DOCSLIB.ORG

Proquest Dissertations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Proquest Dissertations The institutionalization of the United States Senate, 1789-1996 Item Type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) Authors White, David Richard Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 06/10/2021 19:50:51 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/289137 INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reptoduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text direcUy f^ the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, cotored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print t}leedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overiaps. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6' x 9" black and white % photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Bell & Howell Informatksn arKj Learning 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA 800-521-0600 THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE, 1789-1996 by David Richard White Copyright © David Richard White 2000 A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARLZONA 2000 UMI Number 9972084 Copyright 2000 by White, David Richard All rights reserved. UMI® UMI Microform9972084 Copyright 2000 by Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Bell & Howell Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road P.O. 80X1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA « GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Final Examination Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by David R. White entitled Institutionalization of the-U.S. Senate, 1789-1996 and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation re,uir«..nt for the Begr.. of Ooctor of Philosophy n Ragsdale Date ZJohnWaMke Date /- 2 V- <3^ Date Date Date Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent upon the candidate's submission of the final copy of the dissertation to the Graduate College. I hereby certify that I have read this dissertation prepared under my direction and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement. Dissertati' Lyn Ragsdale Date 3 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR This dissertation has been submitted in partial fuifilhnent of requirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this dissertation are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the copyright holder. SIGNED ZCOO 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are two sets of people I would like to acknowledge now that my dissertation is completed. First, 1 owe a great deal of gratitude to my dissertation chair, Lyn Ragsdale, who stuck with me throughout this very long journey, even as I moved away and became a father. John Wahlke and Brad Jones, the other members of my dissertation committee, also proved helpful with their comments on earlier drafts. A special thanks goes to Bill Dixon, who was particularly helpful to me when I was conducting my statistical analysis. His patience was appreciated. The political science department's Graduate Coordinator, Vickie Healey, and Business Manager, Denise Allyn, also deserve some credit for helping see me through the completion of my degree. Finally, I have a new appreciation for librarians. I offer a collective thanks to the many that helped me while I conducted research at The University of Arizona, The University of Utah and Brigham Young University. Many friends and family have seen me through this effort. I probably learned as much from my fellow graduate students as I did my course work, particularly from Jay Theis, Scott Spehr and Todd Lutes. Friends and neighbors who were not political scientists were also an asset. Mark and Joanne Hulme, Jean and Leo Patterson, Tom and Kaylin Murray, and Mike and Mary Ruehl, all provided support and distractions when necessary. My parents, Richard and Janet White, were always a source of encouragement, and my in-laws, Edward and Eleanor Medemach, personified patience at its best. Finally, very special thanks go to my daughters, Emily Claire and Sydney Erin. You both are more special to me than you will ever know. I look forward to spending more time with you, and having a lot more fun. 5 DEDICATION There is no doubt that finishing graduate school and my dissertation took longer than it should have. Through it all—the two moves to Arizona and a move to Utah, two lovely daughters, too many all-nighters and a few missed deadlines—one person has always been by my side. Little did she know when we married in 1988 that she would be spending more than a decade living with a graduate student. Yet she supported my effort, never complained and provided me with more than ample "funding." If I could have "multi- tasked" the way she did, I would have been done years ago. During those extra years the White Family "institutionalized." It adapted to many challenges, became highly autonomous and grew more complex through the addition of two new subunits. With my dissertation now complete, the White Family will undoubtedly begin to operate more coherently as well. Although it will not be there, her name deserves to be on my diploma no less than mine. Thank you Carol. 