Moving up or Moving out: Career Ceilings and Congressional Retirement

Theriault, Sean M.

doi:10.2307/440361

Cited by 66 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies of congressional retirement, for instance, conclude that as an electoral margin decreases, so, too, does a member's likelihood of seeking reelection (e.g., Moore and Hibbing 1998;Theriault 1998). For many members of Congress, it is preferable to exit the chamber voluntarily, as opposed to engage in an arduous reelection bid that might end in defeat.…”

Section: Expressive Ambitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

To Run or Not to Run for Office: Explaining Nascent Political Ambition

Fox

Lawless

2005

American J Political Sci

254

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we develop the concept of nascent political ambition and offer the first empirical assessment of potential candidates' initial interest in seeking elective office. Our analysis is based on the Citizen Political Ambition Study-our national survey of nearly 3,800 individuals in the four professions that most frequently precede a career in politics. We find that a general sense of efficacy as a candidate, as well as a politicized upbringing, motivate well-situated potential candidates' inclinations to run for office. Alternatively, status as a member of a group historically excluded from politics depresses the likelihood of considering a candidacy. These findings shed light not only on the prospects for political representation and democratic legitimacy in the United States, but also the means by which to study candidate emergence and conceptualize political ambition.

show abstract

Section: Expressive Ambitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

To Run or Not to Run for Office: Explaining Nascent Political Ambition

Fox

Lawless

2005

American J Political Sci

254

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also the reactions among senior members to the new rules suggest that they perceive they have reached their career ceiling and will have limited opportunity to achieve greater independent institutional influence. 10 For instance, 87 per cent of the Republicans and 85 per cent of Democrats who want to be the chair or ranking member on a committee also retired from the Congress in our study period. On the other hand, 79 per cent of Democrats and 91 per cent of the Republicans who see themselves as advancing inside their party in four years or less stay in the chamber.…”

Section: Impact Of Rulesmentioning

confidence: 79%

The behavioural consequences of institutional rules: republicans in the US house

Davison

Krassa

Reagan

2005

The Journal of Legislative Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Republicans gained a majority in the US House from the 1994 elections, and upon taking office they rewrote the rules that determine legislative power relations. This paper combines a 1996 attitudinal survey of US Representatives with demographic information, status within the House, and party position to examine the impact of the 1995 rule changes on satisfaction, ambition, and retirement. This paper demonstrates that member reactions to reform are explained jointly by their partisanship and their relative position within their party. Senior members of any party dislike rules making power more exclusive, and dissatisfaction increases the likelihood of retirement. THE REPUBLICAN RULE CHANGESFollowing their 1994 election victory, the new Republican majority in the US House of Representatives adopted a series of institutional reforms that substantially altered the rules of the game under which that chamber operates. Those changes appear to strengthen the power of the leadership and reduce the autonomy of committees and their members. The reforms enhanced the power of leaders and the Speaker, altered the jurisdictions, composition and decision processes of committees, reduced the role for seniority, and changed scheduling procedures and the conduct of floor deliberations. These significant changes in formal chamber rules afford us the chance to explore whether individual members' reactions to the new institutional context is shaped by their position in the House. For instance, do members of the majority party respond to these new organisational incentives in a way that distinguishes them from their minority party counterparts? Or do

show abstract

“…11 For instance, congressional studies commonly consider retirement decisions as hinging upon some sort of cost-benefit analysis, often with the view that retirement is an expression of dissatisfaction with legislative life or avarice; yet, failure to allow for the allure of post-elective career opportunities, following successful congressional careers, seemingly renders these cost-benefit calculations incomplete. This issue arises in many prominent studies: Hibbing (1982); Hibbing (1992, 1998); Kiewiet and Zeng (1993); Groseclose and Krehbiel (1994); Hall and van Houweling (1995); and Theriault (1998). post-elective employment and those retiring from office behave differently as their congressional careers come to a close; failure to distinguish between them may confound the measurement as well as the interpretation of retirement-related effects in legislatures. Accordingly, our approach differs from previous analyses by discriminating between legislators retiring and those reentering the labor force.…”

Section: Post-elective Career Choicesmentioning

confidence: 96%