AG Chapter Six Study Guide

What is the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?

A compromise left the final choice to Congress, and Article III, section 1, begins simply by vesting "The judicial Power of the United States ... in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Courts have two types of jurisdiction: original and appellate. Original jurisdiction refers to a court's authority to hear disputes as a trial court; these courts determine the facts of a case. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in cases involving a conflict between two or more state governments or public officials. Appellate jurisdiction refers to a court's ability to review and/or revise cases already decided by a trial court. The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction in all other cases. The Constitution nonetheless did include some checks on the power of the judiciary. One such check gives Congress the authority to alter the Court's ability to hear certain kinds of cases. Congress can also propose constitutional amendments that, if ratified, can effectively reverse judicial decisions, and it can impeach and remove federal judges. In one further check, it is the president who, with the "advice and consent" of the Senate, appoints all federal judges.

Explain Presidential Leadership and the importance of public opinion: personality, "power to persuade," Going public, bully pulpit (modern day examples).

A president's success in having preferred programs adopted or implemented depends on many factors, including individual leadership capabilities, personality and powers of persuasion, the president's ability to mobilize public opinion, the public's perception of the president's performance, and Congress's perception of the president's public support. Political scientist Richard E. Neustadt calls the president's ability to influence members of Congress and the public "the power to persuade." Neustadt believes this power is crucial to presidential leadership because it enables presidents to get their policy goals enacted and win support for their policies in the electorate. Even before radio, TV, and the Internet, presidents tried to reach out to the public to gain support for their programs through what President Theodore Roosevelt called the bully pulpit. Presidents, their spouses and family members, and other presidential advisers travel the world over to publicize their views and to build support on a personal level for administration programs. Direct presidential appeals to the electorate, such as those often made by recent presidents, are referred to as "going public." Going public means that a president bypasses the heads of members of Congress to gain support from the people, who can then place pressure on their elected officials in Washington. Presidents and other public figures often use approval ratings as tacit measures of their political capital: their ability to enact public policy simply because of their name and their office.263 People assume that presidents who have high approval ratings—as President George W. Bush did in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks—are more powerful leaders with a mandate for action that comes largely by virtue of high levels of public support. In sharp contrast, low approval ratings often cripple presidents in the policy arena. Their low ratings can actually prevent favored policies from being enacted on Capitol Hill, even when their party controls the Congress, as many of their partisans locked in close elections shy away from being seen or affiliated with an unpopular president.

Explain how Apportionment Works.

After each U.S. Census, a constitutionally mandated process called apportionment adjusts the number of seats allotted to each state. After seats are apportioned, state legislatures must redraw congressional districts to reflect population shifts, thereby ensuring that each member in Congress represents approximately the same number of residents. This process of redrawing congressional districts to reflect increases or decreases in the number of seats allotted to a state, as well as population shifts within a state, is called redistricting.

Explain Congressional Demographics: Age, Race, Gender, etc.

Age: The average member of Congress is also older than the American public. Members of the House average 58 years of age; senators average 62 years of age. These ages are likely to be lower in 2019 given how many young new members were elected in 2018. Race: The 2018 midterm elections resulted in many new "firsts" with at least 88 new members joining the 116th Congress. In the House, a record number of African American women won (all Democrats), bringing the total number of African Americans in the House to at least 48 (up from 33 in the 115th Congress). Religion: Members of Congress are more religious than the general public with 98 percent reporting some religious affiliation. The highest percentage of House members identify as Protestants and are overrepresented in comparison to their percentage of the population, as are Roman Catholics and Jews. In contrast, nonreligious Americans and minority religious groups, such as Mormons, Muslims, and members of Eastern religions, are significantly underrepresented Gender: The total number of women in the House finally broke the 100-member glass ceiling with 103 women winning election or reelection beating the previous high of 83 significantly. Thirty-five of the women are new to the House. Two new members are American-Indian women; another two are Muslim women - the first ever in the House. Wealth: More than half of all members of Congress are millionaires. The Senate, in fact, is often called the Millionaire's Club. In 2018, two-fifths of the members of Congress were millionaires. In 2018, it took $28 million to be among the twenty wealthiest members of the House and Senate.

Explain the Roots of Legislature Branch.

Article I of the Constitution describes the structure of the legislative branch of government. The Great Compromise at the Constitutional Convention resulted in the creation of a lower house, the House of Representatives, and an upper house, the Senate. As agreed to at the Constitutional Convention, House members must be at least twenty-five years of age; senators, thirty. Members of the House must be citizens of the United States for at least seven years; those elected to the Senate, at least nine years. Both representatives and senators must be legal residents of the states from which they are elected. In 1790, one member represented about 30,000 people. But, as the population of the new nation grew and states were added to the union, the House became larger and larger. In 1910, it expanded to 435 members in 1963. The eligible electorate in each congressional district votes to elect members of the House of Representatives to two-year terms. Senators are elected to six-year terms, and originally state legislatures chose them because the Framers intended senators to represent their states' interests in the Senate. State legislators lost this influence over the Senate with the ratification of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913, which provides for the direct election of senators by voters. Then, as now, one-third of all senators are up for reelection every two years.

Limitations on government workers and political involvement: Hatch Act

As the number of federal employees and agencies grew during the 1930s, many Americans began to fear that members of the civil service would play major roles not only in implementing public policy but also in electing members of Congress and even the president. Consequently, Congress enacted the Political Activities Act of 1939, commonly known as the Hatch Act. It prohibited federal employees from becoming directly involved in working for political candidates. In 1993, the Hatch Act was liberalized to allow employees to run for public office in nonpartisan elections, contribute money to political organizations, and campaign for or against candidates in partisan elections. Federal employees still, however, are prohibited from engaging in political activity while on duty, soliciting contributions from the general public, and running for office in partisan elections

How does the budget process work? CBO v. OMB? Presidents role as well as Congress?

