Institutional change in congress : the impact of elections
Authors:   , Grogan Fred Leroy 
Published: June 2024

This dissertation examines the nature of institutional change in Congress from 1930 to 1976. Specifically, the relationship between two distinct aspects of institutional change--membership composition and procedures and rules--is tested. This relationship is examined within both the House of Representatives and Senate Democratic, Republican, and Overall membership categories. The major hypothesis.of this study is that membership change serves to stimulate procedural and rule changes, so that high levels of membership change will be followed by high levels of procedural/rule change. A second hypothesis suggests that elections may have a "critical impact" upon membership, in that membership change may vary widely among different membership groups (party, Conservative Coalition, committee, and party leadership). Finally, it is hypothesized that institutional change will be greater in the House than in the Senate because of the different terms of office and greater House reliance upon formal rules and procedures. Membership change is measured by constructing an index of membership change from turnover, party, Conservative Coalition, committee membership, committee leadership, and party leadership change measures for each of the twenty-three congressional elections between 1930 and 1974 inclusive. Separate index scores are created for each House and Senate membership category (Overall, Democratic, and Republican). Procedural and rule change is measured by estimating the "importance" of such changes within the Congress following each of the twenty-three elections. The major hypotheses are tested through the analysis of this data. The relationship between membership change and procedural/rule change is found to be generally weak, but variable among membership categories. Only within the House Democratic membership is this relationship found to be substantial. The relationship is markedly improved, however, by the use of a "delayed reaction" thesis and Froman's "chamberparty alternative" thesis of procedural/rule change. The "critical impact" hypothesis receives little support. Overall, the replacement of incumbents by new members is reflected throughout most key units of membership. The hypothesized difference between House and Senate institutional change is confirmed. Both membership change and procedural/ rule change are consistently higher in the House than in the Senate. Moreover, the relationship between these two types of change is closer in the House than in the Senate. It is found that while the level of membership change has declined during the 1930-1976 period, the level of procedure and rule changes has increased. The recent upsurge in procedural/rule change has been combined, however, with a reversal of the general pattern of declining levels of membership change. Changes in procedures and rules appear to be periodic reactions to relatively long periods of institutional stability (both of membership and procedures and rules) within the Congressional chambers and parties. Institutional change in Congress is, thus, cyclical in nature -- reacting periodically to demands for change. It appears that Congressional procedure and rule changes are, at least in part, reactions to membership changes produced by elections. This response is not, however, a uniform or immediate reaction within the House and Senate membership categories.