Addition, Constituents May Hold Members Accountable For

The congressional behaviors of Representative Maxine Waters, a Democratic representative for the 43rd district of California, and that of Democratic Representative Darren Soto are both inspired by the goal of reelection. This common goal of reelection coined by David Mayhew is achieved differently by each representative depending on the demographics, political leaning, and incumbency of the district. When comparing the legislative behavior of Darren Soto, the representative of Florida’s newly drawn 9th congressional district, and that of Representative Maxine Waters from California’s 43rd Congressional district, this holding becomes evident. This paper will argue that while both Rep. Waters, and Rep. Soto are inspired by the common goal of

“ Congress: The Electoral Connection”, the article is written by David R. Mayhew. Mayhew represents his view about Congressmen activities. These politicians discuss certain issues going on within the country and to emphasize people to focus on their listed issues and get attention of public in order to take position in House.

Candidates for the House of Representatives, both incumbents and challengers, work hard to raise public awareness of their intentions of running for Congress. Trying to inform voters of themselves is important for candidates to potentially increase their opportunity of election. However, incumbent candidates may differ from challengers based on the level of knowledge voters have on each. Such as, if voters are capable of recalling the name of the House candidate, whether it be the incumbent or the challenger, can demonstrate the voter’s knowledge. Furthermore, voter’s capability to recall a name may be affected by how much they care about who wins the election for the House from their congressional district.

More convincing than the fact that the majority of incumbents retained their seats by overwhelming margins is the shocking statistic that a quarter of the incumbents were uncontested.13 These politicians were so successful at arranging favorable districts that it was futile to even attempt a challenge. The author continued to examine particularly egregious cases of gerrymandering in New York, including that of Senator Guy Vellela, who once selected voters for his district by individual city blocks.14 Senator Guy Vellela, as well as the other state senators of New York, are prime examples of politicians exploiting gerrymandering to manipulate the outcome of elections and improve their outcomes.

Mayhew examines the congressmen activity in Washington that is useful to engage in for the purpose of reelection. The first activity is advertising, defined by making a conscious effort to disseminate one’s name in a positive light among constituents to gain a favorable view. They emphasize personal qualities such as:

Moreover, legislators were randomly assigned to vote with their district or the broader public. At the end, participants had to decide whom the representatives should answer too, the nation or the district. Furthermore, the second experiment featured all the characteristics the first one had; however, it furthered the analysis to help test the last two hypotheses. In addition to, the participants were introduced with legislators representing the state of Missouri or the participant’s own state. After reading the information, all the participants in the second experiment were asked about their standpoint of the bill and their evaluation of the representatives. Finally, within both studies, the evaluations the participants made were measured on a scale from 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent) for the farm subsidy bill, and 0 to 10 for the nuclear energy.

85% of House incumbents have been re elected and 91% of Senate incumbents were re elected. Being an incumbent, these officials have name recognition already from their district and allows voters to already be familiar with what they stand for. Congress members can give back to their districts the longer that they are elected into their

Today, career politicians are constantly looking for what will aid them in getting reelected. They become more loyal to their campaign fund contributers than to the people whom they represent. This increases the likelihood of having corrupted politicians in office, as they use the government as a vehicle to further their own career (Kurfirst, 1996, p. 123, 129). George Will, a well-known political journalist, was quoted as saying “[The] worst feature of professionalism in politics is that it obliterates the proper distance between the representatives and the represented” (Kurfirst, 1996, p. 125). Even James Madison agreed that legislators were meant to represent the people, not hold office as a career. In The Federalist No. 57 (1788), he wrote, “From this change of men must proceed a change of opinions; and from a change of opinions, a change of measures.” The lack of new faces in Congress today symbolizes that the American legislative branch is straying from its intended purpose.

This point is backed up even more by the time members have before they face re-elections, as in the Senate this period is every six years but only every two in the house. Consequently displaying the implication of House members being less important than that of Senators who have a longer period to make themselves known to their people and carry out their work without the hindrance of elections.

Congressional members are influenced by their subjective experiences as well as their intellectual and psychological dispositions in dealing with the variability of global politics. Foreign policies, such as declarations of war, are conceived with the intent to defend congressional interests to protect the powers of Congress. Senators and Representatives frequently determine their stance on an issue by determining how it would impact their appointment to higher office, chances for reelection, and improving their influence and legacy. Once Members of Congress have established their interests, the United States Constitution provides the framework of how Congressional interests are conveyed into laws. The lawmaking process, however, may be a tedious

Assess the extent to which incumbents have an adage over challengers in congressional elections. (25marks)

In my opinion, I feel that constituents have power over congress members because they have the power to vote them in or out of office. On the other hand, I feel that voting constituents have the least amount of influence over congress members, who strive for money contributions in order to, run their political campaigns, compared to donors and PACs.

As stated previously, the turnover percentages were extremely high during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and this is certainly no longer the case. In Albert D. Cover’s journal article “One Good Term Deserves Another: The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections,” he states that “voluntary retirements were more common in the early Congresses than they are now” (Cover, p. 524). Back then, Congress members would actually voluntarily step down from their positions and let another person take that position. This is no longer the case since now the majority of the members of Congress are incumbents. In other words, after their term ends, they keep running for reelection and for the most part, every incumbent gets elected once again (Cover, p. 524). This can be tied to the idea that there is more power and prestige that is now associated with being a member of Congress. The Congressmen might now find that as the organization institutionalizes, it is s lot easier for them to continue serving in it ultimately gaining “gratification, status and power” (Polsby, p.

     The third factor that seems to have an influence on the operations of Congress is the public opinion. Logically, if the public thinks that a certain congressman doesn’t know how to do his job, then he won’t get elected. That’s why the public opinion has a major influence the operations of Congress because the public has say if that Congressman or Congressmen will get elected again.

One of the most confusing phenomenon to anyone unfamiliar with the American political landscape is about the “non-politician” or so-called “outsider” who is seeking a political office on the strength of his inexperience or unfamiliarity with the political process. The public likes the idea of someone who is an outsider to politics, who will come in and “straighten” out all the ‘mess’ the career politicians have made. Most people running for an office for the first time (whether new to politics or not) know this and are astute enough to paint themselves as “new”, “fresh”, ‘outsider” etc.