Probability Interest Group Rates DOA Bill
From Chapter 5
You can access this title through a library that has purchased it. More information about purchasing is available at our website.
University of Michigan needs your feedback to better understand how readers are using openly available ebooks. You can help by taking a short, privacy-friendly survey.
Losing to Win answers these questions through a novel theory of agenda-setting. Unlike other research that studies bills that become law, Jeremy Gelman begins from the opposite perspective. He studies why majority parties knowingly take up dead-on-arrival (DOA) bills, the ideas everyone knows are going to lose. In doing so, he argues that congressional parties' decisions to play politics instead of compromising, and the topics on which they choose to bicker, are strategic and predictable. Gelman finds that legislative dysfunction arises from a mutually beneficial relationship between a majority party in Congress, which is trying to win unified government, and its allied interest groups, which are trying to enact their policies. He also challenges the conventional wisdom that DOA legislation is political theater. By tracking bills over time, Gelman shows that some former dead-on-arrival ideas eventually become law. In this way, ideas viewed as too extreme or partisan today can produce long-lasting future policy changes.
Through his analysis, Gelman provides an original explanation for why both parties pursue the partisan bickering that voters find so frustrating. He moves beyond conventional arguments that our discordant politics are merely the result of political polarization. Instead, he closely examines the specific circumstances that give rise to legislative dysfunction. The result is a fresh, straightforward perspective on the question we have all asked at some point, "Why can't Democrats and Republicans stop fighting and just get something done?"
From Chapter 5
Figure 5.3. Predicted Probability Interest Groups Rate DOA Bill Note: Predicted probabilities that an interest group rates a bill in its legislative scorecard based on the interaction term from Model 1 in Table 5.5. Dead on Arrival is held at 1. Important Bill is held at 0 in the “All Bills” model and its mean in the “Important Bills” model. Log Total Donations is held at its mean.
From Chapter 5
Figure 5.2. Percentage of Legislative Agenda and Scorecards Devoted to Dead-On-Arrival Bills
From Chapter 2
Figure 2.3. Dead-On-Arrival Bills Brought to the Floor by Chamber, 2003-2012
From Chapter 2
Figure 2.2. Important Bills that Received Floor Consideration, 2003-2012
From Chapter 2
Figure 2.1. Bills that Received Floor Consideration, 2003-2012