Processes Of Congress
I. How a Bill Becomes A Law
- Bills travel at different speeds
- Money bills or tax/regulations move slow
- Bills with a clear, appealing idea move fast
- Complexity of legislative process helps opponents
- Introducing a bill
- By member of Congress
- Congress initiates most legislation
- Presidentially DRAFTED legislation is shaped by Congress
- Resolutions
- simple – passed by one house affecting the house
- concurrent – passed by both houses affecting both
- joint
- Essentially a law passed by both houses, signed by President
- If used to propose constitutional amendment – two-thirds vote in both houses, president’s signature unnecessary
- Role of Leadership
- House/Senate – set agenda, decide which bills will come to floor
- Access to the Floor
- Senate – ranking committee members influence allocation of time
- House – Chair can “refuse to recognize”
- BE NICE TO SPEAKER
- Role of Committee
- Referred to committee by Speaker or presiding officer
- Revenue bills must originate in the House
- Most die in committee
- Multiple referrals – limited after 1995
- Mark-up bills are revised by committees
- Committee reports a bill out to chamber
- if not reported out, House can use “discharge petition” (discharge motion in Senate)
- usually unsuccessful
- bill is placed on calendar
- House Rules Committee – sets rules for consideration (see handout)
- can move to suspend rules
- Floor Debate
- House
- Committee of the Whole – procedural device for expediting house consideration of bills (Cannot Pass bills)
- Reduces Quorum to 100 (from 218)
- Committee sponsor of bill organizes discussion
- Lead supporter, opponent given time
- Can dole out in small increments to anyone wishing to speak on bill
- No real “surprises” – Speaker can choose to not recognize individuals (germaneness)
- House usually passes sponsoring committees version of bill
- Senate
- No rule limiting germaneness
- Committee hearing process can be bypassed by a senator with a “rider”
- Debate can only be limited by “cloture” vote (60 Senators)
- Filibuster – unlimited debate, easier to stage now
- Can be curtailed by “double-tracking”, shelving bill to continue on to other business
- Roll Call votes replacing long speeches
- Logrolling
- Practice of using reciprocal agreements (usually through trading votes), to gain passage of a bill
- Unites parties that have nothing in common other than desire to exchange support (unlike bargaining)
- Voting Procedures
- House
- voice vote
- division (standing) vote
- roll-call vote
- teller vote
- Senate – same, no teller
- Differences in bills between houses
- if minor, last house merely sends to other for acceptance
- if major, conference committee appointed
- 10-15% of bills
- Senate usually wins
- Conference reports bill back fo each house
- report can only be accepted/rejected, no amendments
- Finally – Goes to President
- may sign
- Can veto, returns to house of origin
- 2/3rds to override (either house)
- Veto sustained 96% of time
II. How Members Vote
- Representational View
- Assumes members vote to please constituents
- Constituents must have clear opinion of issue (vote must attract attention – IRAQ WAR)
- Civil rights, social welfare bill
- Weak correlation to foreign policy
Can anyone identify any votes that fit these criteria that have come up in local elections?
- Constituency important in Senate, unknown in House
- members in marginal districts as independent as those in safe districts
- Weaknesses of this explanation: No clear opinion in the constituency on most issues
- Organizational View
- Assumes members vote to please colleagues, gain status, prestige
- Cues
- Party
- Ideology
- Party Members on sponsoring cmtes
- Problem is party and other organizations do not have clear position on all issues
- On minor votes, most members influenced by party members on cmtes.
- Attitudinal View
- assumes ideology affects a legislators vote
- House members tend to have opinions more similar to American voters WHY???
- 1970s – Senators more liberal
- 1980s – More conservative
III. Reforming Congress
- Numerous proposals
- Representative or Direct Democracy?
- Framers: Reps refine, not reflect public opinion
- Today: reps should mirror public opinion
- Guardians?
- Madison – National laws transcend local interest
- legislators should make reasonable compromises
- should not be captured by “special interests”
- PROBLEM – most interests represent professions, public-interest groups
- Decisive or Deliberative?
- Framers designed to work slowly by balancing competing views
- Today – complaints of GRIDLOCK, but if Congress moves quickly, might not move wisely
- Term Limits?
- Anti-Federalists distrusted strong national gov., favored term limits
- 80% of public supports
- Effects of term limits vary
- Lifetime limits produce amateur legislators less prone to compromise
- limiting continuous sequence leads to “office hopping” and attention seeking
- 1995 – Congress failed to approve Const. Amend. For term limits
- Supreme Court ruled states cannot impose term limits on Congress
- Reducing Power/Perks
- Legal bribes such as gifts banned in 1995
- Regulating Franking?
- Congressional Accountability Act of 1995
- forced Congress to obey 11 major employment laws
- Trim Pork
- main cause of deficit is entitlement programs, not pork
- some spending is needed, most already decreased
- members supposed to advocate interests of district (price of citizen-oriented Congress)
- Cut committees/assignments to slow pace and allow reasoned consideration of bills
- 1995 reforms cut # of committees
- Downsize staff
- same as 1980s
- cutting staff makes Congress more dependent on Executive
- Ethics and Congress
- Separation of Powers and Corruption
- Fragmentation of power increases number of officials with opportunity to sell influence
- Example: Senatorial Courtesy rule (informing before nominating) offers opportunity for office seeker to influence a senator
- Forms of Influence
- $ and Exchange of Favors
- How define unethical conduct?
- Violation of criminal law – obvious
- 1978-1992 Congressional Misconduct charged against 63 members
- 31 sanctioned/convicted, 16 resigned/retired,
- ABSCAM
- New Ethics Rules 1994 (104th Congress)
- Honoraria – House bans, Senate may designate charity
- Campaign Funds – ban retaining of surplus
- Lobbying – former members banned for one year
- Gifts - $100 Senate, $250 House
- Lobbyist payments banned for travel, defense funds, charitable donations
- Problems with Rules
- Assume money is only source of corruption
- Neglect political alliances and personal friendships
- Framers were more concerned to ensure liberty (through checks and balances) than morality