Collective vs. Dyadic Representation in Congress
- 1 June 1978
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Political Science Review
- Vol. 72 (2), 535-547
- https://doi.org/10.2307/1954109
Abstract
Previous studies of legislative-constituency representation have focused almost exclusively on pairs of Congress members and their constituencies. It is possible, however, to think of representation collectively, i.e., to consider the extent to which Congress as an institution represents the American people. Our analysis delineates this concept of representation, analyzes its existence by use of probability theory and the Miller-Stokes data, and then considers the relationship between collective representation and electoral control. We conclude that citizens probably get better representation than is suggested by the Miller-Stokes analysis, that the amount of representation may be more a function of institutional arrangements than of electoral control, and that citizen indifference towards many aspects of legislative politics is quite reasonable, given the existence of collective representation.Keywords
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Determinants of the Outcomes of Midterm Congressional ElectionsAmerican Political Science Review, 1975
- Representative democracy via random selectionPublic Choice, 1972
- The Electoral Impact of Congressional Roll Call VotingAmerican Political Science Review, 1971
- Short-Term Fluctuations in U.S. Voting Behavior, 1896–1964American Political Science Review, 1971
- The Role of the CongressmanThe Western Political Quarterly, 1970
- The Concept of RepresentationPublished by University of California Press ,1967
- Support for the Party System by the Mass PublicAmerican Political Science Review, 1966
- Constituency Influence in CongressAmerican Political Science Review, 1963
- Do Representatives Represent?The Journal of Politics, 1960
- The Representative and His DistrictHuman Organization, 1957