ABSTRACT
Congressmen suffer from many role conflicts. The trade-act debates drew attention to the disparity between the national interest and that of the district, with its local business and industry. The role conflict between national and constituent interest on the tariff issue is widely recognized. Role conflict over general public service versus constituent service occasionally operates in the opposite direction, too. In 1953, we found some New Englanders who appeared to favor protection in principle speaking out against quotas on fuel-oil imports which would discriminate against them. The congressman who thinks of his job in terms of favors to constituents can make a good case for so thinking. And, because there is a case to be made for serving both constituent and national interests, he feels role conflict. American parties do not command the kind of loyalty that makes their organizational progress a criterion for public policy.