1 love you. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT 10 L INTRODUCTION 11 Endnotes 25 2. THE THEORY AND PROCESS OF INSTITUTIONALIZATION 27 Introduction 27 Institutionalization in Theory 27 Institutionalization in Practice 31 Institutionalization and Congress Since Polsby 40 Lessons From the Institutionalization Literature 44 Adaptability 45 Autonomy 49 Complexity 52 Coherence 54 Conclusion 56 Endnotes 57 SENATE INSTITUTIONALIZATION IN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE 59 3. EARLY SENATE INSTITUTIONALIZATION, 1789-1860 62 Introduction 62 Elections and Attributes of Senators 64 Pay and Perquisites 73 Sessions, Rules, Norms and Workload 75 Staff 87 Committees 90 Leadership 97 Conclusion 100 Endnotes 102 7 TABLE OF CONTENTS~Co«/mMei/ 4. THE SENATE INSTITUTIONALIZES FURTHER, 1861-1900 106 Introduction 106 Elections 107 Attributes of Senators Ill Pay and Perquisites 114 Sessions, Rules, Norms and Workload 118 Staff. 126 Committees 131 Leadership 137 Conclusion 140 Endnotes 143 5. THE SENATE IS SUPERSEDED, 1901-1946 146 Introduction 146 Elections and Attributes of Senators 147 Pay and Perquisites 150 Sessions 152 Workload, Rules and Norms 154 Staff 159 Committees 160 Leadership 163 Conclusion 167 Endnotes 169 6. THE SENATE REASSERTS ITSELF, 1947-1996 171 Introduction 171 Elections and Attributes of Senators 172 Pay and Perquisites 177 Workload, Rules, Norms and Sessions 179 Staff. 185 Committees 186 Leadership 191 Conclusion 194 Endnotes 196 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS-Cowf/ViMeJ 7. INDICATORS OF SENATE INSTITUTIONALIZATION 198 Measuring Institutionalization in the U.S. Senate 198 Data Sources and Collection Methodology 199 The Adaptability of the U.S. Senate 206 Senate Resiliency - A Chronological Indicator 207 Senate Flexibility - Two Generational Indicators 209 Senate Resiliency and Flexibility - Functional Indicators 212 The Resilient and Flexible Senate 218 The Autonomy of the U.S. Senate 219 Growth of Senate Expenditures 220 Senate Service 225 Characteristics of Senate Party Leaders 232 An Autonomous Senate 236 The Complexity of the U.S. Senate 236 Growth in Senate Staff 238 Growth and Differentiation in the Office of the Secretary of the Senate ... 240 Growth and Differentiation in Senate Committee Staff 243 Growth and Differentiation in Senators' Personal Office Staff 248 A Complex Senate 251 The Coherence of the U.S. Senate 254 Bills Introduced and Laws Passed 255 Senate Rules 256 Decline in Seniority Violations 258 Contested Senate Seats 261 A Coherent Senate 266 Conclusion 266 Endnotes 268 8. A MODEL OF SENATE INSTITUTIONALIZATION 276 Introduction 276 Duration Of Political Party Control of the Senate 278 Size of Senate Minority 279 Political Party Opposition in the Presidency 280 Political Party Opposition in the House of Representatives 282 Growth of Federal Government Expenditures 284 1946 Legislative Reorganization Act 286 Seventeenth Amendment 286 9
Load more

Recommended publications
  • By Patrick James Barry a Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of The
    CONFIRMATION BIAS: STAGED STORYTELLING IN SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARINGS by Patrick James Barry A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (English Language and Literature) in the University of Michigan 2015 Doctoral Committee: Professor Enoch Brater, Chair Associate Professor Martha Jones Professor Sidonie Smith Emeritus Professor James Boyd White TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 SITES OF THEATRICALITY 1 CHAPTER 2 SITES OF STORYTELLING 32 CHAPTER 3 THE TAUNTING OF AMERICA: THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARING OF ROBERT BORK 55 CHAPTER 4 POISON IN THE EAR: THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARING OF CLARENCE THOMAS 82 CHAPTER 5 THE WISE LATINA: THE SUPREME COURT CONFIRMATION HEARING OF SONIA SOTOMAYOR 112 CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION: CONFIRMATION CRITIQUE 141 WORK CITED 166 ii CHAPTER 1 SITES OF THEATRICALITY The theater is a place where a nation thinks in public in front of itself. --Martin Esslin, An Anatomy of Drama (1977)1 The Supreme Court confirmation process—once a largely behind-the-scenes affair—has lately moved front-and-center onto the public stage. --Laurence Tribe, Advice and Consent (1992)2 I. In 1975 Milner Ball, then a law professor at the University of Georgia, published an article in the Stanford Law Review called “The Play’s the Thing: An Unscientific Reflection on Trials Under the Rubric of Theater.” In it, Ball argued that by looking at the actions that take place in a courtroom as a “type of theater,” we might better understand the nature of these actions and “thereby make a small contribution to an understanding of the role of law in our society.”3 At the time, Ball’s view that courtroom action had an important “theatrical quality”4 was a minority position, even a 1 Esslin, Martin.
