Abstract
Based on interviews with and questionnaires returned by a total of 232 federal branch and 402 current and former members of Congress and congressional staff assistants, this study tests three hypotheses about congressional casework: (1) that it is more useful than commonly believed for purposes of congressional and internal executive oversight of programs, personnel, and operations; (2) that congressional and administrative elites hold very similar views about congressional casework; and (3) that the positions and responsibilities held by congressional and administrator participants in the casework process affect their views toward casework in a fashion predicted by a textbook understanding of administrative processes. The findings of the study generally support the hypotheses, differing somewhat with previous findings at the state level. Explanations for the discrepancy are provided and an assessment of the consequence is made.