By the 1920s, as a result of growing federal regulation and the bureaucracy, many policy makers sensed a need for greater centralization and order in the budgetary process. Thus, Congress passed and President Warren G. Harding signed into law the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921. This legislation required the president—for the first time—to submit a budget to Congress. The president's proposal would include the prior year's spending, projections, and proposals for the next year. Congress, in turn, could alter the allocation of appropriations but could not increase the total level of spending proposed by the president. To aid the executive branch in this role, the act also created the Bureau of the Budget. In 1970, the name of this agency was changed to the Office of Management and Budget. The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 established the congressional budgetary process in use today. The act also created the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), a nonpartisan agency to help members make accurate estimations of revenues and expenditures and to lay out a plan for congressional action on the annual budget resolution, appropriations, reconciliation, and any other revenue bills. In general, these bills and resolutions establish levels of spending for the federal government and its agencies during the next fiscal year. One special process detailed by the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is reconciliation. The reconciliation procedure allows consideration of controversial issues affecting the budget by limiting debate to twenty hours, thereby ending the threat of a filibuster in the Senate. This process received a great deal of attention in 2010, when members of Congress used it to pass the health care reform bill. The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 also includes a timetable intended to make sure that action on the budget occurs without unnecessary delay (see Table 6.6). Under this constraint, Congress must complete initial action on the budget resolution by April 15 of the preceding fiscal year.*

Explain the development of the federal bureaucracy over time: civil war, spoils to merits, regulating commerce, world wars to growth

Civil War: As the nation geared up for war, President Abraham Lincoln authorized the addition of thousands of new employees to existing departments. The Civil War also spawned the need for new government agencies in response to a series of poor harvests and distribution problems. President Lincoln (who understood that well-fed troops are necessary to conduct a war) created the Department of Agriculture in 1862, although it was not given full Cabinet-level status until more than twenty years later. Congress also created the Pension Office in 1866 to pay benefits to the thousands of Union veterans who had fought in the war (more than 127,000 veterans initially were eligible for benefits). Overwhelmed with post-Civil War litigation and the high cost of outsourcing government litigation to private attorneys, Congress also created the Department of Justice as a Cabinet department in 1870. Spoils to Merit: Garfield's immediate predecessor, Rutherford B. Hayes, had favored the idea of replacing the spoils system with a merit system, a system of employment based on qualifications, test scores, and ability rather than loyalty. Congress, however, failed to pass the legislation he proposed. Possibly because potential job seekers wanted to secure positions before Congress had the opportunity to act on an overhauled civil service system, Public reaction to Garfield's death and increasing criticism of the spoils system prompted Congress to pass the Civil Service Reform Act in 1883, more commonly known as the Pendleton Act. It established a merit system of federal employment on the basis of open, competitive exams and created a bipartisan three-member Civil Service Commission, which operated until 1978. Regulating Commerce: Congress created the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) in 1887. In doing so, Congress was reacting to public outcries over exorbitant rates charged by railroad companies for hauling freight. It became the first independent regulatory commission, an entity outside a major executive department. Congress creates independent regulatory commissions such as the ICC, which generally focus on particular aspects of the economy. The creation of the ICC also marked a shift in the focus of the bureaucracy from service to regulation, giving the government—in the shape of the bureaucracy—vast powers over individual and property rights. Progressives wanted new government regulations to cure some of the ills suffered by workers and to control the power of increasingly monopolistic corporations. In 1913, when it became clear that one agency could not represent the interests of both employers and employees, President Woodrow Wilson divided the Department of Commerce and Labor, creating two separate departments. One year later, Congress created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to protect small businesses and the public from unfair competition, especially from big business. World Wars to Growth: The economy appeared to boom as U.S. involvement in World War I caused an increase in manufacturing, but ominous events loomed just over the horizon. Farmers were in trouble after a series of bad harvests, the nation experienced a severe slump in agricultural prices, the construction industry went into decline, and bank failures became common throughout the 1920s. After stock prices crashed in 1929, the nation plunged into the Great Depression. Formerly, most Americans had believed in a hands-off approach; now they considered it the federal government's job to get the economy going and get Americans back to work. The war immediately affected the economy: healthy, eligible men went to war, and women went to work at factories or in other jobs to replace the men. Factories operated around the clock to produce the armaments, material, and clothes necessary to equip, shelter, and dress an army. Tax rates were increased to support the war, and they never again fell to prewar levels. After the war, this infusion of new monies and veterans' demands for services led to a variety of new programs and a much bigger government. The G.I. (Government Issue) Bill, for example, provided college loans for returning veterans and reduced mortgage rates to enable them to buy homes.

How do judges get confirmed? Compare Gorsuch and Barrett confirmation issues

Confirmation hearings for Trump's second Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, began September 4, 2018 and lasted four days. Controversy followed the nominee throughout the process. On the first day of hearings, Kavanaugh refused to shake the hand of Fred Guttenberg, the father of a Parkland shooting victim, and later, when Dr. Christine Blasey Ford testified that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her, he responded with anger and tears. Observers, including former Justice John Paul Stevens, concluded that he lacked the temperament to serve on the high court. He was confirmed by a vote of 50-48 on October 6, 2018. The Constitution gives the Senate the authority to approve all nominees to the federal bench. Ordinarily, nominations are referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. This committee investigates the nominees, holds hearings, and votes on its recommendation for Senate action. As a president proceeds to narrow the list of possible nominees for a judicial vacancy, White House staff begin an investigation into their personal and professional backgrounds. The Federal Bureau of Investigation also receives names of potential nominees for background checks. In addition, traditionally, the names are forwarded to the American Bar Association (ABA), the politically powerful organization that represents the interests of the legal profession. After its own investigation, the ABA rates each nominee, based on his or her qualifications, as Well Qualified (previously "Highly Qualified"), Qualified, or Not Qualified. As a candidate, President Trump took the unusual step of announcing a list of potential Supreme Court nominees vetted by the Federalist Society, a conservative group made up of law students, professors, and lawyers, from which both Justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were drawn. All of Trump's appointees to the federal courts are first approved by the Federalist Society. To start, the Senate Judiciary Committee asks each nominee to complete a lengthy questionnaire detailing previous work (dating as far back as high school summer jobs), judicial opinions written, judicial philosophy, speeches, and even all interviews ever given to members of the press. More and more, interest groups are also involving themselves in district court and court of appeals nominations. They recognize that these appointments increasingly pave the way for future nominees to the Supreme Court.

