DOCSLIB.ORG

CHAPTER 12: Congress

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CHAPTER 12: Congress CONGRESS Representation, Organization, 12 and Legislation Press Proof CQ / SAGE hey are divided into two chambers: the House Tof Representatives andUncorrected the Senate. They are increasingly divided along lines of political partisanship. They sort themselves into a host of committees and subcommittees in order to do the actual work of their institution. In spite of all of their divisions and differences, however, Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), left, and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) talk before the start of a Senate Energy and all members of the United States Congress Natural Resources Committee hearing in early 2016. Compared share one thing in common. They are there to to just a few decades ago, many more women and people represent, to stand for, the interests of the from traditionally underrepresented groups currently serve in copyright Congress. voters who sent them there.1 Americans cannot (Photo by Bill Clark/CQ Roll Call) all fit into the Capitol Building, at least not without computer-generated graphics. Therefore, Americans elect people to make the laws, raise and spend the nation’s money, and watch over other institutions in the federal government, along with a host of activities that shape 2 American public policy in a profound way. In this chapter, we will focus primarily on one particular group of representation members of Congress: women in the Senate. We will look back on what the act of “standing for” one’s has been accomplished and ahead to what still needs to be done to constituents in government. achieve more equal representation for women in Congress. The stories we will consider constitute only one effort to explore and understand congressional organization, action, and representation. Many more stories have been written, are being written, and will be written. Many other groups of Americans have looked and continue to look to Congress to represent their interests and advocate for their preferences and goals. However, the stories in this chapter—many of which happened before some of the readers of this book were born—are far from outdated, irrelevant, or idiosyncratic to one specific group of Americans. They speak to the heart of what representation means in American democracy, what has been accomplished, and what is still under construction. After reading this chapter, you will be able to: 12.1 Describe the structure of Congress 12.4 Trace the steps of the legislativePress as established in the Constitution, process and explain how that including the differences between processProof can diverge from traditional the House of Representatives and “textbook” descriptions the Senate and the powers placed CQ LEARNING OBJECTIVES in each chamber 12.5 Connect the issues surrounding the representation/ of women in 12.2 Identify the obstacles to winning a Congress to the representation, seat in Congress, the factors that or lack of it, of other individuals in influence an individual’s decision to America, whether based on race, run, and the resources and skills that ethnicity, sexual identity, or other successful candidates need traditionally excluded identities. 12.3 List the primary organizational features of Congress and understand the role of chamber SAGE leaders, political parties, committees, and congressionalUncorrected norms WOMEN IN CONGRESS TODAY Lookingcopyright Around, Looking Back, and Looking Ahead It might have been a record for Washington, D.C. A winter storm referred to as “Snowzilla” slammed the East Coast of the United States on January 22, 2016, prompting governors of eleven states to declare states of emergency. Airlines cancelled more than ten thousand flights, and transportation and commerce ground to a halt.2 Snowfall records were broken in parts of New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. The nation’s capital may have also set a record; meteorologists are unsure because apparently the official measuring device got lost in the snow. Without question, though, D.C. shut Women in Congress Today 3 down. Then it began to dig out. Members of Congress were no different. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), no doubt familiar with snow, got out her shovel and posted a photo to her Twitter account. That’s when things got interesting, at least for one day. On Tuesday morning, after the storm had ended, the Senate convened for a brief morning session. Not much was on the agenda; too many senators were out of town or not able to make it to Capitol Hill. As Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) opened the session, she looked around the chamber and noticed some- thing different, something very, very different: There were no men to be seen. Not one. As Murkowski put it, “You look around the chamber and the pre- siding officer is female, all of our parliamentarians are female, our floor managers are female, all of our pages are female. Now this was not orchestrated in any way, shape or form. We came in this morning, looked around and thought, something is different this morning. Different in a good way,Press I might add. But something is genuinely different, and I think it’s Maine Senator Susan Collins Proof3 genuinely fabulous.” tweeted a photo of herself digging out after “Snowzilla” in The next day, Murkowski introduced a bipartisan energy policy bill cosponsored by January of 2016. Maria Cantwell (D-WA). The men were filing back in, and,CQ when full attendance was Source: Sen. Susan Collins, achieved, male Senators outnumbered women in the Senate five to one. @SenatorCollins, Twitter, / The 114th session of Congress, which began in January 2015, was the most diverse January 3, 2016, https://mobile .twitter.com/SenatorCollins/ in the nation’s history. It included twenty women senators, three Latinos, two African status/690970650731614208. Americans, and one Pacific Islander. Serving in the