Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

For more information, click here

Become a Reviewer!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Political Research Quarterly
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
1065912907304153v1
60/4/579    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McCormick, J. M.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, N. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Commitments, Transnational Interests, and Congress

Who Joins the Congressional Human Rights Caucus?

James M. McCormick

Iowa State University, Ames

Neil J. Mitchell

University of Aberdeen, United Kingdom

The authors seek to explain the membership of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus (CHRC). Focusing on human rights violations abroad, the Caucus offers few incentives for representatives to join this organization, yet it consistently has a large membership. Drawing on theoretical literature on Congress and interest groups, the authors argue that members' policy motivation and the subsidizing role of national and transnational human rights interest groups account for the decision to join. Documentary and interview evidence for House members in the 107th and 108th Congresses support these arguments. The results have substantive and theoretical implications for the study of the CHRC, the interactions between members of Congress and interest groups, and the study of congressional caucuses generally.

Key Words: Congress • congressional caucuses • Congressional Human Rights Caucus • foreign policy • human rights • interest groups • NGOs

This version was published on December 1, 2007

Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 4, 579-592 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1065912907304153
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?