Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The 1994 congressional elections were dramatic. The Republicans won control of the U.S. House, ending the longest continuous reign by a single party in the nation's history and including the defeat of a sitting Speaker for the first time this century. These results caught nearly everyone by surprise. Hardly a pollster, pundit, scholar, or even Republican party leader anticipated such GOP victories in the House. As dramatic as the election returns proved to be, Republican activities within the House in the 104th Congress were equally as dramatic. Speakerto-be Newt Gingrich (GA) led an aggressive change in the rules and practices of the House, apparently with the hope that such changes would result in dramatically different policies forthcoming from it. In this article we investigate the nature of the structural and procedural changes, focusing in particular on the manner in which the newly elected Republican majority reorganized its partisan and leadership institutions with the apparent expectation of using them to enact outcomes the party collectively sought to achieve. Our purpose is to consider what these changes reveal, not just about the different views between the two parties as to the appropriate ways to conduct the public's business, but also as to the importance and role of structure and process in congressional politics. The House has long been the more highly structured and rules-driven of the two chambers. Over the last few decades, the
Aldrich et al. (Wed,) studied this question.