House of Representatives were eighty- five members of racial and ethnic minorities, eighty-four women, and six representatives who self-identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT).4 Forty-four African American members were serving in the House and two in the Senate. Thirty-seven rep- resentatives identified as Hispanic or Latino/a, thirty-two in the House and four in the Senate, an overall record. ThirteenSAGE members, eleven in the House and one in the Senate, identified as Asian or Pacific Islander, another record. Two representatives were Native American. Two members of Congress identified as Buddhist, two as Muslim, and one as Hindu,Uncorrected speaking to, although not perfectly reflecting, the growing religious diversity in the nation as a whole.5 The 114th Congress was not the first to set records for representation of women, members of minority racial and ethnic groups, religious affiliations, or sexual identities, however. Many records had already been broken in the preceding two decades. And the changes occurring in Congress were more than just a question of numbers. Individual members of historically underrepresented groups had also moved up the chain of power within the institution. copyrightAttaining key assignments in congressional leadership depends upon talent, politi- cal skill, and seniority. In the Senate, two women, both Democrats, had become espe- cially influential over the years. Patty Murray of Washington was the first woman to chair the powerful Senate Budget Committee, and Barbara Mikulski had served as chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, one of the most important commit- tees in Congress. These two committees deal with a matter of great concern: money. 4 CHAPTER 12 Congress As Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for Women and Politics at Rutgers University, put it, “When you are making the decisions and you are controlling the debate around the dol- lars, that’s big. That’s what the milestone is here, in having these two women in the posi- tions they currently hold and then to see where that takes them. It’s what happens when you get enough women in and they start to have the tenure to move into these positions.”6 Both senators, however, lost their positions of committee leadership when the Republican Party took control of the Senate following the 2014 elections. Murray and Mikulski, along with other women in Congress who have achieved posi- tions of power and influence, did not end up there by chance, or quickly. To understand what changes, if any, have come about as a result of Senators Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), left, and Patty Murray the electoral gains of women, members of minority groups, or Americans overall, we will Press (D-WA) talk politics before have to explore many interconnected topics in the study of Congress:Proof why individuals a Senate Health, Education, choose to run for office, how the structure of congressional elections affects the chances of Labor, and Pensions Committee winning, and how the organization of Congress shapes how much power individuals have hearing on the health within the institution. In order to do that, we need to go back in time to 1992, to when insurance marketplace. Both CQ have been in Congress long many of these women began their journeys as congressional representatives./ enough to have established 1992 was called “the Year of the Woman” because a record number of women ran important leadership positions. for and won seats in both the Senate and the House, beginning a trend of record-setting CQ Roll Call via AP Images numbers of seats in Congress held by women that continues to this day. Their collec- tive electoral success resulted in the largest number of women in Congress—fifty-three in total—up to that point in American history. After the elections, there were six women senators and forty-seven women representatives, both records at the time.7 It was, accord- ing to scholars of women in American politics, “a turning point for U.S. women’s polit- ical participation at the national level, with unprecedentedSAGE attention focused on women running for Congress.”8 The six women who entered the Senate chamber following the 1992 election were not the first womenUncorrected to do so, though there had not been many before.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012
    Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012 Jennifer E. Manning Information Research Specialist Colleen J. Shogan Deputy Director and Senior Specialist November 26, 2012 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL30261 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Women in the United States Congress: 1917-2012 Summary Ninety-four women currently serve in the 112th Congress: 77 in the House (53 Democrats and 24 Republicans) and 17 in the Senate (12 Democrats and 5 Republicans). Ninety-two women were initially sworn in to the 112th Congress, two women Democratic House Members have since resigned, and four others have been elected. This number (94) is lower than the record number of 95 women who were initially elected to the 111th Congress. The first woman elected to Congress was Representative Jeannette Rankin (R-MT, 1917-1919, 1941-1943). The first woman to serve in the Senate was Rebecca Latimer Felton (D-GA). She was appointed in 1922 and served for only one day. A total of 278 women have served in Congress, 178 Democrats and 100 Republicans. Of these women, 239 (153 Democrats, 86 Republicans) have served only in the House of Representatives; 31 (19 Democrats, 12 Republicans) have served only in the Senate; and 8 (6 Democrats, 2 Republicans) have served in both houses. These figures include one non-voting Delegate each from Guam, Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Currently serving Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) holds the record for length of service by a woman in Congress with 35 years (10 of which were spent in the House).
