POLS 1101E Chapt 6: Congress

Scheduling Debate

)Scheduling Debate -When committee reports bill to floor, the bill is put on a calendar - list of bills scheduled for action. -Each chamber has different calendars for different bill types. -House - noncontroversial bills are put on Consent Calendar (public bills) or private calendar (concerning individuals) to be passed without debate. Some pass swiftly, waving formalities. Most legislation happens this way. -House - controversial/important bills put on Union Calendar (money bills) or House Calendar (other public bills). -Committee must ask Rules Committee for a rule about how long a bill will be debated, and how. -Rule may permit germane amendments from the floor - OPEN RULE, only certain amendments (RESTRICTED RULE - specified limits), or no amendments (CLOSED RULE). -Rule may also specify the order in which the amendments are considered; favoring certain outcomes. -Majority party leaders use restricted/closed rules to keep unwanted amendments off the agenda. -Closed rules help solve the majority's prisoner's dilemma: many proposals that wouldn't be enacted piece by piece because different members would defect different sections CAN pass if they're voted on as a package. -Tight majority party control of legislative process has since become the norm, and open rules have been scarce. -In hearings, interested members may express their view. After, Rules Committee may grant an open, restricted, or closed rule, or deny a rule entirely, at least until the bill's sponsors (committee) have revised it to the Rules Committee's satisfaction. -Then, the rule must be adopted by a majority vote on the floor. -Sometimes, House kills a bill by voting against the rule. So, the Rules Committee may intentionally put an unreasonable rule. -Something rare: supporters of a bill can get a bill out of the Rules committee through DISCHARGE PETITION: brings a bill directly to the floor without even going to its committee. Can happen when signed by a majority of the House members. Senate: -Senate has no rules limiting debate or amendments. -Majority leader can exercise some agenda control by using "filling the amendment tree" device, preventing all opportunities for offering amendments in order to avoid votes party members would prefer not to cast. (In United States Senate procedure, filling the tree is the process by which a piece of legislation in the Senate has all of its possible opportunities for amendments filled by the majority leader. It is not a new tactic, but has seen an increase in prevalence over the past few decades). -This annoys the minority party, which has other tools to obstruct the majority. -So, leaders of both parties routinely negotiate UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENTS to arrange for orderly consideration. -This is similar to House Rules Committee - limits time for debate, determines which amendments are allowed, and provides for waivers of standard senate procedures. -Difference is that in Senate, minority party always has a say in this. -Without unanimous consent agreement, no limit on how long senators can talk or how many amendments they can offer. -Individuals/small groups can FILIBUSTER to halt bill action. Make long speeches until majority retreats. Have unlimited time to speak unless a CLOTURE vote is passed by 3/5 (60) of members. Cloture allows a maximum of 30 additional debate hours on a bill before vote must be taken. -Conservative southern senators used filibusters over civil rights. -Now all senators use it. -Even the threat of filibusters can stop action because Senate leaders dislike wasting time on bills not likely to pass. -Because of danger of filibustering, a support of 60 senators is needed to pass any controversial bill, except budget resolution, which is protected from filibusters by a special rule. -Unknown whether the filibuster will survive or be taken away in future years. -Members can also tie up Senate in knots by refusing to concur with unanimous consent agreements aimed to facilitate chamber work. -Senate breaks down without bipartisan cooperation. Senate: HIGHER TRANSACTION COSTS, LOWER CONFORMITY COSTS.

Joint Committees

-permanent committees with members from both chambers. -leadership rotates between the chambers at the beginning of each new congress. -these committees do not have any legislative authority; they monitor specific activities and compile reports.

2010

2010, people hated Democrats. Republicans promised to shrink the government, and abstain from EARMARKS: money set aside by congress in federal budget which individual members insert into spending/revenue bills to pay for projects in their home district. Earmarks always get public criticism as "PORK BARREL LEGISLATION" - legislation providing congress members with federal projects and programs for their individual district. House republicans adopted rules inhibiting earmarks, but didn't really stop them. Price of earmarks has increased. Most members are convinced that these local benefits do some good. Most congress members have law and business experience. Women and minorities underrepresented, but increasing. Democratic makeup of House much more diverse than Republican makeup of Senate. Congress has grown more diverse but has yet to mirror the electorate. This contributes to party polarization. Challenges that spurred members to develop modern congress fall into 2 classes: problems besetting the house and senate as organizations, and problems besetting the house and senate from competing individual and collective needs of members. Need for information: -Congress has division of labor and specialization -Committee and subcommittee staffs -Members of congress can become specialists in topics. Rewarded with preeminent influence in policy in that area. -One problem is that specialists may dominate policymaking in their domains, shutting out other members' viewpoints. Coordination: -greater the group's workload, the more eleborate the division of labor. -dividing work, directing the flow of bills, scheduling debates and votes -delegation is necessary. control over agenda (deciding what gets voted on when) is powerful. -members thus sacrifice some autonomy for efficiency (especially in the house). Resolving Conflicts: -even when there is consensus on both ends, congress must agree on the means. -party leaders build legislative coalitions. -parties in congress are ready-made coalitions, resolving conflicts in advance and reducing transaction costs. -price is the loss of autonomy, to the party and its leaders. Members suffer conformity costs, because they must do what is best for their party, not for them. Collective Action: -Congress members want to keep their party's reputation high, but also their own. -Winning reelection/advancing is important. -Tension between individual and collective political welfare (prisoner's dilemma - if I put the group before myself, will everyone else do the same?) -Congress responds to this with committee system, giving individual incentives to work for collective benefits. -As lawmaking has centraliized in parties, incentives for specialization have weakened, and not to congress's benefit!!!!!! Transaction Costs: Costs of doing politics Congress has organized itself to reduce some transaction costs - fixed rules to automate decisions - ex. SENIORITY RULE - appointing of committee chairs to members of the majority party with the most years of service. Another way to reduce Transaction costs is following precedents and rules (especially in the House) Time Pressures: -ex. One year session of congress and over 2 year tenure of each congress -If congress fails to enact a federal budget in some form each year (session), large parts of the government must shut down. -Bills not enacted by the end of its 2nd session in the "pipeline" must be reintroduced in the next congress. The House experiences organizational problems more acutely/severely than the Senate, because of the large population. So, it must follow stricter rules and leaders.

A few weeks after the 2014 midterm election would give full control of congress to Republican party...

A few weeks after the 2014 midterm election would give full control of congress to Republican party, lame duck congress enacted $1.1 trillion budget appropriation package (as a CONTINUING RESOLUTION - bill that sets aside money for specific federal government departments, agencies, and programs, in the absence of a formal budget). Negotiated behind closed doors just in time to avoid government shutdown that would occur if agencies are not given authority to spend money. -Votes on the bill were bipartisan -Opposition to bill came from the extremes of both parties. -Ted Cruz wanted to use the bill to force Obama to rescind his executive order protecting immigrants. Obama would have vetoed this, which would have resulted in a government shutdown, like the one a year prior, which Republicans had been blamed for. For upcoming presidential election, Republicans wanted to show they could do more than obstruct. House majority leader John Boeher and Senate minority (future majority leader) Mitch McConnel wanted to avoid shutdown. -Democrats who voted against the package did so for different reasons than tea party republicans - objected to provisions that eased restrictions on banking investment strategies allowing an increase in the amount of money wealthy people could contribute to organizations. -Obama preferred this bill (funded government through the next year) to anything the Republicans would pass in the next congress if the budget were left unfinished. -Bill was filled with unreleased provisions (ex. banned pot in DC), which couldn't build support on their own, but rolled into one big package, could pass. Bill had to pass, or government would be paralyzed. So, only simple majority required. Bill was a prime target for interest groups (ex. banks) wanting to pursue legislation out of public sight. -In both chambers, used procedures making amending the bill impossible. -Democrat and Republican leaders lobbied their partisans to vote for the bill. -2016 gave Republican Party full control of government. -But, factional differences between congressional Republicans and Trump would make unity difficult; challenging for Republican leadership in both chambers.