How does the SC makes decisions: deciding on hearing a case to the final decision (all the writs) and assigned opinions— majority, concurring, etc

Deciding to hear a case: As many as 8,000 cases are filed at the Supreme Court each term; traditionally seventy to seventy-five cases have been heard per term by the Roberts Court. During its 2017-2018 term, although approximately 8,000 petitions were filed asking for review, only 63 cases were heard and several cases were decided that summarily reversed eleven lower court decisions without written opinions, making it the least productive Court in several decades. Since 1988, nearly all appellate cases that have gone to the Supreme Court arrived there on a petition for a writ of certiorari (from the Latin "to be informed"), which is a request for the Supreme Court—at its discretion—to order up the records of the lower courts for purposes of review All petitions, or writs of certiorari, must meet two criteria: -The case must come from a U.S. court of appeals, a court of military appeals, district court, or a state court of last resort. -The case must involve a federal question. Thus, the case must present questions of federal constitutional law or involve a federal statute, action, or treaty. The reasons that the Court should accept the case for review and legal argument supporting that position are set out in the petitioner's writ of certiorari. Pool participants review their assigned fraction of petitions and share their notes with each other. Those cases deemed noteworthy by the justices then make it onto the "discuss list" prepared by the chief justice's clerks and are circulated to the chambers of the other justices. All other petitions are dead listed and go no further. Only about 30 percent of submitted petitions make it to the discuss list. The chief justice speaks first, then the rest of the justices, according to seniority. The decision process ends when the justices vote, and by custom, certiorari is granted according to the Rule of Four—when at least four justices vote to hear a case. How does a case survive the process: Political scientists nonetheless have attempted to determine the characteristics of the cases the Court accepts. Among the cues increasing the odds of the Court hearing a case are the following: The federal government is the party asking for review. The case involves conflict among the courts of appeals. The case presents a civil rights or civil liberties question. The case involves the ideological or policy preferences of the justices. The case has significant social or political interest, as evidenced by the presence of interest group amicus curiae briefs.

Describe the formal organization of the Bureaucracy: cabinet, agencies, commissions, corporations. Can the President alter the Bureacracy?

Federal agencies are classified based on their area of specialization, method of appointing officials, and accountability to the president and Congress. (The largest department, the Department of Homeland Security , is probably the best example of this phenomenon.) Cabinet Departments: The fifteen Cabinet departments are major administrative units that have responsibility for conducting broad areas of government operations (see Figure 8.2). Cabinet departments account for about 60 percent of the federal workforce. The vice president, the heads of all the departments, and, depending on the president, additional appointees and staff make up the formal Cabinet. Cabinet secretaries are responsible for establishing their department's general policy and overseeing operations. They are directly responsible to the president but are often viewed as having two masters—the president and citizens affected by the business of their departments.274 Cabinet secretaries also are tied to Congress through the appropriations, or budgetary, process and their role in implementing legislation and making rules and policy.* Independent Executive Agencies: Independent executive agencies closely resemble Cabinet departments but have narrower areas of responsibility. Generally speaking, independent agencies perform services rather than regulatory functions. The president appoints the heads of these agencies, and they serve, like Cabinet secretaries, at his pleasure. Independent Regulatory Commissions: Independent regulatory commissions are agencies created by Congress to exist outside the major departments and regulate a specific economic activity or interest. Because of the complexity of modern economic issues, Congress sought to create commissions that could develop expertise and provide continuity of policy with respect to economic issues because neither Congress nor the courts have the time or specific talents to do so. Unlike the case of executive department heads, the president cannot easily remove them. In 1935, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that in creating independent commissions, Congress had intended them to be independent panels of experts sequestered, as far as possible, from immediate political pressures. These boards and commissions often lack autonomy and freedom from political pressures; a single administrator who is subject to removal by the president generally heads them. Thus, they are far more susceptible to the political wishes of the president who appoints them. Government Corporations: Government corporations date from the early 1930s. They are businesses established by Congress to perform functions that private businesses could provide. The government often forms corporations when the financial incentives for private industry to provide services are minimal.

How does Congress oversight function work? Specific areas and methods

Historically, Congress has performed its oversight function by holding committee hearings in which members question bureaucrats to determine if they are enforcing and interpreting the laws as intended by Congress. These hearings, now routinely televised, are among Congress's most visible and dramatic actions, especially in times of divided government, that is, when the executive and legislative branches are controlled by different parties. The resolution permits the president to send troops into action only with the authorization of Congress or if the United States, its territories, or the armed forces are attacked. It also requires the president to notify Congress within forty-eight hours of committing troops to foreign soil. In addition, the president must withdraw troops within sixty days unless Congress votes to declare war. The Congressional Review Act of 1996 allows Congress to exercise its oversight powers by nullifying agency regulations. Under the home rule charter of the District of Columbia, the House and Senate may also nullify actions of the Washington, D.C. City Council. Congress has sixty days after the implementation of an administrative action or—in the case of the District of Columbia any laws, resolutions, or ballot measures—to pass a joint resolution of legislative disapproval. The president must also approve the resolution. If the president vetoes the resolution of disapproval, Congress needs a two-thirds majority to override the president's veto. The Senate plays a special oversight function through its ability to confirm key members of the executive branch as well as presidential nominations to the federal courts. In the case of federal district court appointments, senators often have considerable say in the nomination of judges from their states through senatorial courtesy, a process by which presidents generally defer to the senators who represent the state where the vacancy occurs. Through the "blue slip" process, senators may submit a favorable or unfavorable review of a nominee; they may also choose not to comment. The impeachment process is Congress's ultimate oversight of the U.S. president and federal court judges. The U.S. Constitution is quite vague about the impeachment process, and much debate over it concerns what constitutes an impeachable offense. The Constitution specifies that Congress can impeach a president for treason, bribery, or other "high crimes and misdemeanors." Most commentators agree that the Framers intended this phrase to mean significant abuses of power. House and Senate rules control how the impeachment process operates.

What are the Key Differences Between the House and the Senate?

House: -435 voting members (apportioned by population) -Two-year terms -Initiates all revenue bills -Initiates impeachment procedures and passes articles of impeachment Senate: -100 voting members (two from each state) -Six-year terms (one-third up for reelection every two years) -Offers "advice and consent" on many major presidential appointments -Tries impeached officials -Approves Treaties

What is the Incumbency effect?

