Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Intended Consequences

Jurisdictional Reform and Issue Control In the U.S. House of Representatives

Bibliographic Data

ID7329463
AuthorsE Scott Adler (0009-0005-9304-3900, University of Colorado System), John D Wilkerson, John Wilkerson (University of Washington)
Year2008
Volume33
Issue1
Pages85-112
Publication date2008-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLegislative Studies Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0362-9805 • E-ISSN: 1939-9162
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.3162/036298008783743318
OpenAlexW2042889004
LanguageEN
Citations received17
References cited37

The power of congressional committees rests in large part on their ability to set the legislative agenda in particular issue areas. But how do committees acquire their issue jurisdictions? Existing research points to informal committee turf wars— not collective reforms—as the roots of jurisdictional allocations (King 1994, 1997). Yet the House of Representatives has made nearly 150 formal changes to its committees' jurisdictions since 1973. We investigated the effects of one prominent instance of extensive jurisdictional changes, the Bolling‐Hansen reforms of 1975, and found that this body of reforms advanced collective goals of improved policy coordination and enhanced information sharing

Control (management · Economics · House of Representatives · Law and economics · Legislature · Management · Political science · Power (physics · Power sharing · Set (abstract data type · Sociology · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Policy Transfer and Learning · Political Influence and Corporate Strategies · Public Administration

  • Political Limits to the Processing of Policy Problems

    Open Access•Peter May, Ashley Jochim et al.•Politics and Governance•2013

  • Computer-Assisted Topic Classification for Mixed-Methods Social Science Research

    Dustin Hillard, Stephen Purpura et al.•Journal of Information Technology…•2008

  • Conceptual and measurement limitations of the Biennial Congress

    Eric Paul Svensen•Journal of Legislative Studies•2020

  • Action publique et partis politiques

    Simon Persico, Caterina Froio et al.•Gouvernement et action publique•2012

  • Physicians in congress

    Open Access•Alexandra Fountaine, Michael E Shepherd et al.•Legislative Studies Quarterly•2025

  • And Presidential Support in the 107th Congress

    Michael S Rocca•Congress & the Presidency•2009

  • The Legislative Matching Game

    Open Access•Clint S Swift•State Politics & Policy Quarterly•2019

  • Widespread Policy Disruption and Interest Mobilization

    Open Access•Peter J May, Peter May et al.•Policy Studies Journal•2009

  • Big & rich

    Open Access•Jennifer Lewallen•Policy Studies Journal•2025

  • The decline of incrementalism in U.S. lawmaking

    Open Access•Jennifer Lewallen•Policy Studies Journal•2024

  • Majority Party Change and Committee Jurisdictions in State Legislatures

    Open Access•Todd Makse•Legislative Studies Quarterly•2014

  • The Calculus of Cosponsorship in the U.S. Senate

    Open Access•Brian M Harward, Kenneth W Moffett•Legislative Studies Quarterly•2010

  • The Comparative Policy Agendas Project

    Open Access•Keith Dowding, Andrew Hindmoor et al.•Journal of Public Policy•2016

  • The study of legislative committees

    Barry J Gaines, Brian J Gaines et al.•Journal of Legislative Studies•2019

  • Comparing Law-Making Activities in a Quasi-Federal System of Government

    Open Access•Laura Chaqués-Bonafont, Laura Chaqués Bonafont et al.•Comparative Political Studies•2011

  • Information Infrastructures for Black-Interest Advocacy in Congress

    P C Peay, Alexander Leasure•Congress & the Presidency•2023

  • What Role Do Interest Groups Play in House Committees

    Open Access•Michael D Parrott, Michael Parrott•PS Political Science & Politics•2019

  • The giant jigsaw puzzle

    Kenneth A Shepsle•The giant jigsaw puzzle•1978

  • Committees in Congress

    Christopher J Deering, Christopher Deering et al.•Committees in Congress•1997

  • Competing Principals

    Forrest Maltzman•Competing principals•1997

  • Information and Legislative Organization

    Keith Krehbiel•Information and Legislative…•1991

  • Turf Wars

    David C King, David King•Turf Wars•1997

  • A Mathematical Theory of Communication

    Claude E Shannon•Bell System Technical Journal•1948

  • The committee outlier debate

    Open Access•Tim Groseclose•Public Choice•1994

  • Congress, The Electoral Connection

    Michael J Ross, David R Mayhew•The Western Political Quarterly•1975

  • Congress

    Open Access•Benjamin I Page•Political Science Quarterly•1975

  • Doing the Right Thing

    Open Access•Thad E Hall•Political Science Quarterly•2005

  • The 9/11 Commission Report

    Open Access•James J Wirtz•Political Science Quarterly•2004

  • Why Congressional Reforms Fail

    Open Access•J A Jenkins•Political Science Quarterly•2003

  • The Industrial Organization of Congress; or, Why Legislatures, Like Firms, Are Not Organized as Markets

    Barry R Weingast, William Marshall et al.•Journal of Political Economy•1988

  • Committees in the House

    Open Access•Richard Bolling•The Annals of the American…•1974

  • Agenda Dynamics and Policy Subsystems

    F R Baumgartner, Bryan D Jones•The Journal of Politics•1991

  • Cosponsorship in the U. S. Congress

    Open Access•Rick K Wilson, Cheryl D Young•Legislative Studies Quarterly•1997

  • One Bill, Many Committees

    Open Access•Roger H Davidson, Roger Davidson et al.•Legislative Studies Quarterly•1988

  • Advocacy versus Certainty

    John W Hardin•The Journal of Politics•1998

  • The Evolution of Legislative Jurisdictions

    F R Baumgartner, Bryan D Jones et al.•The Journal of Politics•2000

  • Capacity, Diversity, and Volatility of the Public Agenda

    Maxwell Mc Combs, Jian-Hua Zhu et al.•Public Opinion Quarterly•1995

  • Legislative Structure

    Open Access•C Lawrence Evans, Ceryn Evans•Legislative Studies Quarterly•1999

  • Emergence of Legislative Institutions

    Open Access•Gerald Gamm, Kenneth A Shepsle et al.•Legislative Studies Quarterly•1989

  • Controlling the Floor

    Eric Schickler, Andrew Rich•American Journal of Political…•1997

  • Demand-Side Theory and Congressional Committee Composition

    E Scott Adler, John S Lapinski•American Journal of Political…•1997

  • Organization of Informative Committees by a Rational Legislature

    Thomas W Gilligan, Keith Krehbiel•American Journal of Political…•1990

  • Representation and Governance

    Open Access•Kenneth A Shepsle•Political Science Quarterly•1988

  • The use of the encompassing principle to resolve empirical controversies in voting behavior

    Open Access•Jim Granato, Motoshi Suzuki•Electoral Studies•1996

  • The Institutional Foundations of Committee Power

    Open Access•Kenneth A Shepsle, Barry R Weingast•American Political Science Review•1987

  • The Nature of Congressional Committee Jurisdictions

    Open Access•David C King•American Political Science Review•1994

  • The Destruction of Issue Monopolies in Congress

    Open Access•Bryan D Jones, F R Baumgartner et al.•American Political Science Review•1993

Unique citing works17
Citations per year0,94
Citation span2008 - 2025 (18)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 17

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae