Skip to main content
University of Michigan Press Ebook Collection

University of Michigan Press
Ebook Collection

Browse Books Help
Get access to more books. Log in with your institution.

Your use of this Platform is subject to the Fulcrum Terms of Service.

Share the story of what Open Access means to you

a graphic of a lock that is open, the universal logo for open access

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.

  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Minority Party Misery: Political Powerlessness and Electoral Disengagement

Minority Party Misery: Political Powerlessness and Electoral Disengagement

Jacob F. H. Smith
Restricted You don't have access to this book. Please try to log in with your institution. Log in
Read Book Buy Book
  • Overview

  • Contents

This book examines the role of minority party status on politicians' engagement in electoral politics. Jacob Smith argues that politicians are more likely to be engaged in electoral politics when they expect their party to be in the majority in Congress after the next election and less likely when they anticipate their party will be in the minority. This effect is particularly likely to hold true in recent decades where parties disagree on a substantial number of issues. Politicians whose party will be in the majority have a clear incentive to engage in electoral politics because their preferred policies have a credible chance of passing if they are in the majority. In contrast, it is generally difficult for minority party lawmakers to get a hearing on—much less advance—their preferred policies, particularly when institutional rules inside Congress favor the majority party. Instead, minority party lawmakers spend most of their time fighting losing battles against policy proposals from the majority party. Minority Party Misery examines the consequences of the powerlessness that politicians feel from continually losing battles to the majority party in Congress. Its findings have important consequences for democratic governance, as highly qualified minority party politicians may choose to leave office due to their dismal circumstances rather than continue to serve until their party eventually reenters the majority.

  • Cover
  • Title Page
  • Copyright Page
  • Dedication
  • Contents
  • Acknowledgments
  • Introduction
  • One. A Theory of Minority Party Status
  • Two. I’m Out of Here! Minority Party Status and the Decision to Retire from Congress
  • Three. How Does This Make Cents? Party Fundraising and the Congressional Minority
  • Four. Minority Party Status and the Decision to Run for Office
  • Five. To Meddle or Not to Meddle? Minority Party Status, Party Leaders, and Candidate Recruitment
  • Six. Political Ambition, Electoral Engagement, and the U.S. Senate
  • Seven. Laboratories of Ambition? The Legislative Minority in U.S. States
  • Conclusion
  • Appendixes
  • Appendix A: Notes on Interview Subjects and Methods
  • Appendix B: Discussion of Data Collection for Campaign Finance Data in Chapter 3
  • Appendix C: Detailed Discussion of Methods for Content Analysis
  • Notes
  • Works Cited
  • Index
Citable Link
Published: 2021
Publisher: University of Michigan Press
ISBN(s)
  • 978-0-472-12852-5 (ebook)
  • 978-0-472-07476-1 (hardcover)
  • 978-0-472-05476-3 (paper)
Series
  • Legislative Politics and Policy Making
Subject
  • Political Science
  • Political Science:American Politics
  • Political Science:Governance

Resources

Search and Filter Resources

Filter search results by

Section

  • Chapter 25
  • Chapter 43
  • Chapter 64
  • Chapter 71
  • Fulcrum only1
Filter search results by

Keyword

  • minority party
  • congressional elections12
  • candidate entry5
  • retirement5
  • Senate elections4
  • more Keyword »
Filter search results by

Creator

  • Smith, Jacob14
Filter search results by

Format

  • chart13
  • dataset1
Your search has returned 14 resources attached to Minority Party Misery: Political Powerlessness and Electoral Disengagement

Search Constraints

Filtering by: Keyword minority party Remove constraint Keyword: minority party
Start Over

Not finding what you are looking for? Help improve Fulcrum's search and share your feedback.

1 - 14 of 14
  • First Appearance
  • Section (Earliest First)
  • Section (Last First)
  • Format (A-Z)
  • Format (Z-A)
  • Year (Oldest First)
  • Year (Newest First)
Number of results to display per page
  • 10 per page
  • 20 per page
  • 50 per page
  • 100 per page
View results as:
List Gallery

Search Results

The probability of minority party status by party varies substantially over time.

