The Rise of the Public Speakership

Harris, Douglas B.

doi:10.2307/2657853

Cited by 20 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, the conclusions presented here are consistent with a growing research literature asserting the relevance of congressional parties outside the roll call arena (e.g., Cox & McCubbins, 1993;Harris, 1998Harris, , 2005Morris, 2001;Sinclair, 1995). For instance, Cox and McCubbins (1993) argue that MCs benefit from their party's reputation, which, as Sinclair (1995) claims, gives them an incentive to choose media savvy leaders.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…For instance, Cox and McCubbins (1993) argue that MCs benefit from their party's reputation, which, as Sinclair (1995) claims, gives them an incentive to choose media savvy leaders. Leaders then turn to non-roll call activities such as NLD, press conferences, or even committee hearings to strengthen their party's reputation and advertise their policy positions (Harris, 1998(Harris, , 2005Morris, 2001;Sinclair, 1995). In all, these are indicators of active parties in Congress, such as those discussed in the groundbreaking research of Rohde (1991) and Cox and McCubbins (1993).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Nonlegislative Debate in the U.S. House of Representatives

Rocca¹

2007

American Politics Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To date, most empirical analyses of position taking in Congress have focused on roll call voting, where members of Congress (MCs) regularly cast votes, thereby regularly taking positions. Left largely unstudied has been position taking outside the domain of roll call voting. This article takes a closer look at who utilizes one popular non-roll call forum in the House of Representatives-nonlegislative debate (NLD)-and why. The analysis expands on extant research by examining multiple Congresses (101st to 106th), both types of NLD (1-minute speeches and special-order addresses), and determinants not explicitly accounted for in previous research. Among other things, I argue that institutional variation across the NLD forums leads to important differences in participation. The results show that more individualistic, institutionally disadvantaged MCs tend to favor 1-minute speeches, whereas those in the parties' mainstream frequent the special-order period.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonlegislative Debate in the U.S. House of Representatives

Rocca¹

2007

American Politics Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contemporary party leaders work to construct and nurture the party's image and promote a broad programmatic agenda through the media (Harris 1998;Sinclair 1995). Because leaders receive more media coverage than do committee chairs and rank-and-file members (Cook 1989), they are uniquely positioned to promote the party message.…”

Section: Party Structuring Of the One-minute Periodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orchestrating Party Talk: A Party-Based View of One-Minute Speeches in the House of Representatives

Harris

2005

Legislative Studies Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies of House members' speech‐giving behavior treat the behavior as a product of members' individual goals. By uncovering leadership memoranda soliciting member participation in one‐minute speech giving, I find, first, that parties significantly structure one‐minute speech giving, with party‐orchestrated message campaigns accounting for about one‐third of the speeches given. Second, I find that a party‐based explanation illuminates individual members' speech‐giving behavior. Ideological proximity to the party leadership and party organizational factors strongly influence a member's willingness to be “on message.” These findings have important implications for studies of both party message politics and members' speech‐giving behavior.

show abstract

“…Although attempts to vilify and link the Speaker of the House to majority party incumbents are nothing new, they may have become more effective as the national visibility of the speaker has increased (Farrell 2002;Green 2010;Harris 1998). In recent Congresses, especially during times of divided government, the Speaker has taken a more prominent role in promoting and defending the party's legislative agenda and working, as Speaker Boehner explained, "to kill [the president's agenda], stop it, slow it down, whatever [the party's majority in the House] can" (Barr 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Public and Partisan Opinions of the Speaker of the House

Hassell

2014

Congress & the Presidency

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Rise of the Public Speakership

Cited by 20 publications

References 3 publications

Nonlegislative Debate in the U.S. House of Representatives

Nonlegislative Debate in the U.S. House of Representatives

Orchestrating Party Talk: A Party-Based View of One-Minute Speeches in the House of Representatives

Public and Partisan Opinions of the Speaker of the House

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About