chapter 23
...................................................................................................................................................COMPARATIVE
LEGISLATIVE BEHAVIOR
...................................................................................................................................................eric m. uslaner
thomas zittel
Parliamentary legislative systems are orderly. Congressional legislative systems are
disorderly. This claim may seem a bit odd when we think about the loudness,
sometimes even the rowdiness, of debate in parliaments compared to the more
Xowery and civil language on theXoor of the United States House of Representa-
tive and especially the Senate. The orderliness of parliamentary systems (and the
disorderliness of congressional systems) refers not to language or style, but rather
to how conXict is structured.
Parliamentary procedure is all about the power of political parties. Parliaments
are the embodiment of collective responsibility of the prime minister and his/her
governing party. In congressional systems, political parties play a much more
limited—some would say a subsidiary—role. Individual members answer to
their constituencies, their consciences, and especially their committees more than
they do to their party leaders. Congressional procedure is disorderly because there
is no centralized authority and no sense of collective responsiblity. Woodrow
Wilson, theWrst modern student of Congress ( 1967 , 59 ), argued in 1885 : ‘‘It is this
- Eric M. Uslaner is grateful to the General Research Board, University of Maryland, College Park, for
support on this and other projects.