Assignment to Committee

Assignment to Committee -After introduced, a bill is given a number and assigned to a committee -Bill's members want the bill to get top numbers (1-5) -Complex bills sometimes go to several committees -Difficult bills sometimes go to temporary ad hoc committees -Speaker makes any non routine decisions to manipulate committee process. -In Senate, party leaders negotiate agreements to settle referrals. -Most bills die of neglect in committee. -Some bills are introduced "by request" (doing a favor for a constituent), but member has no interest in its fate. -Bills introduced by minority party to score political points are deliberately buried. -If committee decides on further action, bill may be taken up directly by full committee, but more commonly is referred to appropriate subcommittee.

After lots of back and forth on the rules, how are committee chairs appointed?

Based on seniority Committee chair based on seniority of majority party in the committee.

Committee Systems in House and Senate

Committee Systems in House and Senate: -Committees are subject to majority party, and committee and party systems are integrated -House committees are more powerful than Senate committees -House used to elect a temporary committee every time. -Then, switched to give more work to more permanent committees. -Speaker rewards party loyalty by assigning the person to a committee. -Transaction costs are reduced by having committee members appointed by the Speaker, not elected. -Senate was slower to set permanent committees. -Created STANDING COMMITTEES: permanent committee specializing in an area of expertise. Stable membership and jurisdiction unless explicitly disbanded. -Committee chair based on seniority of majority party in the committee. -Avoids transaction cots (avoids election, with time consuming squabbles) and Conformity Costs (avoids appointment by party leaders, which would give them too much power) -Standing committees of the House and Senate have fixed jurisdiction (always deal with the same topics), and stable membership. Both promote specialization (expertise brings influence). -Party ratios on committees generally match ratios in the House and Senate. -Legislators seize opportunities to move up to more important committees. -Money committees are at the top of both chambers. -Seats in Senate foreign relations + judiciary committees are also in demand because of senate authority over treaties + judge appointments. -House rules committee is attractive! -Least desirable - those dealing with internal administration of congress members' ethics. COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS: -Assignments made by party committees under firm control of senior party leaders. Ratified by party membership. -Members pursue assignments that allow them to serve their constituents' interests. -A party's committee members are, like party leaders, the party's agents, and party majorities use their ultimate control over committee assignments to keep their agents responsive to party desires. -Most committees are divided into subcommittees. Specialization and stable membership and fixed jurisdiction. -Committees (and subcommittees in the Senate) come with staffs of experts to help the members do their work. -In addition to standing committees, congress also forms special, select, joint, ad hoc, and conference committees. Most SPECIAL COMMITTEES (temporary legislative committee, usually lacking authority, created for specific purpose and then dissolved) and SELECT COMMITTEES (same thing) deal with problem and disappear. Some last through many congresses, though. JOINT COMMITTEES: -permanent committees with members from both chambers. -leadership rotates between the chambers at the beginning of each new congress. -these committees do not have any legislative authority; they monitor specific activities and compile reports. -In House, speaker occasionally appoints AD HOC COMMITTEES (appointed for a limited time to design and report a specific, sensitive bill). -ex. Congressional pay raise legislation. CONFERENCE COMMITTEES: temporary joint committee of House and Senate to resolve differences between House and Senate versions of a bill. -House committees used to be dominated by speaker, who appointed members and chairs. -1910 revolt transferred control to committee chairs who owed their positions to seniority, not loyalty to their party or its leaders. -By 1950s, both chambers' committees run by chairs who could ignore the wishes of party majorities. -Some Republicans and conservative democrats ran committees like dictators. -1959 young liberals formed Democratic Study Group (DSG), took control over the Democratic Caucus. -Watergate Scandal 1974 brought many new Democrats into the House. They adopted a rule forbidding any individual from chairing more than one committee/subcommittee. -Committee members and caucus, rather than chairs, assumed control over committee rules and budget. Committee nominations were transfered from: -Ways and Means Committee... TO the caucus's..... Steering and Policy Committee Caucus itself elected committee chairs in a secret ballot. So, party majority, not seniority, would now have the say in who runs committees! Produced a more fragmented committee system where HALF of Democrats in the House chairs a committee/subcommittee. Members benefited individually, but difficult to act collectively. Strengthening of the Speaker authority complemented/accompanied this, bringing Transaction costs down. But still, the net effect was a strengthened party capacity for collective action and a decline in the power of conservative southern Democrats. New Republican Majority that took over the House in 1995 revised the rules. Gave committee chairs greater control over subcommittees, authorizing them to appoint all subcommittee chairs, and control the work of majority's committee staff. But, committee chairs themselves now had to report to the Speaker and were limited to 3 consecutive terms (6 years) as chair. Returning to power in 2007, Democrat leaders in House dropped the TERM LIMITS, and generally followed seniority in choosing committee assignments. In 2011, new Republican House reinstituted term limits, but continued to choose chairs based on seniority!!!!

Congress is subject to CONDITIONAL PARTY GOVERNMENT

Congress is subject to CONDITIONAL PARTY GOVERNMENT - the degree of authority delegated to congress leaders varies with (and is conditioned by) the extent of election-driven ideological consensus among members. (a homogenous majority of members in a party vote the same way and agree on election-driven politics, AND give lots of authority to their leader. Very polarized from the other end). Congressional partisanship (disagreement) since 1950s - declined and then went back up. Proportion of "party unity" votes (most people in a party take opposite side of most people of the other party) has increased. Party coalitions have become homogeneous. Now, there is a high % of congresspeople who vote with their party's majority Ideological gap between parties is widening (has been since the 1970s). Views became stronger. Ideological polarization unites party internally, separates parties from each other, and strengthens party leaders!!!

Congressional Investigations

Congressional Investigations -Under divided government, a party's more ambitious goals are likely to be frusterated. -But, congress still has the power of oversight - can hold hearings and investigations, issue subpoenas compelling testimony from individuals in and out of executive branch, pry into any matter catching a members eye. -Members can embarrass a rival party by exposing its supposed misgovernment, and to assert congress's authority. -2006 Democrats accused Republican congress for lax oversight of Bush administration, said it had given up its status as coequal branch of government. -2006 Democrats took control of congress, but had a Republican president, so launched many investigations and hearings. Few led to legislation, but they hoped they'd expose alleged misgovernment. -4 years later, Republican congress investigated Democrat executive, peppered the white house with subpoenas. Hoped to earn political points and embarrass democrats. -Like Bush administration, the Obama administration was quick to invoke EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE (to withhold information in public interest) to avoid revealing sensitive information. -Congress Republicans may not want to expose Trump. Depends on how their relationship with him evolves.

Congressional Staff and Support Groups

Congressional Staff and Support Groups -Congress has added staff and specialized research agencies. -ex. Personal staff assistants. Almost any legislative chore (except casting formal votes) can be given to them. -Committee staffs are deeply involved. -Specialized Congressional agencies, too. -ex. Congressional Research Service (CRS) gives congress access to skilled researchers -ex. Congressional Budget office (BCO) gives economic expertise. -This way, members don't have to rely on biased information from experts of the executive branch. -Although officially bipartisan, SUPPORT AGENCIES (ex. CBO, CRS) are the most valuable to congress majority party when the other party controls the executive branch.

Davis v. Bandemer

Court case that ruled that a gerrymander would be unconstitutional if it were too strongly biased against a party's candidates (Partisan Gerrymandering) A group of Democrats challenged Indiana's 1981 state apportionment scheme on the ground of political gerrymandering. The Democrats argued that the apportionment unconstitutionally diluted their votes in important districts, violating their rights. A three-judge District Court sustained the Democrats' challenge.

Thornburg v Gingles

Court case that ruled that district lines may not dilute minority representation, but neither may they be drawn with race as the predominant consideration (Racial Gerrymandering).