    [Show full text]
  • PPM138 Women in Senate Glossy
    WOMEN IN THE SENATE CO LITI O hinkle — p S HN O Y J B From left: Sens. OS Barbara Mikul- T O ski of Mary- PH land, Dianne Feinstein of California, and Olympia Snowe and Susan Col- lins of Maine is that she’s been on all the major committees is the only senator to chair two — Ethics and and deeply engaged in every moving issue of our Environment and Public Works. time.” The women owe some of their success to They may not always get the respect, but Mikulski. As the unofficial “dean” of the women’s EYE-OPENER behind the scenes, female senators more caucus, the Maryland Democrat has acted as a den The Magnificent Seven frequently are getting what they want. Schroeder mother to 11 classes of new female senators. HOLIDAY WEEKEND BRUNCH u u u remembers having to plead with powerful When Mikulski first came into the Senate, committee chairmen to get the funding requests she sought out mentors to help her navigate its SUN. & MON., OCT. 11 & 12 • 11AM–3PM of congresswomen heard. complicated and often arcane rules. She turned “They would say, ‘Now, what can I pass for to Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts and Paul NEW ORLEANS PIANO • HURRICANE HOWIE From what was a record high of seven female senators elected in 1992, you girls that won’t cost us any money and will Sarbanes, her Senate colleague from Maryland, BREAKFAST CAFE • BAR make all the women love us?’” she says. calling the two Democrats her “Sir Galahads.” women have gained in numbers – and seniority No one asks those kinds of questions when They helped her land a seat on the powerful LUNCH • DINNER BOOKSTORE women hold the gavel.
    [Show full text]
  • Women and the Presidency
    Women and the Presidency By Cynthia Richie Terrell* I. Introduction As six women entered the field of Democratic presidential candidates in 2019, the political media rushed to declare 2020 a new “year of the woman.” In the Washington Post, one political commentator proclaimed that “2020 may be historic for women in more ways than one”1 given that four of these woman presidential candidates were already holding a U.S. Senate seat. A writer for Vox similarly hailed the “unprecedented range of solid women” seeking the nomination and urged Democrats to nominate one of them.2 Politico ran a piece definitively declaring that “2020 will be the year of the woman” and went on to suggest that the “Democratic primary landscape looks to be tilted to another woman presidential nominee.”3 The excited tone projected by the media carried an air of inevitability: after Hillary Clinton lost in 2016, despite receiving 2.8 million more popular votes than her opponent, ever more women were running for the presidency. There is a reason, however, why historical inevitably has not yet been realized. Although Americans have selected a president 58 times, a man has won every one of these contests. Before 2019, a major party’s presidential debates had never featured more than one woman. Progress toward gender balance in politics has moved at a glacial pace. In 1937, seventeen years after passage of the Nineteenth Amendment, Gallup conducted a poll in which Americans were asked whether they would support a woman for president “if she were qualified in every other respect?”4 * Cynthia Richie Terrell is the founder and executive director of RepresentWomen, an organization dedicated to advancing women’s representation and leadership in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • How a Bill Becomes a Law – Reality Version
    How a Bill Becomes Law (textbook version) Source: Lexis-Nexis Congressional Universe, URL: http://web.lexis- nexis.com/congcomp/form/cong/h_law.html?_m=48bf77a4c5b7a2bcb4bf36d348aa3b54 &wchp=dGLbVtz-zSkSA&_md5=11b90e1a6333544b397469132966b0ef How a Bill Becomes a Law – Reality Version MOTIVATING FACTORS BEHIND LEGISLATION Party leadership leaders in House (Speaker, majority leader, minority leader) or Senate (majority and minority leaders) wish to fulfill their agenda through passing legislation, and/or to score political points vs. other party in eyes of media, public; more important in House than in Senate Individual members members are “single minded seekers of reelection,” passing legislation is one way to show effectiveness to constituents (credit claiming); members may also support someone else’s bill in exchange for that member’s support (log rolling) Committees committees exist to develop expertise within each chamber on specific issues, can use this expertise to push a particular policy President as leader of his party, the President has his own agenda and seeks to fulfill it through congressional action Issue networks includes any entity that is concerned about a particular policy area: • House committee(s) – one or more committees responsible for specific policy area, Budget and Appropriations committees also involved (jurisdiction is often overlapping, see multiple referrals) • Senate committee(s) – the Senate and House are fiercely independent of each other; in recent years Senate has been more politically moderate (esp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Election of Women to the U.S. House of Representatives: Is Demography Destiny?