Incumbency helps members stay in office once they are elected. It is often very difficult for outsiders to win because they don't have the advantages enjoyed by incumbents, including name recognition, access to free media, an inside track on fund-raising, and a district often drawn to favor the incumbent Advantages of Incumbency: -Name recognition -Credit Claiming -Casework -Franking Privilege's -Access too Media -Easy in Fundraising -Experience in running a campaign -Redistricting On average, 96 percent of incumbents who seek reelection win their primary and general election races. The majority of members who lose their reelection bids are affected by redistricting or changing demographics in their districts.*

Describe the structure of the federal judiciary: 3 tiers— what are they and how do they function

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once remarked that a justice should be a "combination of Justinian, Jesus Christ and John Marshall." Most judges have held other political offices, such as a lower federal or state court judge or prosecutor. Many have been involved in politics, which is what usually brings them into consideration for a position on the federal bench. White males continue to dominate the federal courts, but since the 1970s, most presidents have pledged (with varying degrees of success) to do their best to appoint more African Americans, Hispanics, women, and other underrepresented groups to the federal bench. Nevertheless, whether the nominee is a friend or someone known to the president only by reputation, at least six criteria are especially important: experience, ideology or policy preferences, rewards, pursuit of political support, religion, and race and gender. Experience: Most nominees have had at least some judicial, legal, or governmental experience. Service on a lower federal court has become almost a de facto requirement for nomination to the Supreme Court.309 All nine sitting Supreme Court justices but one—former U.S. Solicitor General Elena Kagan—have prior judicial experience Ideology or Policy Preferneces: Most presidents also seek to appoint individuals who share their policy preferences, and almost all have political goals in mind when they appoint a judge or justice. To optimize these goals, most presidents select judges and justices of their own party affiliation and/or who have been active in party politics. Rewards: Historically, many of those appointed to the judiciary were personal friends of presidents. Pursuit of Political Support: During Ronald Reagan's successful campaign for the presidency in 1980, some of his advisers feared the gender gap would hurt him. Polls repeatedly showed that he was far less popular with female voters than with men. To gain support from women, Reagan announced during his campaign that should he win, he would appoint a woman to fill the first vacancy on the Supreme Court. When Justice Potter Stewart, a moderate, announced his retirement from the bench, under pressure from women's rights groups, President Reagan nominated Sandra Day O'Connor of the Arizona Court of Appeals to fill the vacancy. Religion: Through November 2018, of the 114 justices who have served on the Court, almost all have been members of traditional Protestant faiths. Fewer than fifteen have been Roman Catholic, and only eight have been Jewish.310 Today, more Catholics—John Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Sonia Sotomayor—serve on the Court than at any other point in history. Race: Race was undoubtedly a critical issue in the appointment of Clarence Thomas to replace Thurgood Marshall, the first African American justice. But, President George Bush refused to acknowledge his wish to retain a black seat on the Court. Instead, he announced that he was "picking the best man for the job on the merits," a claim that was met with considerable skepticism by many observers. Ethnicity: As the ethnic diversity of the United States increased, presidents also faced greater pressure to nominate a Hispanic justice to the Supreme Court. Early in his presidency, President Barack Obama fulfilled these expectations by nominating Sonia Sotomayor. Gender: As the number of women in the legal profession has grown, presidents have also made conscious efforts to appoint more women to the federal bench. These efforts began in the late 1970s with President Jimmy Carter and have increased over time. Today, more women—three—serve on the Supreme Court than at any other time in history.

What are the rules of succession?

Knowing that a system of orderly transfer of power was necessary, the Framers created the office of the vice president. To further clarify presidential succession, in 1947, Congress passed the Presidential Succession Act, which lists—in order—those in line to succeed the president. Should a vacancy occur in the office of the vice president, the Twenty-Fifth Amendment directs the president to appoint a new vice president, subject to the approval (by a simple majority) of both houses of Congress. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment also contains a section that allows the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet (or some other body determined by Congress) to deem a president unable to fulfill his duties.

How is the Bureaucracy accountable? The roles of the other branches in accountability?

Many political scientists argue that presidents should take charge of the bureaucracy because it is their responsibility to see that popular ideas and expectations are translated into administrative action. Congress creates the agencies, funds them, and establishes the broad rules of their operation. Moreover, Congress continually reviews the various agencies through oversight committee investigations, hearings, and its power of the purse. The federal judiciary, as in most other matters, has the ultimate authority to review administrative actions although the judiciary generally defers to the judgments of the federal administrative agencies and administrative courts. Executive Control:

How does the Bureaucracy work? Iron triangle, making policy, rulemaking, administrative adjudication

