Going Nuclear, Senate Style
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6320902 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sarah A Binder, Sarah Binder (0000-0002-9489-6551, Brookings Institution), Anthony J Madonna (University of Washington), Stephanie S Smith (0000-0001-9943-6717, Klinikum Weiden), Steven S Smith |
| Year | 2007 |
| Volume | 5 |
| Issue | 04 |
| Publication date | 2007-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Perspectives on Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1537-5927 • E-ISSN: 1541-0986 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1017/s1537592707072246 |
| OpenAlex | W2106305643 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 29 |
| References cited | 12 |
Conflict within and beyond the United States Senate has refocused scholarly and public attention on "advice and consent," the constitutional provision that governs the Senate's role in confirming presidential appointments. Despite intense and salient partisan and ideological disputes about the rules of the game that govern the Senate confirmation process for judicial appointees, reformers have had little success in limiting the ability of a minority to block contentious nominees. In this paper, we explore the Senate's brush with the so-called "nuclear option" that would eliminate filibusters of judicial nominees, and evaluate competing accounts of why the Senate appears to be so impervious to significant institutional reform. The past and present politics of the nuclear option, we conclude, have broad implications for how we construct theories of institutional change.Sarah A. Binder is Professor of Political Science at George Washington University and a Senior Fellow at The Brookings Institution ([email protected]). Anthony Madonna is a Ph.D. candidate at Washington University ([email protected]). Steven S. Smith is the Kate M. Gregg Professor of Social Sciences, Professor of Political Science, and Director of the Weidenbaum Center, Washington University ([email protected]). The authors thank Stanley Bach, Richard Baker, Greg Koger, Forrest Maltzman, Elizabeth Rybicki, Eric Schickler, and Greg Wawro for helpful comments and advice
Art history · Electoral college · George (robot · Ideology · Institution · Political science · Politics · Presidency · Presidential system · Sociology · Style (visual arts · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · History · Law · Political and Economic history of UK and US · Social Policy and Reform Studies
Nuclear Fallout
The Reed Rules and Republican Party Building
Questions of Order in the U.S. Senate
Winning Coalition Formation in the U.S. Senate
Nuclear Fallout
A distant mirror”
Media Coverage of the Senate Filibuster and Its Effects on Public Opinion
The Vice President in the U.S. Senate
Prioritizing Judicial Nominations after Presidential Transitions
Serving the Law or Playing Politics? The Strategic Use of U.S. Attorney Appointments
Qualifications or Philosophy? The Use of Blue Slips in a Polarized Era
The Contemporary Presidency
How Preferences Change Institutions
Majority Party Power and Procedural Motions in the U.S . S enate
Dodging the Rules in Trump’s Republican Congress
Anchoring or Expanding? Gender and Judicial Nominations
Confirmation Wars, Legislative Time, and Collateral Damage
In pursuit of power
Reid's Rules
Staggered Terms for the US Senate
Legislative Obstructionism
Signaling through Obstruction
The Politics of Executive Nominations in the Post-Nuclear Senate
Setting the Table
Americans’ Attitudes About the Senate Filibuster
Regulating the Floor
Quick to Judge? Confirmation by Cloture in the Post-Nuclear Senate
Going Nuclear
New Directions in Legislative Research
Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy
Information and Legislative Organization
Filibuster
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
Old Bullion Benton
Henry Clay
The Federal Elections Bill of 1890
The Senate's Compliance with Its Legislative Rules
Increasing Returns, Path Dependence, and the Study of Politics
| Unique citing works | 29 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,71 |
| Citation span | 2009 - 2025 (17) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 29 |