    The Election of Women to the U.S. House of Representatives: Is Demography Destiny? Dennis Simon Barbara Palmer Southern Methodist University Baldwin Wallace University Political Science Department Political Science Department [email protected] [email protected] Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, San Juan, Puerto Rico, January, 2016. 0 The Election of Women to the U.S. House of Representatives: Is Demography Destiny? Even a quick glance at the geographic distribution of the women in Congress suggests that there is a distinct political geography to the districts they represent: twenty-six of the eighty-four female US House members serving in 2015, or nearly one-third, were from California and New York. Eight more were from Florida. In other words, 40 percent of the women in the House came from only three states. Texas, with thirty-six districts, has only three women in its House delegation.1 Female Representatives are not randomly distributed across the country. Congressional districts in the United States vary widely in their demographic characteristics. Candidates rely heavily on demographic data to create their campaign strategies, and they often hire consulting firms to provide them with detailed profiles and suggestions for targeting voters in their districts. However, we know very little about the demographic characteristics of the districts where women have been successful candidates. Female candidates tend to cluster in particular districts, but what explains this? Can we identify the districts
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-16-155, IRS Referral Programs
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters February 2016 IRS REFERRAL PROGRAMS Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Controls and Increase Coordination across Overlapping Programs GAO-16-155 February 2016 IRS REFERRAL PROGRAMS Opportunities Exist to Strengthen Controls and Increase Coordination across Overlapping Programs Highlights of GAO-16-155, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found Reports by the public of suspected Information referrals from the public alleging tax noncompliance must be underreporting of taxes or other tax submitted on paper forms by mail to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). These violations can help IRS detect millions referrals are manually screened by clerical staff and routed by mail to units of dollars in taxes that would otherwise across IRS for further action, as shown in the figure. go uncollected. Productive referrals can help address the net $385 billion tax gap—the difference between the Process for Screening and Routing Information Referrals for Further Review amount of taxes paid voluntarily on time and the amount owed. IRS received about 87,000 information referrals in fiscal year 2015. GAO was asked to assess the overall effectiveness of the information referral process. This report (1) describes IRS’s process for screening and routing information referrals; (2) assesses the controls for the information referral screening and routing process; and (3) evaluates the coordination between the information referral process, the Whistleblower Office, and other IRS referral programs. GAO reviewed IRS Ineffective internal controls undercut IRS management of the information referral guidance, processes, and controls for process. IRS does not have an organizational structure for information referrals the information referral process, with clear leadership for defining objectives and outcomes for measuring cost- assessed whether IRS’s processes effectiveness and results.
    [Show full text]
  • H.Doc. 108-224 Black Americans In
    FORMER MEMBERS H 1971–2007 ������������������������������������������������������������������������ Carol Moseley-Braun 1947– UNITED STATES SENATOR H 1993–1999 DEMOCRAT FROM ILLINOIS he first African-American woman Senator, Carol believing politicians were out of touch with the average TMoseley-Braun was also only the second black American, Moseley-Braun contemplated running for Senator since the Reconstruction Era.1 “I cannot escape Congress. Her resolve to seek national office strengthened the fact that I come to the Senate as a symbol of hope and after she witnessed Senators’ questioning of Anita Hill change,” Moseley-Braun said shortly after being sworn during the Clarence Thomas’s controversial confirmation in to office in 1993. “Nor would I want to, because my hearing for the Supreme Court in 1991. “The Senate presence in and of itself will change the U.S. Senate.”2 absolutely needed a healthy dose of democracy,” she During her single term in office, Senator Moseley-Braun observed. “It wasn’t enough to have millionaire white advocated for civil rights issues and for legislation on males over the age of 50 representing all the people in crime, education, and families. the country.”6 Officially entering the race for the Senate Carol Moseley was born in Chicago, Illinois, on August in November 1991, Moseley-Braun focused in her 16, 1947. Her parents, Joseph Moseley, a policeman, and Democratic primary campaign on two-term incumbent her mother, Edna (Davie) Moseley, a medical technician, Alan Dixon’s support of Clarence Thomas’s appointment divorced in 1963. The oldest of the four Moseley children and the need for diversity in the Senate.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Procedure and Statutory Interpretation Larry Evans