DEBATE AND AMENDMENT

DEBATE AND AMENDMENT House: -Time for debate divided equally between proponents and opponents of a bill. -Each side's time controlled by floor manager, typically committee/subcommittee chair, and the opposing rank member. -If amendments are allowed, they must be germane/pertinent to the purpose of the bill. -Extraneous proposals/amendments - not allowed - RIDERS -Debate on amendments usually 5 minutes for each side. -House often debates bills as Committee of the Whole - a form of a committee - less restricted by formal procedures - ex. QUORUM: minimum number of congress members who must be present to conduct business. Quorum of each chamber is a majority of its members. -Unanimous consent ie needed to limit Senate debate (unless in case of cloture) In bill amendment debate, House quorum is 100 rather than the usual 218 majority, and a member chosen by the speaker wields the gavel. The House must revert back to itself, however, to vote on legislation. Senate: -Floor debaters change few minds. -Unlike the House, few conflicts are resolved in Senate committees/subcommittees. -Senators do much more legislating on the floor, offering amendments or complete alternatives. -Senate amendments need not even be germane/pertinent. (Can attach riders). -Important bills are sometimes passed as amendments/RIDERS to unrelated bills. -Senate is very individualistic + ethos. But, this is threatened by intensified party conflict and arrival of many veterans to the highly partisan, majority-dominated House.

Decisions in the House and Senate

Decisions in the House and Senate are made (with few exceptions) by majority vote. Majorities set rules and choose leaders. Makes incentives for members to maintain coalitions (alliances), assembled by party leaders. Members must sacrifice some independence. Reduces transaction costs, but risks high conformity costs and agency losses (party leader, as an agent representing the party, may do something that the party members don't like). Parties began to form in the 1st session of the 1st congress. -majority in house favored a program for national economic development, led by Hamilton and his federalists. Madison and Jefferson opposed this federal expansion - called Republicans, then Democratic-Republicans, then Democrats. Formal leadership established more quickly in the House. Elected by the reining majority, the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE - presiding officer. Elected at the beginning of each congressional session on a party-line vote (majority of members of a political party vote the same way). Speaker has control over legislative agenda, can appoint committees, make rules. -Chairs the RULES COMMITTEE, which controls legislation flow from other committees to the floor. -One speaker, Thomas Reed, thought of as a tyrant. But people didn't object to strong leadership then. -Then, the House revolted. Joseph Cannon (another "tyrant speaker") offended his Republican majority, which teamed up with Democrats to strip him of his power to appoint committees and chairs, and forced him off the rules committee. -This made the House more decentralized. -By weakening the Speaker, the House members chose to tolerate high Transaction costs to reduce Conformity costs. -1970s-90s: House became unified again. Democrats had majority, so they saw no problem in a strong Democrat leader. Saw small conformity costs in centralizing. -Republicans granted even more authority to their leaders when they took the house 1995. -Republican Conference ignored the seniority rule in appointing committee chairs. -The Speaker had a strong say in Committee assignments. -New Republican majority adopted the rule limiting committee chairs to 3 two-year terms. -They gave the leader a strong hand, because they wanted to keep their promise of acting on every item in the contract with America within 100 days of taking office. -1997: House Republican Unity went bad. Republican Members forced Speaker Gingrich to resign. -Then, Speaker Nancy Pelosi presided over a Democrat majority more unified than it had been in 50 years. Crucial to Obama's major legislative victories. -John Boehner came after her, and he couldn't resolve disputes between conventional and tea party conservatives. He resigned.

The number of standing committees has _____ over time.

Decreased

Speaker

Formal leadership established more quickly in the House. Elected by the reining majority, the SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE - presiding officer. Elected at the beginning of each congressional session on a party-line vote (majority of members of a political party vote the same way). Speaker has control over legislative agenda, can appoint committees, make rules. -Chairs the RULES COMMITTEE, which controls legislation flow from other committees to the floor.

HEARINGS

HEARINGS -Once committee/subcommittee decides to act, it may hold a hearing inviting people from executive branch, interest groups, etc. -Committees can investigate almost anything, including White House or Congress -Majority party may hold hearings to investigate the minority party's president or candidates. -Senate committees hold hearings to evaluate judicial, diplomatic, and senior administrative appointments. -Heavy duty falls on House Appropriations subcommittees, because government agencies have to justify their budget requests here. -Congress members set up administrative procedures giving affected interests an opportunity to protest damaging bureaucratic policies. -Congress relies on people affected by decisions, by letting the people let congress know how it's doing.

How do party leaders in congress win the support/cooperation of members?

Helping them with earmarks and campaigns for reelection

House Structure:

House Structure: Majority Party: (Democrats) Speaker Majority Leader Majority Whip Conference (everyone in majority party) Steering Committee Policy Committee National (Majority Party) Congressional Committee Minority Party: (Republicans) Minority Leader Minority Whip Caucus (all minority party members) Steering committee Policy Committee (Minority Party) Congressional Campaign Committee

House and Senate

House and Senate occupy center stage in national policy making, but constitution gives some legislative authority to president Congressional parties have become polarized. Difficult to resolve conflict when neither party has full control. Electoral politics influences almost everything congressmen do. Majority party directs congress action. Degree to which leaders exercise control depends on how internally unified the party is. RULES (specify how a bill is to be debated and amended in the House) and structure of House and Senate have an effect on power distribution and policymaking. Easier to stop thing from happening in congress than to make things happen. Even prospect of consequences of inaction doesn't guarantee action. Great Compromise balanced large states demands for national representation with small states protection of states rights. Established bicameralism. Bicameralism also achieved another compromise. Representatives popularly chosen in biennial (ever 2 years) elections held in even numbered years. -Broad suffrage and short tenure keeps House close to the people Senate much more insulated from transient shifts in public mood. -Senators would be chosen by state legislatures. -Protects government from volatility (from changing quickly). -Incorporated remnants of state sovereignty into national government. -More mature. Must be 30 years old. Required to reside in the state they represent. House representatives don't have to live in their district, but usually do. -Articles had included a senate reelection restriction, but now, no restriction. NECESSARY AND PROPER/ELASTIC CLAUSE: has given lawmakers authority over many public policy spheres Senate was granted some special powers over foreign relations. -In "advice and consent" capacity, Senate ratifies treaties and confirms presidential judge and ambassador appointments. -Framers belied the more aristocratic and insulated of the 2 houses would would keep a steadier eye on the nation's long term interests. Power to raise and spend money - bills raising revenue originate in the House, with Senate having unrestricted right to amend them. -House assumed the right to initiate spending bills. President may recommend new laws and (in emergency) call congress into special session. In Parliamentary system, the legislature chooses the executive. In US, voters given separate choices for president, senators, and representatives. Congress members elected by plurality vote. Some parliamentary systems have PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION: legislative seats are awarded to candidates/parties in proportion to % of votes received. -Party leaders in this system are powerful, because they control parliamentary careers by deciding who goes on the list (to gain seats when the party receives votes) and in what order. American legislators are elected from territorial units, not party lists. Parties do matter, and usually only major-party candidates win. But, PARTIES DON'T CONTROL NOMINATIONS. Nominees chosen by voters in primary elections. After 1790, each state was allotted 1 House seat per 33,000 inhabitants, and seats grew as the country grew. Since 1911, states have lost and gained seats to reflect population changes. -States in west and south have gained at the expense of large industry states in the northeast and midwest. STATES CAN DRAW DISTRICTS AS THEY PLEASE, but districts must have the same populations. GERRYMANDERING: produces bizarrely shaped districts - drawing legislative districts in a way to give one political party a disproportionately large share of seats for the share of votes its candidates win. Courts ruled that RACE can't be a predominant factor in drawing a district. Substantive Representation - how well congress represents the interests of the whole nation. Redistricting can cause minorities to be spread out in many districts, making many representatives defend them. But are political interests too selfish to make that happen? Constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering has been challenged in court, without success. -ex. David v Bandemer ruled it is constitutional. Racial Gerrymandering: Supreme Court requiring that legislative district lines not discriminate against racial minorities. Interpreted as directing mapmakers to design districts where racial minorities make up the majority, wherever residence patterns make it possible. Supreme Court is still deciding whether this is okay, for states like North Carolina. UNEQUAL REPRESENTATION IN SENATE: Senate has equal representation (2 senators for every state). BUT... Different states have different populations, so in this way, the 2 senator per state rule gives unequal representation. Currently favors Republicans, who tend to do better in small states. 17th Amendment changed Senator election from state legislatures to popular election. Members of congress want their party to be majority party, and want to be reelected. During much of the 19th century, electon system was party-centered. Changes in election laws and parties at turn of the century WEAKENED PARTIES AND ENCOURAGED TICKET SPLITTING - voting for candidates of different political parties for different offices. -Most important changes: primary elections -As New Deal Controversies faded and new issues like environment, abortion, civil rights, and vietnam came, party lines blurred and party loyalty in voters declined More candidate centered electoral process emerged. -This was good for incumbents defending their jobs. They made sure to do good things and show their character. -Incumbent advantage rose. Since then, it has declined sharply! Republican party has long enjoyed advantage in House, because regular votes are distributed efficiently. Democrats tend to be clustered urbanly. Republicans victory 2010 enabled them to control more redistricting. Republican states took advantage of gerrymandering opportunity. (PVI) PARTISAN VOTING INDEX (ex. for a democrat presidential candidate) = Average district level president vote - Average national level president vote Republicans wanted Democrats to have a low, negative number below -2. Means that this is a Republican district. Number of Republican districts has increased, because republicans control redistricting. Number of Democrat districts (above +2) and balanced districts (between -2 and +2) has gone down. House results matched this. Republican districts got Republican representatives, and Democrat districts got Democrat representatives. Balanced districts divided perfectly in half. This accuracy and Republican advantage remains. Democrats will find it hard to take control of House until another round of redistricting. FIRST, PARTY-CENTERED: In the earlier period, incumbents were successful because they represented districts that consistently voted for one party's candidates. THEN, CHANGE TO CANDIDATE-CENTERED: 1960s-1980s, incumbents became even more successful in winning in districts where their party didn't have a majority - states and districts had split outcomes in presidential and congressional elections. THEN, A CHANGE BACK TO PARTY CENTERED: Incumbent success went down. Now, Incumbents still win at high rates, because they represent electorate that favors their party's candidates, incumbent or not. In 2016, for the first time, every Senate contest was won by the party that won the state's electoral votes in the presidential election. -Reflects growth in party-line voting, and the inability of incumbents and candidates to separate themselves from their party's fate. Correlation between vote shares won by president and congress candidates has gotten stronger. Recent increase in party-centered electoral process leads to an increase in House+Senate polarization. Correlations between the Presidential and Congressional votes at the district and state level have become very high. (not a lot of ticket splitting now. red state voters vote for red president, representative, and senator). In the midterm elections, the president's party almost always loses congressional seats, but the size of its loss depends on performances of the national economy and the president. When things are good, the loss is fewer. Individual congress members remain more popular than a hated president or congress as a whole, but still, they suffer at the ballot box when public hostility toward president and congress grows, especially if one party controls both chambers and gets all the blame. For reelection purposes, congress members are responsive to their constituencies. CASEWORK: activity undertaken by congress members and staff to solve constituents' problems with government agencies. Senators have never been as productive as representatives at keeping jobs, and they now find it more difficult to win states where the other party is ascendant. But, because senators only deal with reelection every 6 years, as opposed to 2, House and Senate tenure evens out. When Senate incumbents do win, the margin of victory is narrow (they only win by a few votes). Why? States are more populous and diverse than congressional districts, and are more likely to have a balanced party competition. Senate races attract more talented CHALLENGERS to incumbents. Fit media markets (TV, etc) for states are better than districts at getting their message out. Senators are more associated with controversial issues, and they don't have the pressure of 2 year cycle to keep them attuned to folks at home. For reelection purposes, congresspeople want to make their constituents happy with federal funded projects in their district. Federal funding comes from constituents' tax dollars, but it is spread so thin that no one notices. This pursuit of reelection leads to logrolling between congressmen. Creates a prisoners' dilemma. When everyone follows such an individually productive strategy, all will share collective blame for overall consequences. Spending rises (because every congressman's project happens), revenues fall, majority party is blamed for wastefulness.