    [Show full text]
  • President Roosevelt and the Supreme Court Bill of 1937
    President Roosevelt and the Supreme Court bill of 1937 Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Hoffman, Ralph Nicholas, 1930- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 26/09/2021 09:02:55 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/319079 PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT AND THE SUPREME COURT BILL OF 1937 by Ralph Nicholas Hoffman, Jr. A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of History and Political Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Graduate College, University of Arizona 1954 This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the Library to be made avail­ able to borrowers under rules of the Library. Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without spec­ ial permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the dean of the Graduate College when in their judgment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other in­ stances, however, permission must be obtained from the author. SIGNED: TABLE.' OF.GOWTENTS Chapter / . Page Ic PHEYIOUS CHALLENGES TO THE JODlClMXo , V .
    [Show full text]
  • Cenotaphs Would Suggest a Friendship, Clay Begich 11 9 O’Neill Historic Congressional Cemetery and Calhoun Disliked Each Other in Life
    with Henry Clay and Daniel Webster he set the terms of every important debate of the day. Calhoun was acknowledged by his contemporaries as a legitimate successor to George Washington, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson, but never gained the Revised 06.05.2020 presidency. R60/S146 Clinton 2 3 Tracy 13. HENRY CLAY (1777–1852) 1 Latrobe 4 Blount Known as the “Great Compromiser” for his ability to bring Thornton 5 others to agreement, he was the founder and leader of the Whig 6 Anderson Party and a leading advocate of programs for modernizing the economy, especially tariffs to protect industry, and a national 7 Lent bank; and internal improvements to promote canals, ports and railroads. As a war hawk in Congress demanding the War of Butler 14 ESTABLISHED 1807 1812, Clay made an immediate impact in his first congressional term, including becoming Speaker of the House. Although the 10 Boggs Association for the Preservation of closeness of their cenotaphs would suggest a friendship, Clay Begich 11 9 O’Neill Historic Congressional Cemetery and Calhoun disliked each other in life. Clay 12 Brademas 8 R60/S149 Calhoun 13 14. ANDREW PICKENS BUTLER (1796–1857) Walking Tour As the nation drifted toward war between the states, tensions CENOTAPHS rose even in the staid Senate Chamber of the U.S. Congress. When Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts disparaged Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina (who was not istory comes to life in Congressional present) during a floor speech, Representative Preston Brooks Cemetery. The creak and clang of the of South Carolina, Butler’s cousin, took umbrage and returned wrought iron gate signals your arrival into to the Senate two days later and beat Sumner severely with a the early decades of our national heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Files; Folder: 9/25/78 [2]; Container 92
    9/25/78 [2] Folder Citation: Collection: Office of Staff Secretary; Series: Presidential Files; Folder: 9/25/78 [2]; Container 92 To See Complete Finding Aid: http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/library/findingaids/Staff_Secretary.pdf WITHDRAWAL SHEET (PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARIES) FORM OF CORRESPONDENTS OR TiTLE DAliE RESTRICTION DOCUMENT Memo Harold Brown to Pres. Carter, w/attachments 4 pp., ·r!=!:Defense Summary 9/22/78 A , ' Cabinet Summari. s Andrew Ypung to Pres. Carter~ 1 pg., re:UN activities 9/15/78 9/22/78 A Capinet' Summa:ri s Cal.ifq:no . to Pres. Carter, 3 pp. , re: Personnel "changes 9/22/7.$ c .:~ 0 '· i ~"d. 'I ".'' ' a ~~~·.0 .:t'' '~ ,, 11 , .. "~ •) •· ·~· ',,• \:l,. ,j; ~··~-·< ·-·... • 1 ' .} "I. " 1~ •: , dJ~ ·, '0 ·., " ~ ~r-~ 1\ ~ '·;P. , .. " . ,, ~ 1 , .. ··~ ·:. •·,· '"" <':'• :..·) .,0 / ~ ;w . • '' .• ~ U',• "·',, If' ~' • ·~ ~ ~· • ~ c , " ill" : " ,·, "''t> ''., ' : "."" ~:~~.,,~ . .. r " ·i ' '· ·: ., .