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 1993 Congressional Procedure and Statutory Interpretation Larry Evans Jarrell Wright Neal Devins William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Repository Citation Evans, Larry; Wright, Jarrell; and Devins, Neal, "Congressional Procedure and Statutory Interpretation" (1993). Faculty Publications. 431. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/431 Copyright c 1993 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs 239 CONGRESSIONAL PROCEDURE AND STATUTORY INTERPRETATION Larry Evans • Jarrell Wright • • Neal Devins • • • ight years ago, a seemingly uneventful Supreme Court decision, Chevron, E USA v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 1 prompted a watershed debate over the role of administrative agencies in ascertaining legislative intent. In Chevron, a unanimous Supreme Court recognized broad agency power to interpret often ambiguous statutory language, holding that' 'permissible'' agency interpretations are controlling unless Congress has spoken to "the precise question at issue. " 2 Counterbalancing this apparent elevation of agency interpretation at the expense of judicial interpretation, however, Chevron made clear that judicial analysis of legislative history is wholly appropriate in determining legislative intent: "If a court, employing traditional tools of statutory consideration, ascertains that Congress had an intention on the precise question at issue, that intention is the law and must be given effect. " 3 Chevron's recognition of a potentially broad judicial role likely explains the Court's unanimity. It also explains why, as Judge Patricia Wald observed in her analysis of post-Chevron decisionmaking, the Supreme C"ourt still relies on legislative history in many of its statutory construction cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Patty Murray (D-Wa)
    LEGISLATOR US Senator PATTY MURRAY (D-WA) IN OFFICE CONTACT Up for re-election in 2016 Email Contact Form LEADERSHIP POSITION http://www.murray.senate.gov/ public/index.cfm/contactme Senate Democratic Secretary Senate Democratic Conference Committee Secretary Web www.murray.senate.gov/public Senate Secretary for the Majority http://www.murray.senate.gov/ public 4th Term Twitter @pattymurray Re-elected in 2010 https://twitter.com/pattymurray SENIORITY RANK DC 154 Russell Senate Office 12 Office Building Out of 100 BGOV BIOGRAPHY By Brian Faler, Bloomberg News When she took the gavel of the Senate Budget Committee in January 2013, Patty Murray made it clear from her very first hearing that she was going to be a different kind of chairman --and not just because she’s the first woman to head the panel. The Democrat from Washington state opened the session with a five-minute critique of Republican tax-and-spending policies, denouncing decisions made over two decades, while emphasizing that she is concerned with more than just making budget numbers add up. “I feel very strongly that it doesn’t make sense to replace our budget deficits with deficits in education and infrastructure and research and development,” she said. It’s a sharp contrast from previous chairmen, such as North Dakota Democrat Kent Conrad and New Mexico Republican Pete Domenici, who have tended to be earnest deficit hawks dutifully warning their colleagues of the budgetary consequences of their decisions. A 20-year veteran of the panel, Murray took over the committee for the 113th Congress, though it wasn’t her first time with a starring role in Washington, D.C.’s budget wars.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisdictional History of the Committee
    Jurisdictional History of the Committee his appendix presents a narrative jurisdictional history of the T Committee on Ways and Means from its creation in 1789 as a select committee to its condition in 1989. House Rule X, Clause 1 (v) of the Rules of the House for the One Hundred First Congress, delin- eates the Ways and Means Committee’s current jurisdiction as follows: 1. Customs, collection districts, and ports of entry and delivery. 2. Reciprocal trade agreements. 3. Revenue measures generally. 4. Revenue measures relating to the insular possessions. 5. The bonded debt of the United States (subject to the last sentence of clause 4(g) of this rule). 6. The deposit of public moneys. 7. Transportation of dutiable goods. 8. Tax exempt foundations and charitable trusts. 9. National social security, except (A) health care and facilities programs that are supported from general revenues as opposed to payroll deductions and (B) work incentive programs. Clause 4(g) of House Rule X relates to procedures for setting the national debt limit triggered by House adoption of a congressional budget resolution reported by the Budget Committee. Since its creation as a select committee in 1789, and its formal reconstitution as a standing committee in 1802, the Committee on Ways and Means has had its formal jurisdiction revised several times, typically when the House has adopted changes to, or conducted a re- codification of, the Rules of the House. However, the committee’s ju- risdictional responsibilities have more often been changed through precedent, as determined by referral patterns of measures. In these cases the committee has usually gained additional responsibilities.2 The following chronological history accounts for, and details, the development of the Ways and Means Committee’s subject responsibil- ities and jurisdictional language, both as included in House Rules and as accrued through referrals that seemingly set precedent.
