Matthew Yglesias has been working the counterfactual beat lately (as he points out, counterfactuals are essential to a sound theory of causation). (Previously on this blog.)
Which inspired me to htmlize and post one of my favorite counterfactual tables, table 9 from Stewart and Weingast’s article on “Stacking the Senate”.1 What if, Stewart and Weingast ask, instead of making state admissions the subject of party politics, the western states had been admitted by some politically neutral rule—say, when they exceeded the population of the average congressional district? They make assumptions about partisan tilt based on real-life territorial politics, and get the below table.
The table shows actual and counterfactual partisan majorities in the House, Senate, and Presidency. I’ve highlighted changes in red. What sticks out most to me is the counterfactual Democratic majority in the Senate in the 51st Congress, 1889-91—this is the so-called billion-dollar Congress that passed the legislation—including the McKinley Tariff, the Sherman Silver Purchase Act, and the Dependent Pensions Act—which brought the nation to the brink of financial ruin and forced Grover Cleveland to seek a bailout from J. P. Morgan (see, in the old days, Wall Street bailed out the government; now … never mind). What if there had been a Democratic Senate then? Would the Democratic Party have gone so Populist in 1896? Would there have been a People’s Party to speak of?
Of course, things really go off the rails with President Tilden, there, so who knows if that question even matters in this alternate universe.
| Actual and Counterfactual Control of the House, Senate, and President, 37th to 55th Congresses (1860-1896 elections) |
|||||||||
| Actual | Counterfactual | ||||||||
| Years | House | Senate | Pres | House | Senate | Pres | |||
| 1861-63 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1863-65 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1865-67 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1867-69 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1869-71 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1871-73 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1873-75 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
| 1875-77 | D | R | R | D | R | R | |||
| 1877-79 | D | R | R | D | D | D | |||
| 1879-81 | D | D | R | D | D | D | |||
| 1881-83 | R | R | R | R | D | R | |||
| 1883-85 | D | R | R | D | D | R | |||
| 1885-87 | D | R | D | D | R | D | |||
| 1887-89 | D | R | D | D | D | D | |||
| 1889-91 | R | R | R | R | D | R | |||
| 1891-93 | D | R | R | D | D | R | |||
| 1893-95 | D | D | D | D | D | D | |||
| 1895-97 | R | R | D | R | D | D | |||
| 1897-99 | R | R | R | R | R | R | |||
1Charles R. Stewart, III, and Barry R. Weingast, “Stacking the Senate, Changing the Nation: Republican Rotten Boroughs, Statehood Politics, and American Political Development.” Studies in American Political Development 6 (Fall 1992): 223-71.
7 comments
July 23, 2009 at 5:45 pm
Michael Elliott
As a fan of counterfactuals, this is awesome. But what strikes me is that aside from President Tilden, the White House doesn’t change hands here at all. Do I have that right?
July 23, 2009 at 8:39 pm
eric
Looks like it to me. The action is in the Senate. Which makes sense; “stateness” has some influence on the Electoral College but all the influence in the Senate.
July 23, 2009 at 8:56 pm
kid bitzer
off topic, but i have been surprised that people don’t see the significance of hillary’s remarks about north korea:
“And maybe it’s the mother in me or the experience that I’ve had with small children and unruly teenagers and people who are demanding attention….”
you see what this means, don’t you?
it means chelsea has nukes.
July 23, 2009 at 10:23 pm
ben
it means chelsea has nukes.
Hubba-hubba.
July 28, 2009 at 3:48 pm
Andrew
So what would a map of an alternate American west look like? Or are you assuming the same states but entering at different points in time?
July 28, 2009 at 4:29 pm
eric
Andrew, the article assumes the same territories / states but they only get to enter the union once their population crosses the representational threshold. So no exciting new maps, I’m afraid.
July 28, 2009 at 9:53 pm
andrew
For the record, that’s a different Andrew. It’s an an interesting alternative scenario. Lots of people don’t think the current state borders make sense, for some values of sense.