~.~ ' 1. ~. ' , .. ;, ~, (• '• ·f." J '',j> '~~'!, ~' -o," :~ ~ ~ e' . " ' ~ ,· J ', I I. FIWE LOCATION Carter Presidenti,al Pap.ers-Staff Offices, Office .of Staff Sec. -Presidenti?l HandwritiRg File, 9/25/78 [2] Box-103 R.ESTRICTtiON CODES (AI Closed by Executive Order 1235S'governing access to national security information. (6) .Closed by statute or by the agency Which originated tine document. (C) Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in the donor's deed of gif,t. ~. NATIONAL ARCHIV.S AND RECORDS AOMINISTRA TION. NA FORM 1429 (6-8,5) ' . THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON 9/25/78 Tim Kraft The attached was returned in the President's outbox: It is forwarded to you for appropriate han<D:ing. Rick Hutcheson cc: Frank Moore THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON 9/25/78 rick-~- although pr.esident is sending note to tim ...
    [Show full text]
  • Nabors Forrest Andrew Phd20
    THE PROBLEM OF RECONSTRUCTION: THE POLITICAL REGIME OF THE ANTEBELLUM SLAVE SOUTH by FORREST ANDREW NABORS A DISSERTATION Presented to the Department of Political Science and the Graduate School of the University of Oregon in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy June 2011 DISSERTATION APPROVAL PAGE Student: Forrest Andrew Nabors Title: The Problem of Reconstruction: The Political Regime of The Antebellum Slave South This dissertation has been accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of Political Science by: Gerald Berk Chairman Deborah Baumgold Member Joseph Lowndes Member James Mohr Outside Member and Richard Linton Vice President for Research and Graduate Studies/Dean of the Graduate School Original approval signatures are on file with the University of Oregon Graduate School. Degree awarded June 2011 ii © 2011 Forrest Andrew Nabors iii DISSERTATION ABSTRACT Forrest Andrew Nabors Doctor of Philosophy Department of Political Science June 2011 Title: The Problem of Reconstruction: The Political Regime of the Antebellum Slave South Approved: _______________________________________________ Dr. Gerald Berk This project studies the general political character of the antebellum slave South from the perspective of Republicans who served in the Reconstruction Congress from 1863-1869. In most Reconstruction literature, the question of black American freedom and citizenship was the central issue of Reconstruction, but not to the Republicans. The question of black American freedom and citizenship was the most salient issue to them, but they set that issue within a larger problem: the political regime of the antebellum slave South had deviated from the plan of the American Founders long before secession in 1860-1861.
    [Show full text]
  • Telegram Telegram
    THE NORTON TTELEGRAMELEGRAM FRIDAY, DECEMBER 11, 2009 OpinionOpinion PAGE 4 For starters, how about Brownback, Parkinson aution: What you are about to read is not, and we repeat, is not, an endorse- ment. It is passed along as nothing more than a suggestion for the Kansas Democratic Party. If you are serious about retaining the governor’s office whenC the votes are counted on that cold, November night in 2010, you best twist the arm of the man occupying that chair or forget it. Period. Gov. Mark Parkinson took over the governor’s office when Gov. Kathleen Sebelius jumped ship to become a member of President Obama’s Cabinet. Parkinson was serving as lieutenant governor, joining the Sebelius ticket when she sought and won re-election to a second term. The state’s financial picture was in a mess when the call came from the president to then Gov. Sebelius to become Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary. The offer was the president’s way of thanking her for her early endorsement of his effort. Lt. Gov. Parkinson took the oath elevating him to the state’s top elective position and has won several accolades for his performance. He has said, time and again, that he would not be a candidate for the office. Gov. Parkinson is unique. He was a Republican for many years and changed par- ties when Gov. Sebelius convinced him to become her running mate. Of course this didn’t sit well with the Republican leadership, seeing one of their own walk away in the fashion he did.