Figure 2.1: Probability of Minority Party Status by Party, 1946-2018

From Chapter 2

Figure 2.1. Probability of minority party status by party, 1946–2018

As the probability of minority party status increases, so does the probability of a retirement.

Figure 2.3: Probability of Minority Party Status and the Decision to Retire

From Chapter 2

Figure 2.3. Probability of minority party status and the decision to retire

In the forty-year era of Democratic control of Congress, a positive relationship exists between the probability of minority party status and retirement decisions.

Figure 2.4: Probability of Minority Party Status and the Decision to Retire, 1956-1994

From Chapter 2

Figure 2.4. Probability of minority party status and the decision to retire, 1956–1994

A positive relationship exists between the probability of minority party status and retirement decisions in the post-1994 era.

Figure 2.5: Probability of Minority Party Status and the Decision to Retire, 1996-2018

From Chapter 2

Figure 2.5. Probability of minority party status and the decision to retire, 1996–2018

In the post-Reform era, the number of terms served has a positive relationship with retirement regardless of the probability of minority party status.

Figure 2.7: Retirement and Terms Served in the Post-Reform Era (1976-1994)

From Chapter 2

Figure 2.7. Retirement and terms served in the post-Reform era (1976–1994)

Candidate quality by party varies considerably in each election cycle.

Figure 4.1: Percentage Quality Candidates by Party, 1946-2018

From Chapter 4

Figure 4.1. Percentage quality candidates by party, 1946–2018

In the pre-Reform era, an increase in the probability of minority party status relates to a large decrease in the number of quality candidates who ran in the South, as compared to a much more modest decrease in the North.

Figure 4.3: The Role of Region in the Pre-Reform Era

From Chapter 4

Figure 4.3. The role of region in the pre-Reform era

Between 1994 and 2014, fewer quality candidates ran in highly competitive seats held by the other party as the probability of minority party status increased. In contrast, quality candidates rarely ran for safe seats held by the other party regardless of the probability of minority party status.

Figure 4.4: The Role of Presidential Vote Lean in the Post-1994 Era (1994-2014)

From Chapter 4

Figure 4.4. The role of presidential vote lean in the post-1994 era (1994–2014)

The probability of minority party status in the Senate varies substantially over time.

Figure 6.1: Probability of Minority Party Status by Party, 1946-2018

From Chapter 6

Figure 6.1. Probability of minority party status by party, 1946–2018

Senate candidate quality varies considerably by party and region in each election cycle.

Figure 6.2: Candidate Quality by Region and Party

From Chapter 6

Figure 6.2. Candidate quality by region and party

For northern Senate seats between 1958 and 1966, fewer quality candidates run as the probability of minority party status increases.

Figure 6.3: Candidate Entry Decisions in Non-Southern Senate Seats, 1958-1966

From Chapter 6

Figure 6.3. Candidate entry decisions in nonsouthern Senate seats, 1958–1966

The probability of minority party status by party in the Senate varies substantially over time.

Figure 6.4: Senate Retirement Decisions, 1946-2018

From Chapter 6

Figure 6.4. Senate retirement decisions, 1946–2018

In 2012 and 2014, most state legislative chambers were highly uncompetitive.

Figure 7.1: Minority Party Status and State Legislative Chambers in 2012 and 2014

From Chapter 7

Figure 7.1. Minority party status and state legislative chambers in 2012 and 2014

Online Appendix

From Fulcrum only

University of Michigan Press Contact Us

UMP EBC

  • Browse and Search
  • About UMP EBC
  • Impact and Usage

Follow Us

  • UMP EBC Newsletter
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube

Quicklinks

  • Help/FAQ
  • Title List
  • MARC Records
  • KBART Records
  • Usage Stats
© 2023, Regents of the University of Michigan · Accessibility · Preservation · Privacy · Terms of Service
Powered by Fulcrum logo · Log In
x This site requires cookies to function correctly.