House majority is led by the...

House majority is led by the Speaker, whose chief assistants are MAJORITY LEADER (formal leader in the House, ranks 2nd, behind speaker. In Senate, is head of the majority party) and MAJORITY WHIP (majority party official in charge of managing communications between party leaders and members. Minorities have a whip too). -Structure of minority party - no speaker. Minority leader is the head. -Whips solve coordination problems. -Rules Committee is an instrument of the majority party. Party members give the House party leaders resources for inducing members to cooperate, and not free ride. Leaders may grant or withold these favors. Leaders control the legislative agenda. In the past, leaders have used earmarks to win the support of members. Leaders can also help with fund raising for reelection campaigns of members.

House party leaders are members' agents, not their bosses.

House party leaders are members' agents, not their bosses. -VOTERS hire and fire members. -Party leaders are elected at the beginning of every congress. -Before Gingrich, Democrats selected leaders who were experts on procedure rather than on policy, and they cared most about building coalitions. -Speaker Gingrich pursued an agenda more POLICY-CENTERED. Since then, this has been the norm for speakers of both parties. -When majority enjoys a wider margin, the minority leaders can do little. -When president of congress's minority party sits in the white house, the president has to cut deals with the majority party in congress to accomplish anything. -When the other party holds the White House, the minority can engage in unalloyed opposition, to win the majority and move up to Speakership. ???????????

Ad Hoc Committee

In House, speaker occasionally appoints AD HOC COMMITTEES (appointed for a limited time to design and report a specific, sensitive bill). -ex. Congressional pay raise legislation.

Ranking of Majority Leader in House

In the House the majority leader ranks second in the party hierarchy behind the Speaker

Introducing Legislation

Introducing Legislation -Many proposals originate outside congress (from executive branch, interest groups, constituents), but must be introduced by congress member -Bills and programs sometimes named after their author (ex. Pell) -Personal credit is valuable. Proponents of bills try to line up cosponsors both to build support (by sharing credit) and to display it (increasing chances for legislative action). Most important bills are introduced in house and senate at the same time. Parties and president (and also congress members) use legislative proposals to establish political statements. Presidents freely submit proposals they know are "dead on arrival" to establish a record their party could run on in the future.

Bipartisan

Involving agreement of 2 political parties that usually oppose each other's policies

Jurisdiction:

Jurisdiction: -Many issues belong in several committees, because they have important impacts. -Committees compete for jurisdiction over important policy areas. -Not surprising that number and type of jurisdictions of committees have changed. -Over the past century, House and Senate have trimmed their committee systems. -Legislative Reorganization Act 1946 reduced the number of standing committees, reduced overlap, and made House and Senate systems similar. -Many former committees became subcommittees. -Members must have rational reasons for why they want to have jurisdiction over something (ex. specialization) -Party leaders sometimes cope with the problem of multiple jurisdictions, by using MULTIPLE REFERRALS: sending proposed bills to more than one committee of the same chamber at the same time.

MAKING LAWS

MAKING LAWS -At every stage of bill becoming law, individual and collective (usually partisan) political interests shape the action -Easier for members to stop bills than to pass them. -Legislative politics - called "regular order." Bill Introduced by any House/Senate member - THEN, Committee and Subcommittee consider the bill (hearings) - THEN, House and Senate consider bill and vote - THEN, only In House, it goes to the Rules Committee - THEN, Conference committee resolves any differences - THEN, the bill passes in both chambers - THEN, President signs or vetoes the bill. Subcommittee holds HEARINGS. If they decide to proceed, they have MARKUPS, where the bill can be changed and voted on. If vote gets majority, penal sends the bill to the full committee. Most bills die in committee. -In House, Rules Committee decides how long a bill can be debated on the floor, and which amendments to bill, if any, will be considered. -Senate leaders often use unanimous consent agreements between 2 parties to govern floor debate. -If 2 chambers result in 2 versions of the same bill, conference committee formed -If committee agrees on one version of the bill, it is sent to both chambers for vote. -If president gets bill and does nothing while congress is in session - Pocket Veto - bill becomes law. -If president uses pocket veto when congress is not in session, bill goes away

