hw

Congress in the Political System Note to students: The best preparation for taking the reading quiz is to pay close attention to the key terms as you read. Each question in the question banks is directly linked to these key terms and phrases.

Chapter Focus Question: How do elections and the election process affect the efficiency of Congressional bodies and the members’ ability to perform their official duties?

Section Focus Question: What are the three major influences on Congressional elections, and why is apportionment such an important factor in the process? Key Terms:Money

Incumbency Party identification Independents' voting patterns Credit claiming Party identification more important in Congressional elections Frequency of Congressional elections Campaign expenses increasing Relaxation of campaign finance laws

We have congressional elections every two years in the United States, electing all 435 members of the House and one-third of the members of the Senate each time. Although congressional elections follow the same general dynamics of elections for other offices, there are some aspects that are unique to these contests. First, we must acknowledge how expensive congressional elections are. A successful campaign for the House can see the two major party nominees spend a million dollars each, and the average Senate candidate can spend upwards of seven million dollars.

To finance these campaigns, candidates for Congress spend an enormous amount of time seeking donations from political party groups, political action committees, and individual donors. It is not unusual for newly elected members of Congress to be told to plan to spend at least three hours a day on fundraising — making calls to donors, meeting with interest group representatives in Washington, DC, or in their home districts and states. Because of several changes to campaign finance laws since the early 2000s, congressional campaigns also receive indirect support from a series of independent groups who seek to influence elections. As long as these groups do not coordinate with a candidate’s campaign directly, they are free to spend money on campaigns, media ads, and get out the vote drives to try to get their favored candidates elected.

Estimated Total Cost of US Elections, 1998-2014

Another important element of congressional elections is the status of the candidates — whether each is an incumbent, a challenger, or someone contesting an open seat. An incumbent is the person who holds the office currently. A challenger is someone running to unseat an incumbent. An open-seat candidate is one running for a seat in which there is no incumbent running. Knowing the status of a candidate is as important as it is because of the overwhelming power of incumbency.

Being elected to and serving in Congress confers benefits on a candidate that a non-incumbent cannot hope to replicate. Members of Congress get a lot of media coverage in the course of their service, so they often have much higher levels of name recognition among voters than do their opponents. Members also use the resources of their office — travel to the district/state, staff resources, free mailing to constituents — to make sure that the voters back home know what they are doing on behalf of the district or state. This “credit claiming” can go a long way to creating a positive image of a member of Congress in the minds of voters. Incumbents are also likely to have an easier time raising money for their campaigns than are non-incumbents. All of these advantages work to make incumbency a powerful force in congressional elections. Once elected to Congress, the vast majority of members — approximately 90 percent — seek reelection. Of those incumbents who do run again, 93 percent of House members and 85 percent of senators will be reelected.

US Senate Reelection Rates, 1980-2014; Amount Spent on Senate Campaigns in Election Cycle, 2014

A third set of influences on congressional election outcomes has to do with political party. Elections for Congress, particularly those for the House, are not as visible as presidential elections, which means that voters are more likely to rely on their own party identification to guide their vote choice. Over 90 percent of people with a party identification will choose their party’s candidate in a congressional election. Independent voters, who make up a fairly small percentage of the population of voters, split their vote between Democratic and Republican candidates from election to election.

Section Focus Question: What is the effect of apportionment on the legislative process?Key Terms:Gerrymandering

Redistricting Redistricting after the Census Perfect redistricting Gerrymandering and the Supreme Court Redistricting in state legislatures Reelection of incumbents

Another aspect of congressional elections that can take on a partisan flavor is the process of redistricting. Recall from the discussion of apportionment that each state is given a number of seats in the House of Representatives after each census. In times when a state receives a larger or smaller number of seats than it had before, that state has to go through a process of redistricting the state — redrawing district

boundaries to account for having more or fewer seats. In the vast majority of states, redistricting decisions are made by state legislatures. Since the members of state legislatures are members of the political parties, they often try to create district boundaries that will advantage their party’s candidates. Since the courts have generally said that this sort of partisan gerrymandering is acceptable, the districts in many states end up electing members of the same political party year after year.

Different Ways to Gerrymander

When a particular party is successful in state legislative elections, this control of the redistricting process tends to be translated into congressional success for that party’s candidates. For example, Republicans made significant gains in state legislative elections in 2010, which gave them control over the redistricting process that followed the 2010 Census. This allowed Republican candidates for Congress in 2012 to help the Republicans maintain their majority status in the House, despite the fact that President Obama won reelection. In the 2012 elections, Democratic candidates won about 70 percent of the House seats in the states where their party controlled the state legislature. The same is true for Republican House candidates in Republican-controlled states.

Section Focus Question: How do conflicts between Congress and the remaining branches — the executive and judicial — affect legislation and policy?Key Terms:Congressional budget checks on the executive

War Powers Resolution Congress treaty check on the executive "Invitation to struggle" Mutual checks on the branches of government

Congress was intended by the Framers to be the dominant branch of government at the national level. But, at the same time, the Constitution creates a system of separate powers with checks and balances to tie the three branches together in the execution of many activities. These ties create situations in which there can be tension between the branches, whether over governmental or political issues.

With regard to governmental functions, Congress has significant connections to presidents and the courts. Since the Supreme Court is the only federal court created in the Constitution, Congress has control over the size and resources of the court system and even over the number of Supreme Court justices. While the primary responsibility of the federal courts is to interpret the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress, Congress is the only branch that can propose amendments to the Constitution. Members of Congress can also exercise control over who sits on the courts through the Senate’s power to confirm or reject judicial nominees and through Congress’ power to impeach and remove judges from office.

Congressional Checks on the Judicial Branch

While Congress can be in conflict with the courts, this is more likely true in the relationship between Congress and presidents. The two branches are even more closely intertwined, having competing powers and responsibilities that set up what has been called an “invitation to struggle,” particularly in times of divided government. Presidents can’t exercise many of their constitutional powers without some contact with, or consent from, Congress. Because of this, there is more regular, and ongoing governmental and political contact between these two branches.

At its most basic, Congress writes and passes the laws that presidents must execute. Although presidents can veto legislation, Congress has the last say through their opportunity to override a veto. Congress can control the ability of the executive branch to carry out laws through their control over the size, structure, and budget of

executive branch departments and agencies and through their oversight function, which requires them to follow up on Congress’ implementation of legislation. Congress, through the Senate’s power of advice and consent, has the power to approve or disapprove of a president’s appointment of cabinet secretaries, judges and justices for the federal courts, and foreign ambassadors. They also have the power of advice and consent for any treaties a president might negotiate.

Congressional Checks on the Executive Branch

Perhaps most contentious is the struggle over the war powers, which the Framers sought to control by dividing them between Congress and the president. According to the Constitution, Congress has the power to declare war, while the president, as Commander in Chief, is tasked with executing the war. However, since the middle of the 20th century, Congress has tangled with almost every president about presidents’ willingness to use the military around the world in situations that are not declared wars. In an effort to rein in presidents in these situations, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution in 1973 over President Nixon’s veto. The Act was designed to establish conditions under which presidents can use the military in situations that fall short of the declaration of war, although the war powers remain a point of contention between the branches.

The Framers set out to create a Congress that could simultaneously represent the interests of the people and make the laws by which we all live. Over time, members of Congress have worked to balance these two important, and sometimes competing, sets of responsibilities by working to bring their legislative and representational roles together when possible. At the same time, Congress has to work with the other actors in the federal system — the president and the courts — in a complex system of shared governmental powers and political allegiances.

Founding Fathers: I keep thinking we should include something in the Constitution in case the people elect a complete moron.