Does how Congress makes a law affect public approval of that law? This question has been little studied, but the rising use of unorthodox processes in Congress raises concerns about the perceived legitimacy of congressional action among the public. Utilizing two unique survey experiments, I present evidence that when people are aware of the use of unorthodox legislative processes they express lower levels of approval for new laws. This effect is especially pronounced among partisans already inclined to be in opposition to the law, further solidifying their opposition. These findings have important implications for a Congress that in recent years has increasingly turned to unorthodox legislative processes to pass legislation.
AldrichJohn H.RohdeDavid W. 2000. “The Consequences of Party Organization in the House: The Role of the Majority and the Minority Parties in Conditional Party Government.” In Polarized Politics: Congress and the President in a Partisan Era, edited by BondJohn R.FleisherRichard, 31–72. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
2.
AtkinsonMary L. 2017. “Combative Politics: The Media and Public Perceptions of Lawmaking.” Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BachStanleySmithSteven S. 1988. Managing Uncertainty in the House of Representatives: Adaptation and Innovation in Special Rules. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
4.
BanducciSusan A.KarpJeffrey A. 1999. “Perceptions of Fairness and Support for Proportional Representation.” Political Behavior21 (3): 217–38.
5.
BartelsLarry M.2002. “Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions.” Political Behavior24 (2): 117–50.
BendixWilliam. 2016b. “Neglect, Inattention, and Legislative Deficiencies: The Consequences of One-Party Deliberations in the U.S. House.” Congress & the Presidency43 (1): 82–102.
9.
BerinskyAdam J.HuberGregory A.LenzGabriel S. 2012. “Evaluating Online Labor Markets for Experimental Research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk.” Political Analysis20 (3): 351–68.
BurdenBarry C.1997. “Deterministic and Probabilistic Voting Models.” American Journal of Political Science41 (4): 1150–69.
12.
CarseyThomas M.LaymanGeoffrey C. 2006. “Changing Sides or Changing Minds? Party Identification and Policy Preferences in the American Electorate.” American Journal of Political Science50 (2): 464–77.
13.
CoughlinPeter J.1992. Probabilistic Voting Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14.
CoxMichaelene. 2003. “When Trust Matters: Explaining Differences in Voter Turnout.” Journal of Common Market Studies41 (4): 757–70.
15.
CurryJames M.2015. Legislating in the Dark: Information and Power in the House of Representatives. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
16.
CurryJames M.LeeFrances E. 2018. “What Is Regular Order Worth? Partisan Lawmaking and Congressional Processes.” Paper presented at the 2018 MPSA annual meeting, April 8.
17.
CurryJames M.LeeFrances E. Forthcoming. “What is Regular Order Worth? Partisan Lawmaking and Congressional Processes.” Journal of Politics.
DohertyDavidWolakJennifer. 2012. “When Do the Ends Justify the Means? Evaluating Procedural Fairness.” Political Behavior34 (2): 301–23.
20.
DownsAnthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Voting. New York: Harper.
21.
DruckmanJames M.GreenDonald P.KuklinskiJames H.LupiaArthur. 2006. “The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science.” American Political Science Review100 (4): 627–35.
22.
DruckmanJames M.LeeperThomas J. 2012. “Learning More from Political Communication Experiments: Pretreatment and Its Effects.” American Journal of Political Science56 (4): 875–96.
23.
DruckmanJames N.PetersonErikSlothuusRune. 2013. “How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation.” American Political Science Review107 (1): 57–79.
24.
DrutmanLee. 2016. Political Dynamism: A New Approach to Making Government Work Again. Washington, DC.
25.
EnelowJames M.HinichMelvin J. 1984. “Probabilistic Voting and the Importance of Centrist Ideologies in Democratic Elections.” Journal of Politics46 (2): 459–78.
26.
FinocchiaroCharles J.RohdeDavid W. 2008. “War for the Floor: Partisan Theory and Agenda Control in the U.S. House of Representatives.” Legislative Studies Quarterly33 (1): 35–61.
27.
FiorinaMorris P.1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
28.
GanglAmy. 2003. “Procedural Justice Theory and Evaluations of the Lawmaking Process.” Political Behavior25 (1): 119–49.
29.
GibsonJames L.1991. “Institutional Legitimacy, Procedural Justice, and Compliance with Supreme Court Decisions.” Law & Society Review25 (3): 631–36.
30.
GomezBrad T.WilsonJ. Matthew. 2001. “Political Sophistication and Economic Voting in the American Electorate: A Theory of Heterogeneous Attribution.” American Journal of Political Science45 (4): 899–914.
31.
GrönlundKimmoSetäläMaija. 2007. “Political Trust, Satisfaction and Voter Turnout.” Comparative European Politics5 (4): 400–22.
32.
HansonPeter. 2014. Too Weak to Govern: Majority Party Power and Appropriations in the U.S. Senate. New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
HarbridgeLaurelMalhotraNeil. 2011. “Electoral Incentives and Partisan Conflict in Congress: Evidence from Survey Experiments.” American Journal of Political Science55 (3): 494–510.
34.
HarbridgeLaurelMalhotraNeilHarrisonBrian F. 2014. “Public Preferences for Bipartisanship in the Policymaking Process.” Legislative Studies Quarterly39 (3): 327–55.
35.
HealyAndrewMalhotraNeil. 2013. “Retrospective Voting Reconsidered.” Annual Review of Political Science16:285–306.
36.
HendersonMichaelHillygusD. Sunshine. 2011. “The Dynamics of Health Care Opinion, 2008-2010: Partisanship, Self-Interest, and Racial Resentment.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law36 (6): 945–60.
