System or self: the role of slaveholding on Congressional behavior in the US North, 1789−1861
We use the 2022 Washington Post’s database of congressional enslavers to ask how much the direct interest of Northern politicians in slavery affected voting. Comparing systemic to self-interest parallels efforts to replace vocabulary, e.g., slaveholder with enslaver, which emphasizes individual agency (and culpability) over societal constraints. Northern slaveholders voted differently from their non-slaveholding Northern colleagues. But this gap was much smaller than the overall North−South divide. Slaveholding had minimal explanatory power over voting in both chambers, except for two periods in the Senate, notably in the 1850s with a slaveholding cluster. But the rise of the GOP diminished their power.
Authors
- Hoyt Bleakley (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0002-2825-6107)
- Paul W. Rhode (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3803-7805)
Institutions
- University of Michigan (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Historical Political Economy
- Published
- 2026-10-30
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1108/jhpe-06-2026-0017
- Primary Topic
- Colonialism, slavery, and trade
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00