Money Committees

Money Committees: Big jurisdictius fights are over money -In early government years, revenue and spending bills were handled by the Ways and Means in the House, and Finance in the Senate -1860s, spending power transferred to Appropriations Committee in each house to deal with demands of the civil war. -Other committees in both chambers later broke the monopoly on spending, and by 1900, authority was spread among 20 house and senate committees -Under strong speaker, this wasn't a problem for the House, but after revolt against Cannon, the Republican House majority restored the Appropriation Committee monopoly. The Senate followed. -Since then, spending is a 2 step process in each chamber. -1st step: committee with jurisdiction over a program authorizes expenditures for it. -2nd step: Appropriations Committee appropriates the money - writes a bill designating a specific sum to be spent on the program. -Sums APPROPRIATED often don't match the amounts AUTHORIZED, because more spending may be authorized than what is appropriated. -For some important programs, expenditures take the form of ENTITLEMENTS: a benefit that every eligible person has the right to receive and can't be taken away without charge in legislation or due process in court. Designates specific classes of people who are entitled. -ex. Social security, medicare, military pensions -Congress must spend whatever it takes to cover those who are eligible. -Money committees had to protect congressional majorities from collective damage that individual goals threatened to impose. -House Appropriations Committee used its power to keep members' desires for local popular projects and programs (ex. dams, highways) from pushing up taxes to intolerable levels. BUDGET REFORM: -By early 1970s, the ability of money committees to enforce self control had been damaged. -Committee reforms weakened committee leaders, and a move toward congressional "openness" - doing more business in public - made it hard for individual members to resist temptation to promote locally popular projects of doubtful value. -At the same time, Nixon impounded (refused to spend) some funds authorized and appropriated by congress to subvert spending priorities of its Democratic majorities. -He even impounded appropriations passed over his veto. -He posed challenges to the House and Senate and their democratic majorities. -1974 congress responded with BUDGET AND IMPOUNDMENT CONTROL ACT. -This established Budget Committee in each chamber to oversee taxing and spending policies. -System compeled members to vote on explicit levels of taxation, expenditures, and deficits, taking responsibility for consequences of many separate decisions. -This subjected the presidential impoundment to congressional control, and tried to make the impoundment unnecessary. -Congress proved incapable of preventing huge deficits (shortfalls) produced by budget policies in 1980s and 1990s -Partisan conflict between Republican presidents and Democrat congresses. -Regan and HW Bush tried to keep taxes low. -Congress Democrats wanted to spend on popular programs. -Budget was left unbalanced. -Attempts to reduce deficit failed repeatedly. -So, the President and congress chipped away at deficit with tax increases and spending cuts. -Still, the budget did not come to a balance. -By 1998, economy had produced so much in tax revenues that the budget was in surplus. -As spending rose with the costs of homeland security and war on Afghanistan and Iraq, deficits returned. -Severe recession 2007 produced huge budget shortfalls, made deep spending cuts the goal when Republicans took control of House 2011. -Democrats wanted new tax revenues to balance the cuts, leading to major shutdown 2012. -Partisan politics dominates the budgeting process, and rules don't stop congressional majorities from finding a way to do what they want. -Budgeting remains a challenge. Deficits: shortfalls. When congress doesn't have enough money. (when taxing on the people is too low or there is a recession and the people can't pay, so congress isn't getting revnue. and spending is high (because congress must pay for programs), so congress is spending money, and is left with a shortfall). -ex. Republican president (like Reagan and Bush) keep taxes down, but Democrat majority in congress wants to spend a lot on programs. So you get a deficit. Opposite: Congress has excess money but isn't spending a lot on it.

Special Committees

Most SPECIAL COMMITTEES (temporary legislative committee, usually lacking authority, created for specific purpose and then dissolved) and SELECT COMMITTEES (same thing) deal with problem and disappear. Some last through many congresses, though.

Evolution of incumbent advantage

Near end of 19th century as we shifted from party-centered to candidate-centered politics, Incumbent advantage rose. Since then, it has declined sharply!

Some examples of Congress Coalitions

Parties are the most important Congress Coalitions, but there are others. Some are ideological, some are based on demographics (ethnicity, gender). Called CAUCUSES. Groups reflect the value of ready-made alliances in a system where success depends on building majority coalitions.

Multiple Referrals

Party leaders sometimes cope with the problem of multiple jurisdictions, by using MULTIPLE REFERRALS: sending proposed bills to more than one committee of the same chamber at the same time.

RECONCILING DIFFERENCES:

RECONCILING DIFFERENCES: -Once passed, bill is sent to other chamber, if some version has not already been passed there. -If 2 different versions pass, Conference Committee needed, usually made up of committee members most involved for and against legislation. -Then, it must go back to both chambers for majority vote. -Conference committees supposed to reconcile differences without adding or subtracting from the bill. -Once conference reaches agreement, they report details to each chamber. Report is privileged - can be considered on the floor without being scheduled. -Sometimes, one or both chambers send conferences back to work again. If differences can't be reconciled, the bill dies. -They usually take it, though. -Use of conference committee has declined in recent years. -Conference committee process has become victim of polarized partisan welfare that has put law deal making in the hands of party senior leaders. So, it is used less now.

Discharge Petition

Something rare: supporters of a bill can get a bill out of the Rules committee through DISCHARGE PETITION: brings a bill directly to the floor without even going to its committee. Can happen when signed by a majority of the House members.

REPORTING A BILL

REPORTING A BILL -If subcommittee decides to act, it marks up (edits) the bill and reports it to the full committee. After that, reported to the floor. -Subcommittees provide division of labor. -Unless political points can be scored, no one wants to waste time on a bill that has no chance of passing. -If bill cannot attract support from at least the majority party committee members, its chances on House/Senate floor are slim. -If amendments and compromises can be made, chances are strong. -So, Committee system also divides labor of coalition building. -WRITTEN REPORT accompanies every bill reported out of committee. Most important source of information of legislation for members of congress not on the committee. Summarizes purpose, provisions, changes from existing law, arguments for and against the bill.

Senate Structure:

Senate Structure: Majority party (Republicans): President Pro Tempore (resides in the absence of Vice President) Majority Leader Assistant Majority Leader (Majority Whip) Conference (all Republicans) Policy Committee National Republican Senatorial Committee Minority party (democrats): Minority Leader Assistant Minority Leader (Minority Whip) Conference (all Democrats) Policy Committee Steering and Outreach Committee Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee

THE VOTE

THE VOTE -Fate of legislation is often described by a series of votes, rather than a single vote -Opponents may propose "killer" amendments, which, if passed, would make the bill unacceptable to the otherwise supportive majority -Opponents may recommit the bill - send it back to committee for modification or burial - before the final vote. -Senate 1789-1806 - had a motion to "move the previous question," which if adopted by simple majority ended the debate and compelled a final vote on the matter. Then, they took it away, and 3 decades later, minority senators realized they could filibuster. -1806-1917, a single senator could block action by refusing to end debate. Then, 2/3 cloture was invented. 1975 switched to 3/5. -Filibuster has become realistic (because we now have cloture) method for a polarized senate. -Both parties have contemplated switching cloture to a simple majority, or removing the filibuster altogether. -But a frustrated minority still has other ways of harassing the majority. -Advice of constituents and colleagues has the most impact on how members vote -Idea is to cast an EXPLAINABLE VOTE, one that can be defended publicly if it's brought up to a challenger in future campaign. -Most constituents know and care little about these issues. The minority that does care varies issue to issue, with specific special interests in mind. -So, congress intense minorities often prevail over apathetic majorities. -ex. There is still a lack of gun control, because of this. -President can have much more influence over bill votes when he can persuade members of his party to stick with the team or by cutting deals with pivotal members. -House and Senate leaders also have limited influence at this stage. Leaders exercise greater influence at earlier stages through agenda control. -Leaders must construct bills their party members will support, so that in the time of the vote, they will vote for it. If they fail, few members will put party loyalty ahead of their constituents' views except under the most intense pressure on the party's most important bills. ROLE CALL VOTE: vote taken by a call of roll to determine whether a quorum is present, to establish quorum, or to vote on a question. -Usually House uses its electronic voting system, but when the system is malfunctioning, speaker directs clerk to read names. Senate roll is always called by clerk. -In House, unrecorded voice votes may be cast, but at the request of at least 20 members, roll call vote is taken. -Members insert a card into one of over 40 stations and press a button for "yea," "nay," or "present" (did not take side) -Senators just announce votes when names are called for role. -Senators may also take unrecorded voice votes, but a recorded roll call vote is taken if any senator requests it.

THE SPEAKER APPOINTS COMMITTEE MEMBERS IN HOUSE.

TRUE

The Senate has been slower to develop formal leadership positions.

