目的
團體專題研究之目的是訓練各位探究有關於國會政治的重要議題。我會給一些方向，點出希望深入討論的特殊議題，但是這還是由你們 (無論經由小組或是個人) 自行決定研究主題和討論議題。
報告
每一個小組必須負責兩項成果報告。第一項為每一個小組必須做至少三十分鐘的口頭報告，有關於小組的研究發現。第二為詳實連慣性的報告，內容需涵蓋數篇主題相同的「章節」，先要有一個小組共同討論出來的簡短介紹。我將參照各位整堂上上課與報告的表現來打各位的分數，這包含個人的報告與團體的報告。更精確的講說，總分的四分之三為各位的書面報告（八到十頁）以及各位所做的口頭報告，四分之一為各位的專題摘要以及整體報告的品質。最後，我將調查各位在每個小組的參與狀況。
第一項分組專題：「與美國有約」的後續發展。
導言
1994年的選舉讓共和黨自從1920年代以來首次能長期控制眾議院。每一次議院中政黨權力的轉移，都是國會中某政黨權力的興起，就如同David Rohde在其《後改革時期中眾議院的政黨與領袖》所述。的確，David Rohde在民主黨長期主導眾議院的末期寫下其所做的觀察，(該書是本課程的指定書目)。目前時機已經成熟，我們可以思考在共和黨時期的條件性政黨政府（conditional party government）的發展。
指定作業
各位的作業為撰寫1990年代政黨政府在國會的角色，重點置於（但不侷限於）:自從1994年選舉以來，國會內部的政治發展。這份報告含以下的問題：
- 1994年共和黨戲劇性勝利的原因？是否為短暫現象亦或代表長期的選舉模式改變？
- 在國會的政黨組織如何在選舉場合中推動、助長該政黨的目標？若個人需求和政黨整體需求相左時，如何求取平衡？
- 政黨透過何種機制將黨的意志加諸於議員？以及是否成功？
- 在1994年後眾議院的共和黨進行一連串的委員會改革。這些委員會這幾年來有何發展？有何差異？
- 在眾議院與參議院當中，民主黨與共和黨各自的政黨策略有何改變？同學或許還有其他類似的題目想要進一步討論，各位可以無拘束的設定問題意識，有關於1990年代國會的政黨意識，並嘗試提出解答。
第二項分組專題：2000年選舉後的發展
導言
2000年在國會選舉歷史上標誌著分水嶺。兩個主要政黨在國會的人數幾乎一樣，這也升高了對於參議院與眾議院的控制權之爭。同時該年也是美國總統大選年，對於總統職位以及國會多數的控制將決定未來二到四年政策的走向。並且，該年也是普查年，各州國會議員選舉的結果將改變影響未來十年選區的劃分以及國會的選舉結果。
指定作業
所指定的作業主題為探究2000年的國會選舉。這包含以下的數道問題：
- 2000年國會選舉的結果，以及如何根據過去各別投票行為的研究與宏觀選舉預測模式，分析此次選舉結果？
- 總統對於2000年國會議員選舉的有何種程度的「裙擺效應」? 以及這種裙擺效應(存在或者不存在) 對於該任期政策制訂之影響？
- 2000年普查之後的選區重劃對於政黨席次之影響？以及對於2002年選舉之後國會中政黨平衡的影響？
- 2000年之後主要的選戰財政趨勢為何？與以往的選戰有何不同？
- 2000年國會的選舉結果，對於107屆國會政黨與委員會領袖的組成有何影響？或許還有其他類似的題目同學想要進一步討論，各位可以無拘束的設定較佳的問題意識，有關2000年國會選舉對於國會政治的影響與作用。
Purpose
The purpose of the group projects is to allow you to explore on your own a large topic in the politics of Congress. I will give you some guidance about the specific topics I’d like you to address, but it will be up to you, as groups and individually, to refine the topics and the questions you address.
Deliverables
The groups will be responsible for delivering two final products. The first will be an oral presentation from each group, lasting 30 minutes each, of the group’s findings. The second will be a comprehensive and coherent report, consisting of “chapters” that address particular topics, introduced by a brief introduction that is the responsibility of the whole group. Your final grade will be based on the entire package, blending together your own individual effort and that of the group. To be specific, three-quarters of the grade will be based on your written chapter (a paper of 8–10 pages) and your oral presentation; one-quarter will be based on the summary essay and the overall quality of the presentation. Finally, I will poll members of both groups, asking you to indicate how the group effort was shared.
Group Project 1: The Aftermath of the Contract with America
Introduction
The election of 1994 ushered in the first period of extended Republican control of the House since the 1920s. This change in party control of the chamber came at a time when some, such as David Rohde (Parties and Leaders in the Postreform House), document a rise in the power of political parties within Congress. Indeed, Rohde’s book, which is assigned for this class, was written at the end of the long-running Democratic hegemony in the House. The time is now ripe to consider issues of “conditional party government” in a Republican era.
Assignment
Your assignment is to write a study of party government in Congress during the 1990s, focusing particularly (but not exclusively) on internal congressional politics since the election of 1994. This study should address the following questions:
- To what can be attributed the dramatic Republican victory of 1994? Was it a onetime phenomenon or did it represent a lasting shift in electoral patterns?
- How have the party organizations in Congress acted to further the aims of the party in the electoral arena, and how have they balanced the needs of individual members against the greater needs of the party?
- What mechanisms have the parties used to impose party regularity internally, and how successful have they been?
- Following the 1994 election the House Republicans instituted a number of committee reforms. How have the committees evolved under those reforms? What difference have they made?
- How have the partisan strategies varied between the parties in the two chambers? There may be other, similar, questions your group would want to take on. Feel free to generate a better set of questions concerning the partisanship of Congress during the 1990s and answer them.
Group Project 2: The Aftermath of the 2000 Election
Introduction
The year 2000 stands as a potential watershed year in the electoral history of Congress. The two parties are narrowly matched in both chambers, raising the intensity of the competition for control of the House and Senate. This being a presidential election year, the resulting mix of control of the presidency and Congress will set the tone for policymaking for the next two-to-four years. And, this being a census year, outcomes in state legislative elections will presumably affect redistricting and congressional election results in the next decade.
Assignment
Your assignment is to write a study of the congressional election of 2000. This study should address the following questions:
- What were the results of the 2000 election and how can they be analyzed in light of past research on individual voting behavior and macro electoral forecasting models?
- To what degree were there presidential “coattails” in 2000, and how will the presence or absence of those coattails affect policymaking in the near term?
- How will the reapportionment following the 2000 census affect the distribution of seats around the country and the partisan balance of Congress after the 2002 election?
- What were the major campaign finance trends of 2000, and how did they differ from the immediate past?
- What difference will the election outcomes in 2000 make for the composition of the party and committee leaderships in both chambers in the 107th Congress? There may be other, similar, questions your group would want to take on. Feel free to generate a better set of questions concerning the implications of the 2000 congressional election on the politics of the institution.
