preview

Clay's Leadership Roles

Decent Essays

eventually became Speaker for two more terms- then resigned. This was the last time he resigned for Speaker of the House, but this was certainly not the end to his noteworthy career. He then became Secretary of State during Quincy Adam’s presidency, and eventually became a Senator for over a decade until he resigned. A few years later he returned, serving as a senator until his death (Polsby, p. 148). There is no doubt whatsoever that Clay’s leadership roles were remarkable, but it is very important to realize and accept that he had a rather quick rise to be Speaker of the House. This is something that would be a lot more challenging during this century where there are harder boundaries. Nowadays, as Congress has become more institutionalized, …show more content…

As stated previously, the turnover percentages were extremely high during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and this is certainly no longer the case. In Albert D. Cover’s journal article “One Good Term Deserves Another: The Advantage of Incumbency in Congressional Elections,” he states that “voluntary retirements were more common in the early Congresses than they are now” (Cover, p. 524). Back then, Congress members would actually voluntarily step down from their positions and let another person take that position. This is no longer the case since now the majority of the members of Congress are incumbents. In other words, after their term ends, they keep running for reelection and for the most part, every incumbent gets elected once again (Cover, p. 524). This can be tied to the idea that there is more power and prestige that is now associated with being a member of Congress. The Congressmen might now find that as the organization institutionalizes, it is s lot easier for them to continue serving in it ultimately gaining “gratification, status and power” (Polsby, p. …show more content…

Since it has been shown that there has been a dramatically decreasing percentage of new members joining Congress, then it must be clear that the people who were previously serving decided to continue serving as stated above. Albert D. Cover provides a table which highlights the extremely large percentage of congressional reelections. He analyzes the incumbents who were seeking reelection in between the years 1956-1976. Something that is worth mentioning is that never throughout any of those years did the reelection percentage even go below 85%. The highest reelection percentage was in 1968 with an outstanding 97.8% of the incumbents who sought to be elected once more to office were successful (Cover, p. 525). That is to say, nearly all of the incumbents were going to be elected again. On the other hand, the lowest reelection percentage was in 1964 with, still a remarkable, 86.6% (Cover, p 525). This shows that even the lowest percentage of reelection is still extremely high, so it is very probable that an incumbent will continue to keep their prestigious position in

Get Access