Ad-Hoc Policy
Commissions
in the Senate
Kristen Coopie Allen
Zachary James Auter
Ian Palmer Cook
University of Pittsburgh
Jennifer Nicoll Victor
George Mason University
MPSA 2013
FIRST, OUR DEFINITION
Bipartisan, ad-hoc, policy-specific
coalitions with select
membership, attempting to find a
solution to a policy problem
RECENT NOTABLE GANGS:
THE GANG OF 14
Worked to avert “nuclear option” on Senate filibuster in 2005
GANG OF 8, IMMIGRATION, AGAIN
GANGS SIDESTEP THE COMMITTEE
STRUCTURE (AND ALL ITS PROBLEMS)
Policy gangs are a preference discovery and
aggregation mechanism
 Committees have failed to produce policy agreeable
to the whole Senate
 On contentious issues, committees may be
representative of the chamber
 Senators from outside the committees will have
information about the chamber
 But this does not explain why Senators may join
THEORY AND HYPOTHESES:
CONNECTIONS TO OTHER SENATORS
 Gangs of fer senators substantive & strategic advantage to
policy negotiation
 Greater policy expertise in relevant policy area and who have
many connections to other senators on a given topic
 Operationalizing connectedness: Eigenvector Centrality in Senate
committee network
H1: Senators more central in the committee membership
network are more likely to join a policy gang.
THEORY AND HYPOTHESES:
BIPARTISANSHIP
 Major gangs have had even numbers, and not by chance
 Gangs have no chairs doled out by party leadership as rewards
or favors
 Gathering information on the other party’s preferences requires
collaborating on an even playing field
 A stalled policy issue that has been stalled and gained enough
prominence that a gang has formed to confront it sheds doubt
on the possibility of the committee members representing the
full range of the chamber’s views
H2: Ideological moderates are more likely to join gangs than
ideological extremists.
THEORY AND HYPOTHESES:
COSTS OF MEMBERSHIP
 Publicity for gang membership has both positive and negative
consequences
 Party control over assets necessary for running in an election:
breaking from the party line could be costly
 But cost would be lessened the more secure the senator is in
her seat
H3: The greater a senator’s vote share in their most recent
reelection, the greater their likelihood of joining a gang.
H4: The more terms a senator has served, the more likely the
senator is to join a gang.
DATA AND METHODS
 DV: Did a Senator join a gang or not?
 Pooled by Congressional session; not over time
 Employ Rare Events Logit to account for small ratio of gang
members in each Congress
 Robust standard errors
 Plot Predicted probability of joining gang
GANG OF 14
RESULTS
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
1
Probability of Joining Gang of 14 across Increasing Ideological Extremism
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
Absolute Value of Senator Nominate Scores
Probability of Joining Gang
Upper 95% CI
Lower 95% CI
1
GANG OF 12 AND 20
RESULTS
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
Probability of Joining 110th Congress Gang across Increasing Ideological Extremism
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
Absolute Value of Senator Nominate Scores
Probability of Joining Gang
Upper 95% CI
Lower 95% CI
1
RESULTS
RESULTS
0
.2
.4
.6
.8
1
Probability of Joining Gang of 6 across Increasing Electoral Security
0%
20%
40%
60%
Margin of Victory in Previous Election
Probability of Joining Gang
Upper 95% CI
80%
Lower 95% CI
100%
DISCUSSION
Encouraging, but not confirmatory, results
Leaves us on the cusp of a decision, and we’re
seeking feedback
Two alternatives, though not mutually
exclusive in the long run
1: EXPAND THE DATA AND ANALYSIS
 Need to increase the sample size by expanding the
range of Congresses
 Gather richer information on the gang members
 Employment history, previous shared committee posts
 Explore extensions:
 Use gang membership as an explanatory variable for electoral
success
2: ENRICH CASES, DEMONSTRATE
IMPORTANCE
 More explicitly American Political Development -like
 Expand the historical discussion of the gangs,
include a wider range of examples, even when not
specifically called “Gangs”
 Pose hypotheses and expectations, but not
challenges for study and data gathering
 Highlight importance to policy issues
GANG OF 14
( P L A I N : C O M M I T T E E , B O L D : S U B C O M M I T T E E , I TA L I C : G A N G )
GANG OF 12
( P L A I N : C O M M I T T E E , B O L D : S U B C O M M I T T E E , I TA L I C : G A N G )
GANG OF 6
( P L A I N : C O M M I T T E E , B O L D : S U B C O M M I T T E E , I TA L I C : G A N G )