37.
HetheringtonMarc J.1998. “The Political Relevance of Political Trust.” American Political Science Review92 (4): 791–808.
38.
HetheringtonMarc J.1999. “The Effect of Political Trust on the Presidential Vote, 1968–96.” American Political Science Review93 (2): 311–26.
39.
HibbingJohn R.Theiss-MorseElizabeth. 2001. “Process Preferences and American Politics: What the People Want Government to Be.” American Political Science Review95 (1): 145–53.
40.
HibbingJohn R.Theiss-MorseElizabeth. 2002. Stealth Democracy: Americans’ Beliefs about How Government Should Work. New York: Cambridge University Press.
JonesDavid R.2013. “Do Major Policy Enactments Affect Public Evaluations of Congress? The Case of Health Care Reform.” Legislative Studies Quarterly38 (2): 185–204.
KinderDonald R.KiewietD. Roderick. 1979. “Economic Discontent and Political Behavior: The Role of Personal Grievances and Collective Economic Judgments in Congressional Voting.” American Journal of Political Science23 (3): 495–527.
45.
KlarSamaraKrupnikovYanna. 2016. Independent Politics: How American Disdain for Parties Leads to Political Inaction. New York: Cambridge University Press.
46.
LauRichard R.RedlawskDavid P. 2001. “Advantages and Disadvantages of Cognitive Heuristics in Political Decision Making.” American Journal of Political Science45 (4): 951–71.
47.
LawrenceRegina G. 2000. “Game-Framing the Issues: Tracking the Strategy Frame in Public Policy News.” Political Communication17 (2): 93-114.
48.
LaymanGeoffrey C.CarseyThomas M. 2002. “Party Polarization and ‘Conflict Extension’ in the American Electorate.” American Journal of Political Science46 (4): 786–802.
49.
LeboMatthew J.O’GreenAndrew. 2011. “The President’s Role in the Partisan Congressional Arena.” Journal of Politics73 (3): 718–34.
50.
LeboMatthew J.McGlynnAdam J.KogerGregory. 2007. “Strategic Party Government: Party Influence in Congress, 1789–2000.” American Journal of Political Science51 (3): 464–81.
51.
LeeFrances E.2009. Beyond Ideology: Politics, Principles, and Partisanship in the U.S. Senate. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
52.
LevenduskyMatthew. 2009. The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
53.
LewallenJonathan. 2016. “Legislative Error and the ‘Politics of Haste.’” PS: Political Science & Politics49 (2): 239–43.
54.
LewallenJonathanTheriaultSean M.JonesBryan D. 2016. “Congressional Dysfunction: An Information Processing Perspective.” Regulation & Governance10 (2): 179–90.
55.
LupiaArthurMcCubbinsMathew D. 1998. The Democratic Dilemma: Can Citizens Learn What They Need to Know?New York: Cambridge University Press.
56.
MannThomas H.OrnsteinNorman. 2006. The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track. New York: Oxford University Press.
57.
MannThomas H.OrnsteinNorman. 2012. It’s Even Worse than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism. New York: Basic Books.
58.
MarienSofieHoogheMarc. 2011. “Does Political Trust Matter? An Empirical Investigation into the Relation between Political Trust and Support for Law Compliance.” European Journal of Political Research50 (2): 267–91.
59.
MillerWarren E.ShanksJ. Merrill. 1996. The New American Voter. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
60.
MutzDiana C.2015. In-Your-Face Politics: The Consequences of Uncivil Media. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
61.
NadeauRichardLewis-BeckMichael S. 2001. “National Economic Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections.” Journal of Politics63 (1): 159–81.
PageBenjamin I.ShapiroRobert Y. 2010. The Rational Public: Fifty Years of Trends in Americans’ Policy Preferences. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
65.
PhillipsAmber. 2017. “Rand Paul, a Copy Machine and a ‘Secret’ Obamacare Bill.” The Washington Post, March2.
66.
PopkinSamuel. 1994. The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
67.
RamirezMark D.2009. “The Dynamics of Partisan Conflict on Congressional Approval.” American Journal of Political Science53:681–94.
68.
ReynoldsMolly E.2017. Exceptions to the Rule: The Politics of Filibuster Limitations in the U.S. Senate. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
69.
RohdeDavid W.1991. Parties and Leaders in the Postreform House. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
70.
RoseRichardMishlerWilliam. 2009. “How Do Electors Respond to an ‘Unfair’ Election? The Experience of Russians.” Post-Soviet Affairs25 (1): 118–36.
ShanksJ. MerrillMillerWarren E. 1991. “Partisanship, Policy and Performance: The Reagan Legacy in the 1988 Election.” British Journal of Political Science21 (2): 129–97.
TaberCharles S.LodgeMilton. 2006. “Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs.” American Journal of Political Science50 (3): 755–69.
81.
TufteEdward. 1975. “Determinants of the Outcome of Midterm Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review69:812–26.
82.
TylerTom R.1994. “Psychological Models of the Justice Motive: Antecedents of Distributive and Procedural Justice.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology67 (5): 850–63.
83.
TylerTom R.2006. Why People Obey the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
84.
WallnerJames I.2013. The Death of Deliberation: Partisanship and Polarization in the United States Senate. New York: Lexington Books.
85.
WlezienChristopher. 1995. “The Public as Thermostat: Dynamics of Preferences for Spending.” American Journal of Political Science39 (4): 981–1000.
86.
ZallerJohn R.1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