The Senate has been slower to develop formal leadership positions. PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE: in the absence of the Vice President, he is the formal presiding officer. The honor is usually given to the most senior member of the majority party, but the post is sometimes rotated among majority party seniors. Vice President rarely presides, and the President Pro Temper is a temporary position. Minority Party has a greater influence in the Senate, because so much of that body's business is conducted under UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENTS - ex. unanimous consent used to restrict debates and make bill amendments. Still, the majority party is at an advantage, because its leader controls the Senate agenda. General rule: the capacity of the House and Senate party leaders to lead depends on the party members' willingness to follow. Parties are the most important Congress Coalitions, but there are others. Some are ideological, some are based on demographics (ethnicity, gender). Called CAUCUSES. Groups reflect the value of ready-made alliances in a system where success depends on building majority coalitions.

Is there a limit on the number of terms a congress member can serve?

There are no limits on how many terms a Representative or Senator may serve. A movement started in the 1980s to limit the number of terms, but nothing yet.

The bill goes to the president!

The bill goes to the president! -If president ignores the hill while congress is in session, for 10 days, not counting Sundays, bill becomes law -If congress adjourned before 10 days are up, bill fails because of POCKET VETO -When president vetoes, usually sends a statement to congress of why -Congress override - 2/3 in each chamber -This success is rare, because president can usually muster some support of the veto. -When president thinks he'll get overriden, he doesn't use the veto. It'd expose his weakness. -Congress doesn't usually put time into a bill that will die on the president's desk. -Exception is when congress majority wants to stake out a position to score political points.

Electorate

The voting population

Who appoints committees?

There are three types of House Committees, these are: standing committees elected by members of the House, select committees appointed by the Speaker of the House, and. joint committees whose members are chosen according to the statute or resolution that created that committee. In Senate: special and select committees appointed by president pro tempore Members are appointed to standing committees by the Committee on Assignments and, with some exceptions, a member may not be removed from a standing committee after he/she has been appointed.

UNORTHODOX LAWMAKING PROCEDURES

UNORTHODOX LAWMAKING PROCEDURES -Bill process imposes high transaction costs, conferring a strong bias in favor of status quo/against action -To stop minority party from obstructing action, majority party leaders have moved to unorthodox bill procedures -ex. House - rules to structure debate and minimize minority influence, overriding drafting committees, rewriting bill in conference committee, and combining bills into huge ominous packages -ex. Senate - most unorthodox - filibuster - requires supermajority for cloture. Majority senate leaders have responded by minimizing damage by filling the amendment tree. Unorthodox lawmaking requires heavy investment of leaders' resources. -Only a limited number of measures can receive such treatment, thus enhancing the STATUS QUO BIAS of legislative politics. -Proposals can always be reintroduced, though. -Also, laws are always subject to revision or appeal by a later Congress. -Victory and defeats are usually partial and temporary. Makes cooperation possible. -Most people approve of the constitution's institutional arrangements. -Americans usually like their own representatives and senators more than the institution itself. -Public usually hates congress. -Politics involves compromise. Alternative (stalemate) often equally scorned by public. -Congress difficulty in agreeing reflects the absence of public consensus on what should be done. -Congress poor reputation arises from pluralism nature. -When minorities defeat majorities, it is because minorities invest more political resources. -Groups win when they care the most. -Also means special interests defeat general interests. -Public approves congress more when there is bipartisan agreement between the president and congress. -ex. Approval went up after 9/11. -Since 2011, fewer than 1/6 of Americans approve of congress's performance. 2016 congress faces challenges from Trump administration dedicated to disrupting federal government.

How to limit the amount of time a senator can speak?

Unanimous consent agreement before debate starts Or, once debate starts and someone starts filibustering... CLOTURE vote is passed by 3/5 (60) of members. Cloture allows a maximum of 30 additional debate hours on a bill before vote must be taken.

Wesberry v. Sanders

Wesberry v. Sanders, 376 U.S. 1, was a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled that districts in the United States House of Representatives must be approximately equal in population. The case was brought by James P. Wesberry, Jr., against Georgia Governor Carl Sanders. Wesberry alleged that the population of the Georgia's Fifth Congressional District, his home district, was two to three times larger than that of other districts in the state, thereby diluting the impact of his vote relative to other Georgia residents in violation of the United States Constitution. On February 17, 1964, the court ruled 6-3 in favor of Wesberry, finding that congressional districts must have nearly equal populations in order to ensure that "as nearly as is practicable, one man's vote in a congressional election is to be worth as much as another's

Casework

activity undertaken by congress members and staff to solve constituents' problems with government agencies.

Seniority Rule

appointing of committee chairs to members of the majority party with the most years of service.

Pluralism

competing interests ; (Second definition): several sources of authority

Partisan

lack of cooperation between parties

Pork Barrel Legislation

legislation providing congress members with federal projects and programs for their individual district.

Earmarks

money set aside by congress in federal budget which individual members insert into spending/revenue bills to pay for projects in their home district.

Conference Committees

temporary joint committee of House and Senate to resolve differences between House and Senate versions of a bill.

Rule for Cloture:

three-fifths of senators, or sixty, must vote for cloture to halt a filibuster except on presidential nominations to offices other than Supreme Court Justice

Ticket Splitting

voting for candidates of different political parties for different offices.