Max Weber believed bureaucracies were a rational way for complex societies to organize themselves. Model bureaucracies, said Weber, exhibit certain features, including: A chain of command in which authority flows from top to bottom. A division of labor whereby work is apportioned among specialized workers to increase productivity. Clear lines of authority among workers and their superiors. A goal orientation that determines structure, authority, and rules. Impersonality, whereby all employees are treated fairly based on merit and all clients are served equally, without discrimination, according to established rules. Productivity, whereby all work and actions are evaluated according to established rules. Congress recognizes that it does not have the time, expertise, or ability to involve itself in every detail of every program; therefore, it sets general guidelines for agency action and then allows the agency to work out the details. How agencies execute congressional wishes is called implementation, the process by which a law or policy is put into operation. Historically, in attempting to study how the bureaucracy made policy, political scientists investigated what they termed iron triangles, the relatively ironclad relationships and patterns of interaction that occur among federal workers in agencies or departments, interest groups, and relevant congressional committees and subcommittees. Many political scientists who examine external influences on the modern bureaucracy prefer to study issue networks. In general, issue networks, like iron triangles, include agency officials, members of Congress (and committee staffers), and interest group lobbyists. But they also include lawyers, consultants, academics, public relations specialists, and sometimes even the courts. Unlike iron triangles, issue networks constantly are changing as members with technical expertise or newly interested parties become involved in issue areas and others phase out. One such example is interagency councils, working groups established to facilitate the coordination of policy making and implementation across a host of agencies. Depending on the amount of funding these councils receive, they can be the prime movers of administration policy in any area where an interagency council exists. In areas marked by extraordinarily complex policy problems, recent presidential administrations have set up policy coordinating committees (PCCs) to facilitate interaction among agencies and departments at the sub-Cabinet level. Making Policy: Policy making and implementation take place on both informal and formal levels. From a practical standpoint, many decisions are left to individual government employees on a day-to-day basis. Administrative discretion, the ability of bureaucrats to make choices concerning the best way to implement congressional or executive intentions, also allows decision makers (whether they are in a Cabinet-level position or at the lowest GS levels) a tremendous amount of leeway. Bureaucrats exercise administrative discretion through two formal procedures: rule making and administrative adjudication. Rule Making: Rule making is a quasi-legislative process resulting in regulations that have the characteristics of a legislative act. Regulations are the rules that govern the operation of all government programs and have the force of law. In essence, then, bureaucratic rule makers often act as lawmakers as well as law enforcers when they make rules or draft regulations to implement various congressional statutes. Some political scientists say that rule making "is the single most important function performed by agencies of government" Because regulations often involve political conflict, the 1946 Administrative Procedures Act established rule-making procedures to give everyone the chance to participate in the process. The act requires that: (1) public notice of the time, place, and nature of the rule-making proceedings be provided in the Federal Register; (2) interested parties be given the opportunity to submit written arguments and facts relevant to the rule; and (3) the statutory purpose and basis of the rule be stated. After rules are published, thirty days generally must elapse before they take effect. All private citizens with interest in potential rules have the right to submit comments. Recent presidents have taken efforts to make commenting easier for citizens by using the government's regulations.gov portal. As a result, the average rule receives about eighty comments, but some rules may receive thousands of comments from citizens. Administrative Adjunction: Agencies regularly find that persons or businesses are not in compliance with the federal laws the agencies are charged with enforcing or that they are in violation of an agency rule or regulation. To force compliance, some agencies resort to administrative adjudication, a quasi-judicial process in which a bureaucratic agency settles disputes between two parties in a manner similar to the way courts resolve disputes. Administrative adjudication is referred to as quasi-judicial because adjudication by any body other than the judiciary would be a violation of the constitutional principle of separation of powers. Several agencies and boards employ administrative law judges to conduct hearings. Although employed by the agencies, these judges are strictly independent and cannot be removed except for gross misconduct. Their actions, however, are reviewable in the federal courts, as are the findings of judges in agencies such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and Social Security Administration.

How do members and Congress make decisions?

Members of Congress consider a number of factors when deciding how to vote on a piece of legislation. Among these are political parties; constituents; colleagues and caucuses; interest groups, lobbyists and political action committees; and staff and support agencies. -Political parties: The influence of political parties on members' votes cannot be overstated. In fact, congressional party unity, a measure of the solidarity of the members of a political party, has reached historically high levels in recent years. Members of both the Democratic and Republican Parties in the House and Senate vote together on approximately 90 percent of all legislation considered by those bodies. The president may also act as chief of the party and attempt to coerce members to support his legislative package. This is particularly true in times of unified government, when the presidency and Congress are controlled by members of the same party and share a similar policy agenda. -Constituents: In short, legislators tend to act on their own preferences as trustees when dealing with topics that have come through the committees on which they serve or with issues they know about as a result of experience in other contexts, such as their vocation. On items of little concern in their district or when they have limited first-hand knowledge, legislators tend to turn to other sources for voting cues. But members are always keenly aware of the consequences of voting against their constituents' views on "wedge issues"—topics such as insurance coverage for contraceptives, medical coverage for preexisting conditions, immigration and moving jobs abroad—that tend to divide voters. -Colleagues and Caucuses: The range and complexity of issues confronting Congress means that no one can be up to speed on more than a few topics. When members must vote on bills concerning issues about which they know very little, they often turn for advice to colleagues who have served on the committee that handled the legislation. On issues that are of little interest to a legislator, logrolling, or vote trading, often occurs. Members may also look to other representatives who share common interests. Special-interest caucuses created around issues, home states, regions, congressional class, or other commonalities facilitate this communication. -Interest Groups: Organized interests can persuade undecided legislators or confirm the support of their friends by providing information that legislators use to justify the position they have embraced. They also can supply direct campaign contributions, volunteers, and publicity to members seeking reelection. Interest groups also use grassroots appeals to pressure legislators by urging their members in a particular state or district to call, write, fax, e-mail, text, or tweet their senators or representatives. Lobbyists cannot vote, but constituents back home can and do. -Lobbyists: A primary function of most lobbyists, whether they work for interest groups, trade associations, or large corporations, is to provide information to supportive or potentially supportive legislators, committees, and their staffs. -Political Action Committees: Political action committees (PACs) organized by interest groups are an important source of most members' campaign funding. When an issue arises that is of little consequence to a member's constituents, that member, not surprisingly, tends to support the positions of those interests who helped pay for their last campaign. -Staff and Support Agencies: Members of Congress rely heavily on their staffs for information on pending legislation. House members have an average of fifteen staffers; senators, an average of thirty-five. Staff is divided between D.C. and district offices. When a bill is nonideological or one on which the member has no real position, staff members can be very influential. Additional help for members comes from support personnel at the Congressional Research Service (CRS) at the Library of Congress, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

How does a bill become a law?

Only members of the House or Senate can formally submit a bill for congressional consideration. One member of Congress must introduce a bill, but several other members (called co-sponsors) often sponsor a bill, in an attempt to show support for its aims. Once introduced, the bill is sent to the clerk of the chamber, who gives it a number (for example, HR 1 or S 1—indicating House or Senate bill number one, respectively). The bill is then printed, distributed, and sent to the appropriate committee or committees for consideration. The committee usually refers the bill to one of its subcommittees, whose staff researches the proposed legislation, and then the chair decides whether or not to hold hearings on the bill. After the hearings, the subcommittee revises the bill and then votes to approve or defeat it. If the subcommittee votes in favor of the bill, it is returned to the full committee. There, it goes through markup, a session during which committee members can offer changes to a bill before it goes to the floor. The second stage of action takes place on the House or Senate floor. As previously discussed, in the House, before a bill may be debated on the floor, the Committee on Rules must approve it and give it a rule and a place on the calendar, or schedule. When the day arrives for floor debate, the House may choose to form a Committee of the Whole. This procedure allows the House to deliberate with only one hundred members present to expedite consideration of the bill. During this time, members may offer amendments, and the full House ultimately takes a vote. If the bill survives, it goes to the Senate for consideration if that body did not consider it simultaneously. The third stage of action takes place when the two chambers of Congress approve different versions of the same bill. When this happens, they establish a conference committee to iron out the differences between the two versions. The conference committee, whose members are from the original House and Senate committees, hammers out a compromise, which is returned to each chamber for a final vote. If the bill passes, it is sent to the president, who has ten days to consider a bill. He has four options: -Approve -Veto -Wait the ten day limit (Bill becomes law without signature) -Congress adjourns early

Explain the constitutional powers of the president and provide examples for each.

