The capitol’s new political dynamic: Establishment versus insurgent
No one can doubt that this establishment v insurgent dynamic has been present in Congress for a while, but “DW-nominate” scores indicate that this dichotomy is becoming increasingly important. These scores seek to rank congressional members’ ideology in two dimensions, based on their rollcall voting record. In my previous analyses of polarization, I’ve used the first dimension, which usually does a good job at placing members on the liberal-to-conservative spectrum. The second dimension has rarely been used in recent years because it hasn’t seemed to stand for anything.
In the past Congress, however, the second dimension has begun to have more explanatory power – among Republicans, especially. That is, something beyond just being conservative or liberal is beginning to predict voting patterns of congressmen and women. The vote-view folks and I think that this dimension is along an establishment v anti-establishment axis, though one might also argue that it is geographically based – since many insurgent Tea Party members are from the American south. …
If the voting had been strictly along partisan lines, we’d expect the best fit line to be straight up and down. That is, the vote could easily be determined as being to the left or to the right. Instead, we have more of a diagonal line that goes from upper left to lower right in the House and upper right to lower left in the Senate. What that means is that there are liberal and conservative elements behind the voting, but there is also something else happening. You might call it a rather strange vote in which the Tea Party caucus, progressive caucus, and black caucus voted all together – though, arguably, it could be explained as establishment House Democrats and establishment House Republicans voting together. In other words, how many times can we expect John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Steny Hoyer, Kevin McCarthy, Nancy Pelosi, and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz all to vote the same way on a relatively divided debate?









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
I like the sound of “insurgent.”
Let’s try that.
tom daschle concerned on January 9, 2013 at 11:00 AM
I like it too. Maverick is sooooo 2008.
UltimateBob on January 9, 2013 at 11:09 AM
The establishment – regardless of party – does not want to give up power.
MoreLiberty on January 9, 2013 at 11:12 AM
When you have spent all the money, and operate out of fear of the general populace, power is all you have left to cling to.
Establishment hacks in both parties are on their last legs and they know it, they just want to grab as much as they can before it all comes crashing down.
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on January 9, 2013 at 11:26 AM
Kabuki theater. The new ones are always the insurgents. Once they’re in office, they become establishment. But for the first couple of terms, they still act and react like insurgents. Then, its establishment all the way.
tommy71 on January 9, 2013 at 11:28 AM
May all the establishment go to Hades for treason to liberty and for their lies and hypocrisy.
Schadenfreude on January 9, 2013 at 12:12 PM
Graphic evidence of the real nature of the polity, as some of us have been describing it for a while.
Establishment Republicans and Democrats are just the left and right wings of the political class, and they are all invested heavily in a government that has metastasized far beyond anything the Founders could have imagined. They have a common interest in maintaining if not expanding that government, and by and large the differences between them aren’t that significant.
novaculus on January 9, 2013 at 2:00 PM