    [Show full text]
  • Hcr91-H-Rpt-98-41-Pt-2-Rules-Cmte
    98TH18t Se$sionCoxahtU~ss ) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1 RE|r.41 Part 98- 2 FIRST CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET- FISCAL YEAR 1984 MARCH 21, 1983.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. PEPPER, from the Committee on Rules, submitted the following REPORT together with ADDITIONAL VIEWS [To accompany House Concurrent Resolution 91] The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred House Concurrent Resolution 91, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the concurrent resolution do pass. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Jurisdiction of the Committee on Rules oter Budget Enforcement Procedures During the last few years, the first budget resolution has been used as the vehicle for enactment, on an ad hoc basis, of novel and far reaching budget enforcement procedures. These procedures, including for example reconciliation instructions in a first budget resolution, binding credit budget ceilings, and de- ferred enrollment of bills that breach S302 spending allocations and subdivisions, have drastically altered the Budget Act and significantly affected the operations of almost every committee of the House. Clause 1 (q) of Rule X vests in the Committee on Rules legislative jurisdiction over all matters affecting the Rules of the House, the Joint Rules, and the order of business. In addition, the Committee reported the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-344) and therefore possesses jurisdiction over any leg- islation affecting the operation of that Act, in the Congress. The Com- uittee therefore has jurisdiction over budget procedures inserted in a (1) first budget resolution not specifically authorized by the Budget Act, that affect the operation of the Act or the Rules of the House.
    [Show full text]
  • House Practice
    Chapter 11 Committees A. GENERALLY; ESTABLISHING COMMITTEES § 1. The Committee System; Standing, Select, and Joint Committees § 2. Establishing Committees § 3. Committee Expenses; Funding B. CHAIRS, MEMBERS, AND STAFF; ELECTIONS AND APPOINTMENTS § 4. In General; Membership and Seniority § 5. Numerical Composition of Committees; Party Ratios § 6. The Chair’s Role § 7. Committee Employees and Staff C. COMMITTEE FUNCTIONS; JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY § 8. Legislative Jurisdiction § 9. Oversight Jurisdiction § 10. Investigative Jurisdiction and Authority § 11. Standing Committees § 12. Select Committees § 13. — Particular Uses of Select Committees § 14. Joint Committees D. PROCEDURE IN COMMITTEES § 15. Committee Rules; Applicable House Rules § 16. Records, Files, and Transcripts; Disclosure and Disposition; Member Access § 17. Meetings § 18. — Consideration and Debate; Voting § 19. Hearings § 20. Hearings and Meetings as Open or Closed § 21. Quorum Requirements § 22. — In Ordering a Report to the House § 23. — Points of Order Based on Reporting Requirements § 24. Witnesses 239 §1 HOUSE PRACTICE § 25. — Rights or Privileges of Witnesses § 26. — Proceedings Against Recalcitrant Witnesses § 27. Media Coverage of Hearings and Meetings E. COMMITTEE REPORTS § 28. In General § 29. Form and Contents of Report § 30. Comparative Prints; The Ramseyer Rule § 31. Printing; Referral to Calendars § 32. Supplemental, Minority, and Additional Views § 33. Filing Reports § 34. Calling Up; Time to Report § 35. Availability (‘‘Layover’’) Requirements § 36. Points of Order Relating to Reports Research References 4 Hinds §§ 4019-4703 7 Cannon §§ 1721-2170; 8 Cannon §§ 2171-2317 Deschler Ch 17 Manual §§ 714-814, 816, 816a, 816b, 816c, 817, 831-863 A. Generally; Establishing Committees § 1. The Committee System; Standing, Select, and Joint Commit- tees The Role of Committees The committee system is as old as the House itself, having been pat- terned after the English House of Commons, the colonial assemblies, and the Continental Congress.
    [Show full text]