Perhaps the most important section of Article II is its first sentence: "The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America." Appointment Power: To help the president enforce laws passed by Congress, the Constitution authorizes him to appoint, with the advice and consent of the Senate, "Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law." -Ex: President Obama's policy initiatives suffered because so many of his nominations stalled in the Republican-controlled Congress during his last two years in office. In contrast, through 2018, President Donald J. Trump failed to nominate hundreds of individuals to positions requiring Senate confirmation where Republicans preside. Although all of his Cabinet-level appointees were confirmed, the president effectively had no bench-leaving career civil servants to run their respective departments, agencies, and bureaus. The Power to Convene Congress: The Constitution requires the president to inform the Congress periodically of "the State of the Union" and authorizes the president to convene either one or both houses of Congress on "extraordinary Occasions." The power to convene Congress had more importance when Congress did not sit in nearly year-round sessions, although it may still be significant in times of national crisis. The Power to Make Treaties: The president's power to make treaties with foreign nations is checked by the Constitution's stipulation that at least two-thirds of the members of the Senate must approve all treaties. -Ex: Rejected Treaty: Perhaps the most notable example of a rejected treaty was the Senate's defeat of the Treaty of Versailles submitted by President Woodrow Wilson in 1919. -Ex: Passed Treaty: When President Jimmy Carter proposed the controversial Panama Canal Treaty in 1977 to turn the canal over to Panama, for example, the Senate demanded settlement of several conditions before approving the canal's return. Veto Power: Thus, the Framers gave the president veto power, but only as a "qualified negative." Although the president has the authority to veto any act of Congress (with the exception of joint resolutions that propose constitutional amendments), the Framers gave Congress the authority to override an executive veto by a two-thirds vote in each house. -Ex: Congress, however, rarely can muster enough votes to override a veto. A notable exception occurred in September 2016 when Congress overrode President Obama's veto of a bill allowing the families of those killed in the September 11 terrorist attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for any involvement in the plot. Power to Preside over military as Commander in Chief: During that highly controversial war, Presidents Johnson and Richard M. Nixon routinely assured members of Congress that victory was near. In 1971, however, publication of what were called The Pentagon Papers revealed what many people had suspected all along: the Johnson administration had systematically altered casualty figures and distorted key facts to place the progress of the war in a more positive light. The pardoning power: Presidents can exercise a check on judicial power through their constitutional authority to grant reprieves or pardons. Presidents exercise complete pardoning power for federal offenses except in cases of impeachment, which cannot be pardoned. -Ex: President Gerald R. Ford gave the most famous presidential pardon of all to former President Richard M. Nixon—who had not been formally charged with any crime—"for any offenses against the United States, which he, Richard Nixon, has committed or may have committed while in office."

Explain the roots of the executive branch: Qualifications, powers, term limits, US v. Nixon, etc.

Qualifications: The Constitution requires the president (and the vice president, whose major function is to succeed the president in the event of his death or disability) to be a natural-born citizen of the United States, at least thirty-five years old, and a resident of the United States for fourteen years or longer. Powers: Term limits: The Framers ultimately reached agreement on a four-year term with eligibility for reelection. A vice president who succeeds a president due to death, resignation, or impeachment is eligible for a maximum of ten years in office US v. Nixon: What came to be known simply as Watergate , which began after a White House-sanctioned burglary of the Democratic National Committee and included President Richard M. Nixon's firing of a Special Prosecutor when he did not like the direction the inquiry was taking, also produced a major decision from the Supreme Court on the scope of what is termed executive privilege. In U.S. v. Nixon (1974), the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that no overriding executive privilege sanctioned the president's refusal to comply with a court order to produce information for use in the trial of the Watergate defendants. Since then, presidents have varied widely in their claim to executive privilege.

Explain the Impeachment/Removal Process.

The House also has the power of impeachment, or to charge the president, vice president, or other "civil officers," including federal judges, with "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." But only the Senate has authority to conduct impeachment trials, with a two-thirds "yea" vote being necessary to remove a federal official, such as the president or a judge, from office.

Explain the Judiciary Act of 1789 and its significance with Marbury v. Madison

The Judiciary Act of 1789 established the basic three-tiered structure of the federal court system. At the bottom were the federal district courts—at least one in each state. If people participating in a lawsuit (called litigants) were unhappy with the district court's verdict, they could appeal their case to the circuit courts, constituting the second tier. Each circuit court, initially created to function as a trial court for important cases, originally comprised one district court judge and two Supreme Court justices who met as a circuit court twice a year. Not until 1891 did circuit courts (or, as we know them today, courts of appeals) take on their exclusively appellate function and begin to focus solely on reviewing the findings of lower courts. The third tier of the federal judicial system defined by the Judiciary Act of 1789 was the Supreme Court of the United States. * ​​The actions of John Marshall, who headed the ​Court from 1801 to 1835, brought much needed respect and prestige to the Court. President John Adams appointed Marshall chief justice in 1800, three years after he declined to accept a nomination as associate justice. An ardent Federalist, Marshall is considered the most important justice to serve on the Court. Nonetheless, because the U.S. Constitution does not mention judicial review, the actual authority of the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of acts of Congress was an unsettled question. But, in Marbury v. Madison (1803) Marbury v. Madison (1803) Case in which the Supreme Court first asserted the power of judicial review by finding that part of the congressional statute extending the Court's original jurisdiction was unconstitutional. , Chief Justice John Marshall claimed this sweeping authority for the Court by asserting that the Constitution's supremacy clause implies the right of judicial review. Nonetheless, because the U.S. Constitution does not mention judicial review, the actual authority of the Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of acts of Congress was an unsettled question. But, in Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall claimed this sweeping authority for the Court by asserting that the Constitution's supremacy clause implies the right of judicial review. In the final hours of his administration, John Adams appointed William Marbury as the justice of the peace for the District of Columbia. But in the confusion of winding up matters, Adams's secretary of state failed to deliver Marbury's commission. Madison refused to turn over the commission. Marbury and three other Adams appointees who were in the same situation then filed a writ of mandamus (a legal motion) asking the Supreme Court to order Madison to deliver their commissions. Responding to this challenge, in a brilliant opinion that in many sections reads more like a lecture to Jefferson than a discussion of the merits of Marbury's claim, Marshall concluded that although Marbury and the others were entitled to their commissions, the Court lacked the power to issue the writ sought by Marbury. In Marbury v. Madison, Marshall further ruled that those parts of the ​Judiciary Act of 1789​ that extended the original jurisdiction of the Court to allow it to issue writs of mandamus were inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore unconstitutional.

