Published journal articles

“The Senate Sandbox: Teaching Legislative Politics Through Open-Ended, Multi-Week Simulations” (with Alison W. Craig, Ryan Dennehy, Frances E. Lee, Joshua Meyer-Gutbrod, and Samuel M. Simon), (forthcoming at PS: Political Science & Politics)

Abstract: Political science educators must take innovative approaches to respond to 21st century classroom challenges. Simulation-based pedagogy can foster deep student engagement while developing strong peer relationships, encouraging empathy, and improving professional skills. But there are many ways to conduct simulations in political science courses. We argue that open-ended, multi-week simulations where students participate as relative equals may be especially beneficial for effective learning. While this “sandbox”-style approach to simulation learning is portable to other settings, we have used it in legislative politics courses focused on the United States Senate. Drawing from our experiences and student reviews, we argue that simulations where students can immerse themselves in a role for an extended period of time, focus on issues they care about, and learn from their mistakes and successes along the way create a uniquely valuable learning experience. Our approach can present challenges for instructors, but we believe it is flexible enough to be deployed in a variety of institutional settings and that any tradeoffs are more than worth it.

When Politics Is Not Pivotal: Supermajority Debate Rules in State Legislatures (with Jim Curry) (published at Legislative Studies Quarterly)

Abstract: The 60-vote end-debate threshold is a key institution in the United States Senate. Most winning coalitions require 60 votes, effectively giving veto power to a minority of senators. But do supermajority debate rules necessarily translate into minority veto power? We examine this in state legislatures, where there is far more variation in whether chamber rules require a majority or a supermajority of legislators to cut off debate. Across multiple analyses and data sources, we fail to find systematic evidence that supermajority debate rules are associated with several outcome variables, including the size of bill passage coalitions, news coverage of obstruction, and the success of major proposals. The lack of evidence indicates that, in many cases, debate rules do not translate into legislative “pivots” and that case-specific knowledge is necessary for understanding the influence of legislative rules.

On the Congress Beat: How the Structure of News Shapes Coverage of Congressional Action (with Jim Curry and Frances Lee) (published at Political Science Quarterly)

Abstract: Scholars have long criticized media coverage of Congress for its focus on conflict over policy substance. To uncover the drivers of this focus, we examine news coverage of the congressional response to Covid. We select the Covid response as an “extreme case” of Congress coalescing quickly to address a major national crisis in an almost entirely bipartisan way. Our study confirms prior research documenting a media preference for conflict narratives, even in this case. But we also find that the practice of beat reporting on Congress is itself a key factor underlying the dominance of news about conflict. A steady volume of reporting on an institution that acts quickly when there is agreement but slowly when there is disagreement gives rise to a large-scale imbalance favoring stories about conflict. Because conflict necessarily takes up more of Congress’s time, it dominates beat reporting on the institution. We find this imbalance is more pronounced in national newspapers, which produce a relatively constant volume of reporting by journalists assigned to the “Congress beat,” than in broadcast television news, which reports on Congress episodically and often only in response to legislative enactments. Our findings shed new light on public and scholarly perceptions of the institution’s performance.

Partisan Governance and Minority Party Vetoes: Evidence from State Legislatures (published at Legislative Studies Quarterly) 

Abstract: It is often argued that bipartisan lawmaking depends on minority legislative parties controlling institutional veto points through divided government and/or supermajority pivots. Using a new dataset of state legislative roll call votes on tax increases – an issue where states vary in whether they require majority or supermajority votes – I assess (1) whether minority control of veto points is necessary for bipartisan policymaking and (2) whether there are greater levels of partisan governance when the majority controls all veto points. I find that partisan governance is more likely when the majority controls all vetoes. However, bipartisan policymaking is still the most common outcome even when institutional conditions are seemingly ideal for partisan governance. Interviews with state policymakers uncover various non-institutional reasons for bipartisanship regardless of veto control. My findings suggest that while institutional rules can compel bipartisanship, they are just one of many reasons why the minority party participates in lawmaking.

Book Project

Congress in Crisis: Lawmaking Under Pressure (Appendix)

Abstract: The common narrative that Congress is gridlocked due to rising polarization misses the institution’s continued ability to legislate in response to crises. While there are notable examples of successful crisis response, scholars have not yet assessed how lawmaking systematically differs during times of crisis. To do this, I develop the concept of a crisis event – a negatively-valenced, time-specific occurrence external to domestic politics. I identify more than 200 crisis events that affected the national agenda between 1981 and 2020 and show that the lawmaking efforts associated with these events were more likely to succeed and have been less affected by polarization relative to non-crisis lawmaking efforts. Interviews with Capitol Hill insiders reveal that member incentives to avoid blame for the negative effects of crisis events and pressure on them to do something about the crisis override the partisan and ideological considerations that hinder lawmaking during normal times.

Other works in progress

“Partisan Agendas and Media Evaluations of Congressional Achievements” (with Jim Curry and Frances Lee)

“More Than Snowballs: Republican Positioning on Climate Change in Congress” (with Jim Curry and Samuel Simon)

“Crisis Lawmaking and Legislative Centralization”

Other publications

Governing the House with Multiple Parties (New America white paper co-authored with Lee Drutman)

One Real Step Toward Transforming Congress (Politico op-ed co-authored with Lee Drutman and  Cerin Lindgrensavage) 

Wave Elections (1918-2016) (Ballotpedia report co-authored with Jacob Smith)

Media appearances

Interviewed about media and Congress on KSL News’s Inside Sources with Boyd Matheson (August 6, 2024)

Interviewed about Congressional media coverage on AEI’s Understanding Congress podcast (August 5, 2024)

Interviewed about House rules reform on KSL News’s Inside Sources with Boyd Matheson (April 10, 2024)

Interviewed about crisis lawmaking in Congress for Ballotpedia’s On The Ballot podcast (February 6, 2024)

Interviewed about the 2018 elections on Grassroots TV’s None of the Above (August 1, 2018)