    [Show full text]
  • President Richard Nixon's Daily Diary, November 1-15, 1973
    RICHARD NIXON PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD DOCUMENT DOCUMENT SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS DATE RESTRICTION NUMBER TYPE 1 Manifest Air Force One – Appendix “C” 11/1/1973 A 2 Manifest Air Force One – Appendix “B” 11/5/1973 A 3 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/1/1973 A Appendix “B” 4 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/5/1973 A Appendix “A” 5 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/9/1973 A Appendix “D” 6 Manifest Helicopter Passenger Manifest – 11/11/1973 A Appendix “A” COLLECTION TITLE BOX NUMBER WHCF: SMOF: Office of Presidential Papers and Archives RC-13 FOLDER TITLE President Richard Nixon’s Daily Diary November 1, 1973 – November 15, 1973 PRMPA RESTRICTION CODES: A. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy. E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or B. National security classified information. financial information. C. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual’s F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law rights. enforcement purposes. D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material. or a libel of a living person. H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material. DEED OF GIFT RESTRICTION CODES: D-DOG Personal privacy under deed of gift -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION *U.S. GPO; 1989-235-084/00024 NA 14021 (4-85) THE WHITE HOUSE PRESIDENT RICHARD NIXON'S DAILY DIARY (Sce Travel Record for Travel Activity) ~t-p"'I.A~CE~DA':"'Y~BE"'G~AN~--------------------------D-A-TE-(M-o-.,-D-a-y,-Y-r.-)----- NOVEMBER 1, 1973 THE WHITE HOUSE TIME DAY WASHINGTON, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Timber Depredations in Montana to 1900
    University of Montana ScholarWorks at University of Montana Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers Graduate School 1967 Analysis of timber depredations in Montana to 1900 Edward Bernie Butcher The University of Montana Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Butcher, Edward Bernie, "Analysis of timber depredations in Montana to 1900" (1967). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 4709. https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/4709 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at ScholarWorks at University of Montana. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at University of Montana. For more information, please contact [email protected]. / 7y AN ANALYSIS OF TIMBER DEPREDATIONS IN MONTANA TO 1900 by Edward Bernie Butcher B. S. Eastern Montana College, 1965 Presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA 1967 Approved by: (fhe&d j Chairman, Board of Examiners Deaf, Graduate School JU N 1 9 1967 Date UMI Number: EP40173 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI EP40173 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Judicial Independence Tara L
    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 71 | Issue 2 Article 3 2018 The Origins (and Fragility) of Judicial Independence Tara L. Grove Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation Tara L. Grove, The Origins (and Fragility) of Judicial Independence, 71 Vanderbilt Law Review 465 (2019) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol71/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Origins (and Fragility) of Judicial Independence Tara Leigh Grove* The federal judiciary today takes certain things for granted. Political actors will not attempt to remove Article II judges outside the impeachment process; they will not obstruct federal court orders; and they will not tinker with the Supreme Court's size in order to pack it with like-minded Justices. And yet a closer look reveals that these "self- evident truths" of judicial independence are neither self-evident nor necessary implications of our constitutional text, structure, and history. This Article demonstrates that many government officials once viewed these court-curbing measures as not only constitutionally permissible but also desirable (and politically viable) methods of "checking" the judiciary. The Article tells the story of how political actors came to treat each measure as "out of bounds" and thus built what the Article calls "conventions of judicial independence." But implicit in this story is a cautionary tale about the fragility of judicial independence.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Senate Arms Control Observer Group