Lecture Notes

· Constitutionally, congress is most important branch of government, because supposed to be most responsive to the people. Why? · Frequency of elections · Elections aren't a big feature of the constitution. Leaves scheduling and rules up to the states. · Number of districts chosen by the census, which happens every 10 years · "At large elections:" when states are so unpopulated that they only have one district (and only one rep: Wyoming) · How candidates are selected varies state to state, but usually it has something to do with political parties · Cost of elections is rising · Incumbent at an advantage. Has done past casework (usually done by congressional staffers and includes: answering questions about how to get gov benefits) and has provided jobs for constituents, like government jobs (PATRONAGE), or indirect employment through gov contracts for programs within a district (earmarks, pork barrel programs: much less common now). · Being an incumbent helps them raise money · Each elected congressman is allowed $100,000 and free postage to send out election materials. Called the FRANKING PRIVILEGE. · Over past 60 years, almost 90% of members of House got reelected. · Senate has been more volatile, but even in 1980, more than 50% of sitting senators kept their jobs. · "Electoral Connection" book had the idea that congressmen were motivated by desire to get reelected. Provides framework for understanding their activities -Advertising: congressmen work to develop their personal brand so they are recognizable to voters. -Credit claiming: get things done to say they did. -Position taking: take a public stance on issues. Senators can filibuster. House can hold hearings, and members can publically support a hearing to associate themselves with the idea. · House and Senate are both divided up into committees. The committees you hear about most are the standing committees. Relatively permanent, handle day to day business. House has 19 and Senate has 16. Reps and Senators serve on multiple committees. Each has a chair who is the one who gets mentioned in press · Special/Select committees: some are temporary, some are permanent. Some only have ADVISORY FUNCTION, so they can't write laws. · Most Joint Committees are standing committees and they don't do a lot, although the joint committee on the Library oversees Library of Congress. · Congressmen want to be on a committee involving issues of his constituents. Wants to build up his brand for reelection. · Congress hasn't changed much, but has sometimes tried to tweak the system · Proposal power: any member can propose a bill. But it has to go to committee first. · The chair of the committee determines the agenda by choosing which issues get considered · In House, Speaker refers bills to specific committees, but committee chair has some discretion over whether or not to act on the bills. GATEKEEPING AUTHORITY. · Committee chairs also manage writing a bill: MARK-UP. And the vote on the bill in the committee. Needs a majority of committee. · Rarely, committee members can be forced to vote for bill and bring it to floor: DISCHARGE PETITION · Gatekeeping Authority is Congress's most important power, but it also has oversight power: an authority to check up on how law is being implemented. -Can assign staff to scrutinize a law or policy, and hold hearings. · Biggest changes under Speaker Newt Gingrich 1994. Increased power of Speaker, who was already pretty powerful. · Number of subcommittees were reduced · Seniority rules in appointing chairs were changed · Before him, chair was the longest serving member of majority party, which for most of 20th century was Democrats. · He changed it so congress holds votes to choose the chairs. The speaker has a lot of influence over who gets chosen on these votes, which happen more regularly because the Republicans also impose terms limits on chairs. · Being able to offer chairmanship to loyal party members gives Speaker more influence over committees. · Speaker also now had more power to refer bills to committee and act as gatekeeper. · 2 types of congressional staff: staff assistants that each member has to help him w/ job of being a legislator, and Staff agencies that work with congress as a whole. · Some staff do research and write legislation, while others respond to constituents' requests · Specialized staff agencies: ex. Congressional Research Service (CRS) supposed to perform unbiased factual research for congresspeople and their staff. Government Accountability Office: branch of congress that can investigate the finances and administration of any gov administrative office. Congressional Budget Office (CBO) asseses likely causes and impact of legislation. "Scoring a bill:" Looks at the cost of a particular bill. · Congressional Reforms 1994 increased number of individual staff, and reduced the staff of the staff agencies. So, more legislation comes out of the offices of individual members. · Caucus System in congress: semi formal groups of members organized around particular identies or interests. Don't have an official function in legislative process. · Caucuses, staff, and committees all exist to make lawmaking more efficient. Committees and staff allow individual legislators to develop expertise. Committees also help members build an identity for reelection. · When congress isn't getting much done, being in a committee is a way to distinguish yourself · Speaker: leader of the house. 3rd most powerful person in the country. Speaker always elected by whichever party has majority. This election takes place every 2 years. · Speaker has 2 assistants to help run the house. Majority Whip has primary task of counting votes on important pieces of legislation, and making party members vote along with their party. Third in line is House Majority Leader, who helps majority, and is chosen by the speaker because he is popular among factions within the party. · Minority leader: de facto spokesperson for minority party in House. · Leader of Senate is majority leader. Elected by the members of his party. Minority leader is the minority part's spokesperson. · VP presides when there is nothing better to do. When he is away, President Pro Tempore presides. Ceremonial role given to senior (longest serving, not necessarily oldest) member of majority party. · Primary way leaders in both House and Senate exercise power is through committee assignment. Speaker of House is especially powerful in this way. · Party leaders very influential in deciding how debate happens and what is debated. How debate happens is actually decided by Rules Committee in House, though. · Agenda Setting is often a negative power, which means that it is exercised by keeping items OFF the agenda, rather than putting them ON. · Congressional leaders also have great access to the press. · When speaker calls a press conference, reporters show up, and Majority Leader can usually get on TV. · Each chamber of congress has a special campaign committee, and whoever chairs it has the ability to shift campaign funds to the race that needs it the most, or to the member he most wants to reelect. · Leaders have no trouble raising money, because donors want to give to proven winners who have a lot of power. This is more true in the House. Frequently leades have extra campaign money to give. Often, donations are given to PACs. · If one party controls both chambers and the presidency, like Democrats 2008-2009, that party is much more likely to get things done. · The party that is the majority in each chamber is also the majority on all of that chamber's committees, or at least the important ones. · When party is unified, easier for leader to set an agenda and get membership to stick to it. Without unity, can't get much done. (ex. 2011: Tea Party conservatives blamed conservative Boehner for siding w/ Democrats). · Bills can start in either chamber, except for revenue bills, which must start in HOUSE · Bill referred to committee, who writes up the bill in formal, legal language (CALLED A MARKUP), and vote on it. · Open Rules make it much less likely for bills to pass because opponents of bill can add clauses that make it hard for proponents/supporters of the bill to vote for. · If bill wins majority on the floor of one chamber, it then goes to the other chamber. · House has an extra step. Before bill goes to the floor, must go to the RULES COMMITTEE, which reports it out to the House. · Usually, second chamber to get the bill will want to make some changes. So, Congress Committee attempts to reconcile both versions and come up w/ new version: compromise bill. · Then sent back to both chambers for majority vote · Pocket Veto option for president is only available at the end of a congressional term. · So, Congress can avoid pocket veto by sending bill to him before that 10 day period. · Override is rare, but happens. Ex. Taft-Hartley Act of 1953 passed over Truman veto. · First place a bill can die is at the hand of the Speaker or majority leader, who refuses to refer it to a committee. · In Senate, leader can also kill a bill by refusing to schedule a vote. Also someone can filibuster until the bill is tabled. · House Rules Committee can kill a bill by not creating a rule for debate. Or the entire House can vote to recommit the bill to committee, so it will die or change a lot. (HOUSE RULES COMMITTEE DECIDES OPEN, RESTRICTED, OR CLOSED RULE, AND THEN THE FLOOR MUST VOTE TO APPROVE THAT RULE. SENATE HAS NO RULES FOR LIMITING DEBATE AND AMENDMENTS, SO OTHER THINGS ARE USED. UNANIMOUS CONSENT, LEADER FILLING THE AMENDMENT TREE, AND W/ 3/5, CLOTURE). · Veto Gates/Hurdles: the many ways a bill can be killed. · Veto gates are purely procedural, so they don't draw a lot of attention from the media. · Easiest way for congress to kill a bill is to not vote or not even schedule a vote. · Procedural hurdles like committees and filibusters were also added so that tyrannical bills wouldn't pass. The Gerrymandering Movie · Each district elects one representative · As country's population grows, districts are added and redrawn every 10 years · Republicans gerrymander by packing many democrats together into a few districts when they draw district lines, and cleverly drawing district lines in a way to spread out enough Republicans that a Republican representative will be elected in many districts · One possible solution is a council with both Democrats and Republicans, to compromise on district boundaries that work for everyone equally. But, the same people would be on this council for a long time (incumbent advantage). Citizens and representatives want different things · Citizens want elections where the candidates have to earn their vote. Close elections where either candidate has a chance of winning · Representatives want safe elections where they run in a range with many supporters · So, Bipartisan committees are not enough to fix gerrymandering · 3 other options: · 1. Set up a politically independent commission of appointed experts or judges to draw the boundaries. Still not ideal, because they usually group similar areas together (democrats in their districts, republicans in their districts), so that elections are uncompetitive. And, they might not actually be independent (ex. Republican judges). · 2. Shortest Split-Line Method: Mathematically divide an area into equally populous ranges. Better than first solution, but does run risk of producing skewed election results just through pure bad luck of where the boundaries are drawn. · 3. Proportional Gerrymandering: Let gerrymandering happen, but this time, pay him to make the winners most closely match the voters as a whole. (So, in districts w/ more democrats, a democrat will win election). Best way to avoid worst problem of gerrymandering, which is disproportionate representation.