What is "big government?" What are 3 features? How has spending changed over time, how has employment changed over time?

The federal bureaucracy, or the thousands of federal government agencies and institutions that implement and administer federal laws and programs, was created by Article II, which speaks of "all civil officers"—implying the need for presidential aides but nowhere specifically mentioning them. It is frequently called the "fourth branch of government." Critics often charge that the bureaucracy is too large, too powerful, and too unaccountable to the people or even to elected officials. The term "bureaucracy" is French in origin taking the word bureau (a desk or office) and combining it with the Greek word kratos, meaning political power or rule. German sociologist Max Weber defined bureaucracy as any system of administration conducted by trained professionals. In 1789, the federal bureaucracy consisted of three departments: Foreign Affairs, War, and Treasury. In commenting on Jackson's wide use of political positions to reward friends and loyalists, one fellow Jacksonian Democrat commented: "to the victors belong the spoils." From that statement came the term spoils system, which describes an executive's ability to fire public-office holders of the defeated political party and replace them with party loyalists. The spoils system was a form of patronage—jobs(such as the Post Office), grants, or other special favors given as rewards to friends and political allies for their support.

Explain the development and expansion of presidential power over time

The formal powers enumerated in Article II of the Constitution and the Supreme Court's interpretation of those constitutional provisions limit a president's authority. The times in which the president serves, his confidantes and advisers, and his personality and leadership abilities all affect how he wields these powers: George Washington (1st): When President George Washington was sworn in on a cold, blustery day in New York City on April 30, 1789, he took over an office and a government yet to be created. He took every opportunity to establish the primacy of the national government. Washington's action helped establish the idea of federal supremacy and the authority of the executive branch to collect taxes levied by Congress. He began the practice of regular meetings with his advisers, thus establishing the Cabinet system. He asserted the chief executive's prominent role in the conduct of foreign affairs. John Adams (2nd): Adams's poor leadership skills heightened the divisions between Federalists and Anti-Federalists and probably hastened the development of political parties. Thomas Jefferson (3rd): Jefferson took critical steps to expand the role of the president in the legislative process. Like Washington, he claimed that certain presidential powers were inherent and used such powers to justify nearly doubling the size of the nation through the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Andrew Jackson (7th): President Andrew Jackson was the first strong national leader who represented more than just a landed, propertied elite. By the time Jackson ran for president in 1828, eleven new states had been added to the union, and the number of white males eligible to vote had increased dramatically, as nearly all states had removed property requirements for voting. Jackson used his image and personal power to buttress the developing party system by rewarding loyal followers of his Democratic Party with presidential appointments. Abraham Lincoln (16th): To combat the unprecedented emergency of the Civil War, Lincoln assumed powers that no president before him had claimed. Because Lincoln believed he needed to act quickly for the very survival of the nation, he frequently took action without first obtaining the approval of Congress. Lincoln argued that the inherent powers of his office allowed him to circumvent the Constitution in a time of war or national crisis. Since the Constitution confers on the president the duty to make sure that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed, reasoned Lincoln, these acts were constitutional. Franklin D. Roosevelt (32nd): FDR took office in 1933 in the midst of the Great Depression, a major economic crisis in which a substantial portion of the U.S. workforce was unemployed. To jump-start the American economy, FDR asked Congress for and was given "broad executive powers to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe." He immediately fashioned a plan for national recovery called the New Deal, a package of bold and controversial programs designed to invigorate the failing American economy. To his successors, FDR left the modern presidency. This included a burgeoning federal bureaucracy, an active and usually leading role for the president in both domestic and foreign policy and legislation, and a nationalized executive office that used technology, bringing the president closer to his people.

Who are the Bureaucrats?

The national government differs from private business in numerous ways. Governments exist for the public good, not to make money. Businesses are driven by a profit motive; many government leaders are driven by reelection. Businesses earn their money from customers; the national government raises revenue from taxpayers. Bureaucracies also differ from businesses because it is difficult to determine to whom bureaucracies are responsible. Is it the president? Congress? The people? The different natures of government and business have a tremendous impact on the way the bureaucracy operates. Because all of the incentive in government "is in the direction of not making mistakes," public employees view risks and rewards very differently from their private-sector counterparts.279 Government employees have little reason to take risks or go beyond their assigned job tasks. In contrast, private employers are far more likely to reward ambition. Most federal bureaucrats are career government employees who work in the Cabinet-level departments and independent agencies that comprise more than 2,000 bureaus, divisions, branches, offices, services, and other subunits of the federal government. Most of these federal employees are paid according to what is called the "General Schedule" (GS). They advance within fifteen GS grades (as well as steps within those grades), moving into higher GS levels and salaries as their careers progress. At the lower levels of the U.S. Civil Service, competitive examinations are used to fill most positions. These usually involve a written test. Veterans automatically get points added to their scores. Mid-level to upper ranges of federal positions do not normally require tests; instead, applicants submit résumés online. Personnel departments then evaluate potential candidates and rank them according to how well they fit a particular job opening. it often takes six to nine months to fill a position in this manner. Persons not covered by the civil service system make up the remaining 10 percent of the federal workforce. Their positions generally fall into three categories: Appointive policy-making positions. Nearly 3,500 people are presidential appointees. Some of these, including Cabinet secretaries and under- and assistant secretaries, are subject to Senate confirmation. These appointees, in turn, are responsible for appointing high-level policy-making assistants who form the top of the bureaucratic hierarchy. These are called "Schedule C" political appointees.280 Independent regulatory commissioners. Although each president has the authority to appoint as many as one hundred commissioners, they become independent of the president's direct political influence as soon as they take office. Low-level, nonpolicy patronage positions. These types of positions generally concern administrative assistants to policy makers. More than 15,000 job skills are represented in the federal government. Government employees, whose average age is approximately forty-six years old, have a length of service averaging between fifteen and twenty years. They include forest rangers, FBI agents, foreign service officers, computer programmers, security guards, librarians, administrators, engineers, plumbers, lawyers, doctors, postal carriers, and zoologists, among others. The diversity of jobs in the government mirrors that in the private sector.