    The Evolution of the Senate Arms Control Observer Group The Evolution of the Senate Arms Control Observer Group By Nickolas Roth In March 2013, the Senate voted down an amendment offered by Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) to cut $700,000 from their budget that was set-aside for the National Security Working Group (NSWG). What many did not realize at the time was that this relatively small and obscure proposed cut would have eliminated one of the last traces of the bipartisan Congressional approach to debating arms control. The NSWG first began as the Arms Control Observer Group, which helped to build support for arms control in the Senate. In recent years, there have been calls from both Democrats and Republicans to revive the Observer Group, but very little analysis of the role it played. Its history illustrates the stark contrast in the Senate’s attitude and approach to arms control issues during the mid- to late 1980s compared with the divide that exists today between the two parties. The Arms Control Observer Group The Arms Control Observer Group was first formed in 1985. At the time, the United States was engaged in talks with the Soviet Union on the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty. To generate support for ongoing negotiations, Majority Leader Senator Bob Dole (R-KS), and Minority Leader Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), with the endorsement of President Ronald Reagan, created the bipartisan Arms Control Observer Group. The Observer Group consisted of twelve senators, with four senators, two from each party, serving as co-chairs1 and created an official role for senators to join U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Brief on Merits of Echols, Et
    No. 02-1676 and consolidated cases IN THE Supreme Court o f the United States FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION, et al. Appellants vs. SENATOR MITCH MCCONNELL, et al. Appellees. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Joint Brief on the Merits of Appellees Emily Echols and Barret Austin O’Brock, et al., Urging Affirmance of the Judgment that BCRA Section 318 is Unconstitutional JAMES BOPP, JR. JAY ALAN SEKULOW RICHARD E. COLESON Counsel of Record THOMAS J. MARZEN JAMES M. HENDERSON, SR. JAMES MADISON CENTER STUART J. ROTH FOR FREE SPEECH COLBY M. MAY BOPP, COLESON & BOSTROM JOEL H. THORNTON 1 South 6th Street WALTER M. WEBER Terre Haute, IN 47807-3510 AMERICANCENTER FOR LAW (812) 232-2434 & JUSTICE 201 Maryland Avenue NE Attorneys for Appellee Barrett Washington, DC 20002-5703 Austin O’Brock (202) 546-8890 Attorneys for Appellees Emily Echols, et al. APPELLEES’ COUNTER-STATEMENT OF QUESTION PRESENTED Prior to the effective date of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA), Pub. L. No. 107-155, 116 Stat. 81, minors had the right to contribute to the committees of political parties and to candidates for federal office, subject to the same limitations that also applied to persons who had attained their majority. Section 318 of BCRA completely prohibits donations to committees and to candidates by minors. In the view of these Appellees, all of whom are minors, the question presented is: Whether the three judge district court erred in its judgment that the absolute ban on donations by minors was unconstitutional? (i) PARTIES These Appellees incorporate by reference the listing of the parties set out in the Jurisdictional Statement of the FEC, et al., at II-IV.
    [Show full text]
  • Gay Liberation Comes to Dixie—Slowly
    Alabama: Commandments, Amendments, and Defendants Patrick R. Cotter Alabama’s 2004 election was a quiet affair. Signs that a presidential campaign was occurring—candidate visits, partisan rallies, hard-hitting tele- vision commercials, or get-out-the-vote efforts—were largely missing from the state. The outcome of Alabama’s U.S. Senate race was a forgone conclu- sion from the beginning of the year. All of the state’s congressmen were easily reelected. Contests for the few state offices up for election in 2004 were generally both invisible and uncompetitive. The only part of the ballot that generated any interest—and even here it was limited—involved a pro- posed amendment to Alabama’s already long state constitution. Alabama’s 2004 election was also a clear Republican victory. Republi- cans George W. Bush and Richard Shelby easily carried the state in the presidential and U.S. Senate elections. The GOP kept it 5-to-2 advantage in Congressional seats. Republicans swept all the contested positions on the state Supreme Court. Alabama’s 2004 election campaign was not the first time the state had experienced a quiet presidential campaign. Nor was it the first in which Republicans did quite well. Both the 1988 and 2000 campaigns were also low-key affairs. Both were also campaigns that the GOP clearly won. These earlier low-key, Republican-winning, presidential campaigns did not significantly alter the state’s partisan politics. Rather, the close partisan balance that has characterized the state since the 1980s continued beyond these elections. (For descriptions of these earlier campaigns and analyses of recent Alabama politics see Cotter 1991; Cotter 2002; Ellington 1999; Cotter and Gordon 1999 and Stanley 2003).
    [Show full text]