Powerpoint Notes

· Local news coverage: more coverage of local representative and events that benefit locally. Take stories straight from members; VNR, columns by the member, rarely including opposing views · National coverage: does not mention average member; focus on the institution (frequently negatively); tends to get statement from both parties · Press bias toward conflict/negativity. Focus on winning and losers. Don't emphasize the successful negotiations. Simple bias, when in reality, congress much more complex. · Basic structure of Congress is product of Great Compromise at Constitutional Convention · 2 year term for House was a compromise between the annual elections advocated by many delegates and the 3 year term proposed by Madison. · SENATE HAS UNRESTRICTED RIGHT TO AMEND REVENUE BILLS (WHICH ORIGINATE IN THE HOUSE) · Minimum age for House members set at 25 years. 30 for Senate. · House members required to have been citizens for at least 7 years. Senate: 9 years. · Representatives do not have to reside in the districts they serve, but they usually do. · After first census 1790, each state was allotted one House seat for every 33,000 inhabitants for a total of 105 seats. · In 1911, House membership became fixed at 435. · Size of each state's House representation may change after each census taken every 10 years. · But each state draws the lines that divide its territory into the requisite number of districts. · In 1964, Supreme Court Wesberry v Sanders ruled that districts must have equal populations · If one party controls the legislature and the governorship, it may attempt to draw lines to favor its own candidates: GERRYMANDERING. · Davis v Bandemer (1986), Court held a gerrymander unconstitutional if it were too unfair to one of the parties. And yet no districting scheme was run afoul of this vague standard. · Average House member represents 714,000 people · 9 largest states are home to 51% of total US population. Leads to unequal representation. · Primary goal of congress members: keep their jobs! · 19th and first half of 20th century: dominance of party-centered electoral politics. · Post WWII Era of democratic majorities in congress coincided w/ emergence of a candidate-centered pattern of electoral politics · Republican takeover of Congress 1994 coincided w/ some resurgence of party-centered · In Party-Centered, parties controlled who was nominated, and monopolized political organization through a system of precinct and block captains held together with the rewards of patronage. Parties controlled flow of info to the voter through pass media. -To be successful, candidate had to serve long apprenticeship, working his way up in the party apparatus · Shift to candidate-based campaigns since 1968 Democratic National Convention · Candidate-centered: (political independent entrepreneurs): favored by Democrats throughout second half of 20thcentury -Electronic mass media in 8 second sound bites on network news and 30 second spot commercials in campaigns · Today's parties appear to be at the mercy of candidates. · The candidate's views are what counts, and they may change from day to day in response to the perceived needs of the campaign. · Modern campaigns are candidate centered, and each candidate must rely on his own resources. Candidate must have the abilities of a game show host, and he must either be wealthy or be on very good terms with those who are. · Root causes of the critical shift are technological change and reform politics, particularly 20th century Progressive Movement. · But, there has been some return to party-centered. 1990s: · Candidates run more as a party team, emphasizing national issues and a common program of action. (Republicans liked this because under the other model they did not win often). · During long period of Democratic majorities, members of both parties won election to congress and stayed their due to their own efforts. -Ran under party label but campaigns were personal and centered on local interests and values. -Local component was not always dominant. · Party line voting during much of the 19th century (1800s). When parties weakened, ticket-splitting. · Decline in party loyalty among voters offered incumbents a chance to win votes that once would have gone routinely to the other party's candidate. So, they decided to increase their chances by giving themselves greater resources for servicing their districts. · If incumbency is so advantageous, why do electoral worries do so much to shape congressional life? Because the incumbency advantage does not accrue automatically. It stems from diligent use of the many resources that come with holding office. · Despite engaging in same constituency-building activities, Senators are 3 times more likely to lose their seats than House incumbents, and win by narrower margins (just barely). WHY? States are more populous and diverse than congressional districts. Most senators are unable to develop the personal ties to constituents that House members do! States (more so than districts) have balanced party competition. · Senate races attract more experienced, politically talented, well-financed challengers · States have media markets that make it easier for challengers to get their message out. Senator incumbents more readily associated w/ controversial and divisive issues. · Electoral logic induces members to promote narrowly targeted programs, projects, or tax breaks for constituents, without worrying about the impacts of such members on spending or revenues. Pork Barrel Legislation. · Logrolling can lead to Prisoner's Dilemma. · Electoral incentives make legislators hesitant to impose direct costs on identifiable groups in order to produce greater but more diffuse benefits to ALL US CITIZENS (ex. pollution regulation, free trade. Costs are concentrated, benefits are diffused). Congress members only worry about benefiting THEIR OWN constituents so they can get reelected. · At times, congressional majorities have been able to solve this dilemma, by: -Delegating authority to the bureaucratic agencies or state governments. (Make THEM be the bad guys and impose the costs on the people). -Framing choices in a way that highlight credit for the general benefits, while NOT highlighting congress as responsible for the costs. -The trick is to make the electoral payoffs from disregarding special interests to benefit a broader public outweigh the costs (and maybe to buy off most vocal potential opponents). · To exercise the powers conferred on them by Constitution, House and Senate had to solve some basic problems: -How to acquire information -How to coordinate action -How to resolve conflicts -How to get members to work for common goals (not just personal goals). · Coordination problem: coordination becomes more difficult (and necessary) the greater the group's workload and the more elaborate its division of labor. · Congress has used its party leaders to act as traffic cops, giving them power to manage business of legislating and agenda control. Members sacrifice some autonomy. · Agreeing requires successful politicking: getting people who are pursuing divergent, conflicting ends to take a common course of action. · The tension between individual and collective political welfare - standard prisoner's dilemma - pervades congressional life · But, committee system gives members individual incentives to work for collective beneficial ends -Become well informed on the issue and contribute to collective good: be rewarded by having influence over that policy · The 2 most crucial institutional structures created to exercise Congress's constitutional power are: -The parties -The committee system · Without them, it would be difficult to overcome the barriers to effective collective action. · House leaders are agents, not bosses. These leaders used to be the experts on procedure and coalition builders, but today the leadership is more policy and ideologically focused. · For minority party in House, legislative leadership is less important, because the party's legislative role is modest. · When party balance is close, minority House leaders can sometimes influence legislation by forming alliances w/ more moderate members of majority party. Rare in recent congress. · When party balance is not close, House minority leaders can: Cooperate w/ majority, exert some influence, and get little credit, OR oppose and attack and position party for future elections · Senators have never delegated as much authority to their leaders as have representatives. Norm of equality (ambassadors from their states to the national government) led them to retain wider freedoms of individual action. · Neither the VP nor President Pro Tempore is a real leadership role in the Senate · It was not until 19th century that senators delegated some authority to party leaders. The positions of majority leader and minority leader were not formalized until 1913. Senate leader power+influence depended on their political skills and the extent of intraparty divisions. · Senate party leadership more collegial and less formal than House · The first congresses delegated authority to committees sparingly. Instead, to do their work, the first congresses would turn into a committee of the whole. Have the entire body act as a committee w/ flexible rules. Frame piece of legislation, elect a temporary committee to draft the bill, then debate and amend the bill line by line. · After that they would rise as the House and vote on the bill. This was a very cumbersome (difficult) process. · So, 1809 House created 10 permanent committees to which it delegated more work. By 1825, 28 were in place. · Transaction costs were further reduced by having committees appointed by the Speaker, rather than elected. · Senate was slower to set up permanent committees. But, despite their small numbers and lighter workload, senators eventually turned to standing committees. 12 established by 1816. By 1841, there were 22. · In Senate, seniority rule became the criterion for selecting committee chairs. This avoided intraparty squabbles and kept power out of the hands of party leaders. · House and Senate Standing Committees embody Congress's division of legislative labor. Fixed jurisdictions, stable membership, specialization. · A member in good standing cannot be forced off a standing committee, unless his or her party suffers large electoral losses; party ratio in the chamber determines partisan committee makeup. · Members can leave committees, generally to go to a better committee · Joint Committees: permanent, composed of members of both chambers. Leadership positions rotate between the chambers at beginning of each congress. Ex. Library (overseas Library of Congress) and Printing (overseas Gov Printing Office). Gather info and oversee executive. Do not report legislation. · In House, does international trade policy fall within jurisdiction of Commerce Committee or International Relations Committee? Committees and subcommittees compete for jurisdiction over important policy areas. · Multiple referrals: sending bills, in whole or piece by piece, to several committees at same time or in a sequence. Used to cope w/ problem of multiple jurisdiction. · In recent congresses, about 20% of all bills and 34% of major bills have been subject to multiple referrals · Draft proposal: Only members may submit legislation to House or Senate · Proponents of bills often try to line up cosponsors both to build support (share credit) and display it (increasing chances for legislative action). · After bill is introduced, assigned a number and referred to a committee. HR in House. S in Senate. · Most bills die of neglect (in committee) · Hearings provide a formal occasion for congress to MONITOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE LAWS AND PROGRAMS IT ENACTS. -Heaviest duty falls on Appropriations subcommittees in the House. -Gov agencies have to justify their budget requests to these panels every year. · In House, Controversial or important bills placed on UNION CALENDAR (Money bills) or House Calendar (other public bills). Noncontroversal bills go on Consent Calendar (public bills) or Private Calendar (bills concerning individuals). · Once 3/5 cloture happens, 30 additional hours of debate on bill allowed before vote is taken. Even the threat of a filibuster can be a potent tool. More routine today. · RIDERS ARE NEVER ALLOWED IN HOUSE · Floor debates do not change many minds because politicians are rarely swayed by words. These activities are for the public. · In Senate, floor action does more to shape legislation. Bills change on Senate floor, more than in the House. Amendments need not be germane. · House: unrecorded voice votes may be cast, but at request of at least 20 members a recorded roll call vote is taken · Usually conference committees made up of members most actively involved for and against legislation (from standing committees) · Supposed to reconcile differences without adding or subtracting from legislation. In practice, sometimes they do both · Size of conference committee depends on complexity of bill · If bill gets far, it is likely to make it through. (Rare that it will get sent back again to conference committee to die).