z-logo
Premium
Commitment and Consequences: Reneging on Cosponsorship Pledges in the U . S . House
Author(s) -
Bernhard William,
Sulkin Tracy
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
legislative studies quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.728
H-Index - 54
eISSN - 1939-9162
pISSN - 0362-9805
DOI - 10.1111/lsq.12024
Subject(s) - pledge , credibility , punishment (psychology) , legislature , voting , economics , advertising , political science , law and economics , business , microeconomics , law , politics , social psychology , psychology
We argue that bill cosponsorship in Congress represents an institutional arrangement that provides credibility to commitments of support. We predict that if cosponsorship fosters legislative deals, MCs will only rarely back out on their pledges to support a bill if it comes up for a floor vote, and when they do, these choices will reflect strategic calculations. Further, legislators who violate their cosponsorship agreements will face punishment from colleagues, compromising their ability to gain support for their own bills. We explore the causes and effects of MCs ' choices to renege on a pledge by voting no on a bill for which they were a cosponsor, focusing on all cosponsorship decisions in the 101st–108th Houses. The results reveal that patterns of reneging and its consequences are consistent with the idea that cosponsorship functions as a commitment mechanism.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here