List the Powers of Congress.

The powers of Congress, found in Article I, section 8, of the Constitution, include the powers to: -Lay and collect taxes and duties. -Borrow money. -Regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the states. -Establish rules for naturalization (the process of becoming a citizen) and bankruptcy. -Coin money, set its value, and fix the standard of weights and measures. -Punish counterfeiting. -Establish a post office and post roads. -Issue patents and copyrights. -Define and punish piracies, felonies on the high seas, and crimes against the law of nations. -Create courts inferior to (below) the U.S. Supreme Court. -Declare war. -Raise and support an army and navy and make rules for their governance. -Provide for a militia (reserving to the states the right to appoint militia officers and to train militias under congressional rules). -Exercise legislative powers over the seat of government (the District of Columbia) and over places purchased to be federal facilities (forts, arsenals, dockyards, and "other needful buildings"). -"Make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States."

Explain presidential establishment: VP, Cabinet, 1st Lady, EOP, etc. and their functions/roles

The presidential establishment includes the vice president and the vice president's staff, the Cabinet, the president's spouse and the spouse's staff, the Executive Office of the President, and the White House staff. All help presidents fulfill their duties as chief executive. Vice President: When John Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail, about his position as America's first vice president, he said it was "the most insignificant office that was the invention of man ... or his imagination conceived." Historically, presidents have selected their vice presidents largely to balance—politically, geographically, or otherwise—the presidential ticket, with little thought given to the possibility that the vice president could become president. How much power a vice president has depends on how much the president is willing to give. Jimmy Carter was the first president to grant his vice president, Walter Mondale, more than ceremonial duties. In fact, Mondale was the first vice president to have an office in the White House. Cabinet: The Cabinet, which has no official basis in the Constitution but is implied by Article II, section 2, is an informal institution based on practice and precedent whose membership is determined by tradition and presidential discretion. By custom, this advisory group selected by the president includes the heads of major executive departments. Since a secretary heading an executive department automatically became a member of the president's Cabinet, powerful clientele groups, including farmers (Agriculture), business people (Commerce), workers (Labor), and teachers (Education), saw the creation of a department as a way to expand their access to the national government. Presidents Spouse: From the time of Martha Washington, the spouses of U.S. presidents (formally called the first lady, a term coined in 1849) have assisted presidents as informal advisers while making other, more public, and significant contributions to American society. Edith Bolling Galt Wilson was probably the most powerful first lady. When President Woodrow Wilson collapsed and was left partly paralyzed in 1919, she became his surrogate and decided whom and what the stricken president saw. Her detractors dubbed her "Acting First Man." Executive Office of the President: In 1939, FDR established the Executive Office of the President (EOP) to oversee his New Deal programs. Its purpose was to provide the president with a general staff to help him direct the diverse activities of the executive branch. In fact, it is a mini-bureaucracy of advisers, many of whom are located in the ornate Eisenhower Executive Office Building next to the White House on Pennsylvania Avenue as well as in the White House itself. Among the EOP's most important members in past administrations were the Council of Economic Advisers, the Office of Management and Budget, the Office of the Vice President, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and the National Security Council. White House Staff: Often more directly responsible to the president are the several hundred members of the White House staff: the personal assistants to the president, including senior aides, their deputies, assistants with professional duties, and clerical and administrative aides. Although presidents organize the White House staff in different ways, they typically have a chief of staff whose job is to facilitate the smooth running of the executive branch of government. Successful chiefs of staff also have protected the president from mistakes and helped implement policies to obtain the maximum political advantage for the president. Other important White House aides include domestic, foreign, and economic policy strategists; the communications staff; the White House counsel; and a liaison between the president and Congress.

Explain how redistricting works: gerrymandering.

The process of redrawing congressional districts to reflect increases or decreases in seats allotted to the states, as well as population shifts within a state, is called redistricting. Redistricting is a largely political process. In most states, partisan state legislatures draw district lines. As a result, the majority party in the state legislature uses the redistricting process as an opportunity to ensure formation of voting districts that protect their majority. Although the processes vary in detail, most states require legislative approval of redistricting plans. The redistricting process often involves gerrymandering—the drawing of congressional districts to produce a particular electoral outcome without regard to the shape of the district. Because of enormous population growth, the partisan implications of redistricting, and the requirement under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 for minorities to have an equal chance to elect candidates of their choice, legislators end up drawing oddly shaped districts to elect more members of their party. Redistricting Requirements: -Congressional and state legislative districts may be apportioned on the basis of population. -District lines must be contiguous; one must be able to draw the boundaries of the district with a single unbroken line. -Purposeful gerrymandering of a congressional district to dilute minority strength is illegal under the --Voting Rights Act of 1965. -Redrawing districts to enhance minority representation is constitutional if race is not the "predominant" factor. -States may redistrict more frequently than every ten years.

Explain Representational Strategies: Trustee, Delegate, Politico.

Trustee: According to Edmund Burke, a British political philosopher, a representative should be a trustee who listens to the opinions of constituents and then can be trusted to use his or her own best judgment to make final decisions. Delegate: True delegates are representatives who vote the way their constituents would want them to, regardless of their own opinions. Delegates, therefore, must be ready and willing to vote against their conscience or personal policy preferences if they know how their constituents feel about a particular issue. Politico: A third theory of representation holds that a politico alternately dons the hat of a trustee or delegate, depending on the issue. On matters of great concern to their constituents, representatives most likely will vote as delegates; on other matters, representatives will act as trustees and use their own best judgment.