Skip to main content

Closing the Deal: Negotiating Civil Rights Legislation

  • GYUNG-HO JEONG (a1), GARY J. MILLER (a2) and ITAI SENED (a2)

Our investigation of the Senate politics of four major civil rights acts indicates that they did not result from winning coalitions bulldozing helpless minorities, nor did they result from some unpredictable chaotic process. These critical bills were the result of a flexible, multidimensional coalition-building process that proceeded by offering amendments carefully constructed to split off pivotal members of the winning coalition. Ideal point estimates of U.S. senators reveal that this coalitional negotiation process led to outcomes at some distance from the first choice of the winning coalition, testimony to significant compromise, both in early proposals and in refinements. This negotiation process resulted in outcomes apparently constrained by the boundaries of the uncovered set (McKelvey 1986; Miller 1980). “Closing the deal” in the U.S. Senate meant finding an outcome that could withstand robust attacks on pivotal coalition members—and that meant finding an outcome in the uncovered set.

Corresponding author
Gyung-Ho Jeong is Assistant Professor, Department of Politics and Policy, Claremont Graduate University, 150 E. 10th Street, Claremont, CA 91711 (
Gary J. Miller is Professor, Department of Political Science, Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130 (
Itai Sened is Professor, Department of Political Science; Director, Center for New Institutional Social Sciences; Washington University in St. Louis, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO 63130 (
Hide All
Aldrich, John H., and Rohde, David. 1998. “Theories of Party in the Legislature and the Transition to Republican Rule in the House.” Political Science Quarterly 112: 112–35.
Aldrich, John H., and Rohde, David. 2001. “The Logic of Conditional Party Government: Revisiting the Electoral Connection,” In Congress Reconsidered. 7th eds., Dodd, Lawrence and Oppenheimer, BruceWashington, D.C: CQ Press 269–92.
Banks, Jeff. 1985. “Sophisticated Voting Outcomes and Agenda Control,” Social Choice and Welfare 1: 295306.
Bianco, William T., Jeliazkov, Ivan, and Sened, Itai. 2004. “The Uncovered Set and the Limits of Legislative Action.” Political Analysis 12: 256–76.
Bianco, William T., Lynch, Michael S., Miller, Gary J., and Sened, Itai. 2006. “A Theory Waiting To Be Discovered and Used: A Reanalysis of Canonical Experiments on Majority Rule Decision Making.” Journal of Politics 68: 837–50.
Bianco, William T., Lynch, Michael S., Miller, Gary J., and Sened, Itai. 2008. “The Constrained Instability of Majority Rule: Experiments on the Robustness of the Uncovered Set.” Political Analysis 16: 115–37.
Bianco, William T., and Sened, Itai. 2005. “Uncovering Conditional Party Government: Reassessing the Evidence for Party Influence in Congress and State Legislatures.” American Political Science Review 99: 361–72.
Care, Robert A. 2002. Master of the Senate. New York: Alfred Knopf.
Clinton, Joshua D., and Meirowitz, Adam. 2003. “Integrating Voting Theory and Roll Call Analysis: A Framework.” Political Analysis 11: 381–96.
Clinton, Joshua D., and Meirowitz, Adam. 2004. “Testing Explanations of Strategic Voting in Legislature: A Reexamination of the Compromise of 1790.” American Journal of Political Science 48: 675–89.
Congressional Quarterly Almanac. 1964. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Congressional Quarterly Almanac. 1965. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Congressional Record. 1964. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office.
Cox, Gary. 1987. “The Uncovered Set and the Core.” American Journal of Political Science 31: 408–22.
Cox, Gary, and McCubbins, Mathew D.. 1993. Legislative Leviathan. Berkley: University of California Press.
Feddersen, Timothy J., Sened, Itai, and Wright, Stephen G.. 1990. “Rational Voting and Candidate Entry Under Plurality Rule.” American Journal of Political Science 34: 1005–16.
Fey, Mark. 2008. “Choosing from a Large Tournament.” Social Choice and Welfare 31: 301–9.
Greenberg, Joseph. 1979. “Consistent Majority Rule over Compact Sets of Alternatives.Econometrica 47: 627–36.
Jeong, Gyung-Ho. 2008. “Testing the Predictions of the Multidimensional Spatial Voting Model with Roll Call Data.” Political Analysis 16: 179–96.
Jeong, Gyung-Ho, Miller, Gary J., and Sobel, Andrew C.. 2009. “Political Compromise and Bureaucratic Structure: The Political Origins of the Federal Reserve System.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 25: 442–71.
Krehbiel, Keith. 1999. “Paradoxes of Parties in Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 24: 3164.
Krehbiel, Keith. 2000. “Party Discipline and Measures of Partisanship.” American Journal of Political Science 44: 212–27.
Mann, Robert. 1996. The Walls of Jericho. New York: Harcourt Brace.
McKelvey, Richard D. 1976. “Intransitivities in Multidimensional Voting Models and Some Implications for Agenda Control.” Journal of Economic Theory 12: 472–82.
McKelvey, Richard D. 1979. “General Conditions for Global Intransitivities in Formal Voting Models.” Econometrica 47: 1085–112.
McKelvey, Richard D. 1986. “Covering Dominance and Institution Free Properties of Social Choice.” American Journal of Political Science 30: 283314.
McKelvey, Richard D., and Schofield, Norman. 1987. “Generalized Symmetry Conditions at a Core.” Econometrica 55: 923–33.
Miller, Gary J., and Schofield, Norman. 2003. “Activists and Partisan Realignment in the U.S.” American Political Science Review 97: 245–60.
Miller, Nicholas. 1980. “A New Solution Set for Tournament and Majority Voting.” American Journal of Political Science 24: 6896.
Penn, Elizabeth M. 2006. “Alternate Definitions of the Uncovered Set, and Their Implications.Social Choice and Welfare 27.
Plott, Charles. 1967. “A Notion of Equilibrium and Its Possibility Under Majority Rule.” American Economic Review 57: 787806.
Poole, Keith T. 2005. Spatial Models of Parliamentary Voting. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Poole, Keith T., and Rosenthal, Howard. 2000. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll-Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.
Riker, William H. 1986. The Art of Political Manipulation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Rivers, Douglass. 2003. “Identification of Multidimensional Spatial Voting Models.” Typescript: Stanford University.
Rodriguez, Daniel B., and Weingast, Barry R.. 2003. “The Positive Political Theory of Legislative History: New Perspectives on the 1964 Civil Rights Act and Its Interpretation.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 151: 1417–541.
Schofield, Norman. 1978. “Instability of Simple Dynamic Games.” Review of Economic Studies 45: 575–94.
Shepsle, Kenneth, and Weingast, Barry R.. 1984. “Uncovered Sets and Sophisticated Voting Outcomes with Implications for Agenda Institutions.” American Journal of Political Science 28: 4974.
Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Weingast, Barry R.. 1994. “Positive Theories of Congressional Institutions.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 19: 149–81.
Thernstrom, Abigail, and Thernstrom, Stephen. 1997. America in Black and White: One Nation, Indivisible. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

American Political Science Review
  • ISSN: 0003-0554
  • EISSN: 1537-5943
  • URL: /core/journals/american-political-science-review
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed