. The findings confirm the strong discipline that the major parties exercise over the Senate, particularly by selecting candidates who are more party – oriented than their lower house counterparts. This is anomalous given that the original purpose of the upper house was to defend the interests of the smaller states and territories. Finally, the article discusses the implications of this increasing partisan control of upper houses for responsible party government.

Key concepts: House of Representatives, Legislature, Lower house, Politics, Political science, Public administration, Government (linguistics), Law

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Legislative recruitment to upper houses: The Australian senate and house of representatives compared — Research Paper | ScholarLens