2026-09-20T22:19:58Zhttps://dspace.mit.edu/server/oai/requestoai:dspace.mit.edu:1721.1/1173072022-01-13T07:54:08Zcom_1721.1_7582com_1721.1_7581col_1721.1_131023
Charles Stewart, III.
Copulsky, Alexander
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Science.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Department of Political Science
2018-08-08T19:48:25Z
2018-08-08T19:48:25Z
2017
2017
http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/117307
1045068908
Thesis: S.M., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Political Science, February 2017.
Cataloged from PDF version of thesis.
Includes bibliographical references (pages 47-51).
The Progressive movement presents a puzzle for analysts of Congress: a deeply divided Republican party that appears in roll calls as extremely unified and homogenous. Historical records and theories of Congress suggest that part of the answer lies in missing votes - legislators abstaining in order to reduce cross-pressure between their party and constituents, and the Speaker using quorum calls to exclude disloyal Republicans. Using imputation to "fill in" the missing vote data from the 60th House reveals that missing votes had the effect of concealing Republican heterogeneity. This preceded the revolt against Cannon in the 61st House, and was more common for the non-Insurgents who faced the strongest cross-pressure. This pattern continued under Democratic rule in the 62nd House, fading out after the GOP revolt in the Speakership elections of the 68th. This evidence of non-random missingness can help resolve the puzzle of the Progressives, and inform historical study of Congress.
by Alexander Copulsky.
S.M.
54 pages
eng
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MIT theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed, downloaded, or printed from this source but further reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission.
http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582
Political Science.
Evidence of absence : the progressives and strategic non-voting in the house, 1907-1925
Progressives and strategic non-voting in the house, 1907-1925
Thesis
application/pdf
false
Publication
unknown
unknown
<Publication xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/1.1/" id="786ce5b6-bfb5-4e98-b72e-3863ced2bd2c">
<Type xmlns="https://www.openaire.eu/cerif-profile/vocab/COAR_Publication_Types">http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_1843</Type>
<Language>eng</Language>
<Title>Evidence of absence : the progressives and strategic non-voting in the house, 1907-1925</Title>
<Subtitle>Progressives and strategic non-voting in the house, 1907-1925</Subtitle>
<PublishedIn>
<Publication>
</Publication>
</PublishedIn>
<PublicationDate>2017</PublicationDate>
<Authors>
<Author>
<DisplayName>Copulsky, Alexander</DisplayName>
<Affiliation>
<OrgUnit>
</OrgUnit>
</Affiliation>
</Author>
</Authors>
<Editors>
</Editors>
<Publishers>
<Publisher>
<DisplayName>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</DisplayName>
<OrgUnit />
</Publisher>
</Publishers>
<License>http://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/7582</License>
<Keyword>Political Science.</Keyword>
<Abstract>The Progressive movement presents a puzzle for analysts of Congress: a deeply divided Republican party that appears in roll calls as extremely unified and homogenous. Historical records and theories of Congress suggest that part of the answer lies in missing votes - legislators abstaining in order to reduce cross-pressure between their party and constituents, and the Speaker using quorum calls to exclude disloyal Republicans. Using imputation to "fill in" the missing vote data from the 60th House reveals that missing votes had the effect of concealing Republican heterogeneity. This preceded the revolt against Cannon in the 61st House, and was more common for the non-Insurgents who faced the strongest cross-pressure. This pattern continued under Democratic rule in the 62nd House, fading out after the GOP revolt in the Speakership elections of the 68th. This evidence of non-random missingness can help resolve the puzzle of the Progressives, and inform historical study of Congress.</Abstract>
<Access xmlns="http://purl.org/coar/access_right"
>
</Access>
</Publication>