2021•The Journal of PoliticsRequires access

Bill Text and Agenda Control in the US Congress

Andrew M. O. Ballard

Open publisher page 9 citations

Abstract

The study of agenda power has largely been the study of negative agenda power. But standard measures of negative agenda power are insufficient to measure the majority’s agenda choices: they only consider a small proportion of bills, only detail how often negative agenda power fails (rather than succeeds), and cannot help us understand positive agenda power. To understand the incentives and strategies of agenda decision-making, then, we must know about members’ preferences on all bills. I develop an approach to estimate members’ preferences on all bills, by generating quantitative characterizations of the policy content in each bill. I use the resulting estimates to examine both positive and negative agenda power using all bills and to directly compare levels of agenda power between chambers of the US Congress. While I find similarly strong negative agenda control in both chambers, I find substantially stronger positive agenda control in the House than the Senate.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The study of agenda power has largely been the study of negative agenda power. But standard measures of negative agenda power are insufficient to measure the majority’s agenda choices: they only consider a small proportion of bills, only detail how often negative agenda power fails (rather than succeeds), and cannot help us understand positive agenda power. To understand the incentives and strategies of agenda decision-making, then, we must know about members’ preferences on all bills. I develop an approach to estimate members’ preferences on all bills, by generating quantitative characterizations of the policy content in each bill. I use the resulting estimates to examine both positive and negative agenda power using all bills and to directly compare levels of agenda power between chambers of the US Congress. While I find similarly strong negative agenda control in both chambers, I find substantially stronger positive agenda control in the House than the Senate.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 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

The study of agenda power has largely been the study of negative agenda power. But standard measures of negative agenda power are insufficient to measure the majority’s agenda choices: they only consider a small proportion of bills, only detail how often negative agenda power fails (rather than succeeds), and cannot help us understand positive agenda power. To understand the incentives and strategies of agenda decision-making, then, we must know about members’ preferences on all bills. I develop an approach to estimate members’ preferences on all bills, by generating quantitative characterizations of the policy content in each bill. I use the resulting estimates to examine both positive and negative agenda power using all bills and to directly compare levels of agenda power between chambers of the US Congress. While I find similarly strong negative agenda control in both chambers, I find substantially stronger positive agenda control in the House than the Senate.

Key concepts: Power (physics), Incentive, Control (management), Political science, Public economics, Law and economics, Public administration, Economics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Bill Text and Agenda Control in the US Congress — Research Paper | ScholarLens