For the first time in one hundred years, the 118th Congress began with a prolonged Speaker’s race that required fifteen ballots to elect a Speaker. The contentious Republican debate displayed a level of personal animosity between a faction – the House Freedom Caucus (HFC) – and the majority party’s chosen leader – Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) – but it also revealed a series of significant divisions within the majority party over policy, and legislative norms and practices. How do different strategies shape the capacity of factions to spur formal changes to legislative institutions? How do party leaders respond to the demands of factions that raise issues threatening to party unity and their own leadership position? In this article, I analyze the composition of defectors in the Speaker’s race, the status of their rule and procedural reform agenda, and the response by McCarthy, including to committee assignments and early use of restrictive rules in the 118th Congress. I conclude with a discussion of the consequences of the HFC strategy for the contemporary U.S. House, and an emerging need to expand theories of institutional change to better integrate the behavior of both party leaders and factions.
In January 2019, the House of Representatives voted 418–12 to respond to widespread bipartisan criticism of the inner workings of the legislative branch by creating a Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress. This article examines the leadership, participation, and salience of the Select Committee by key reform stakeholders, including individual members, party factions, leaders, interest groups, and the national media that cover Congress. I identify bifurcated participation patterns that overrepresent the interests of junior members, party leaders, and Democratic Party factions. I also find limited salience of Select Committee activities among key stakeholders. The findings raise normative and theoretical questions about procedural reform and reveal a significant challenge to coalition-building efforts in future sessions of Congress.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.