Congress - Legislation Flashcards
4 main differences between the UK and US - legislative process
Bills go through two houses parallel, not one after the other (with the need to ‘merge’ the different bills together in a conference committee
The committee stage is earlier; in the US the committee stage is the first step, making committees more important
The President can veto bills
Another key difference is that the executive is not part of Congress, and therefore cannot introduce bills in Congress. The President has to ask a member of Congress to introduce
bills they want to pass.
bills introduced in the US congress 2019-20
16,093
laws enacted
193 - 1%
Why is the success rate in the US so much lower?
1.Large number of bills
2.Equality of both houses
3. Polarisation
4. Presidential veto
5. Filibuster
1.Large number of bills
Around 6,000 per year. The huge amount of legislation means not all can be
debated and voted on – there is simply not enough time to do so in one Congress (2 years).
If a bill is not scheduled for debate with priority, it is unlikely to pass.
In the UK Parliament fewer than 100 bills per year are introduced each year, and about half get passed (usually all government bills
get passed, only private members bills fail)
equality of both houses
In the UK it really is the House of Commons alone who decides – the House of Lords can only amend and delay
In the US, both the House and Senate need to pass a law – if one votes it against, the bill is binned. The reason is due to the principle of checks and balances and to ensure limited government
Example:
In 2017 the House voted for the 2nd version of the American Health Care Act.
The Senate voted against (3 times)
Polarisation
In the past, differences between both parties were solved through bipartisanship.
Ideological polarisation leads increasingly to gridlock; the gap between both parties is simply
too large
Example:
2013 or 2018/19 federal government shutdown
2016 Merrick Garland appointment
presidential veto
The president has a powerful veto (which the Queen does not have): he can veto (block) any law. After a bill is passed by Congress he can do 3 things - Sign bills he supports
Leave – becomes law automatically after 10 days. Bills he doesn’t support, but does
not want to veto
Veto Bills he really opposes
Filibuster
Senators have a special power: the filibuster. A bill can only be voted on when the debate has finished. If the debate doesn’t end before the scheduled deadline to vote: there is no vote!
So, bills can be ‘talked out’. Other Senators need a 3/5th (60 vote) majority to end a filibuster. This means that controversial bills effectively need a 3/5th majority in the Senate
Example - 2021 Republican filibuster of the For the People Act (successful)
how can you criticise the filibuster?
Filibusters can be seen as undemocratic
2013 rule changes meant filibusters are no longer allowed for presidential appointments to the executive (but still applied to Supreme Court appointments)
2017 rule change also abolished filibusters for
presidential appointments to the judiciary
what are earmarks
provisions in a bill that allocate funds to a specific local project
why are earmarks added to bills
They are only included in return for support from members of Congress
why are earmarks seen negatively
They increase (wasteful) spending of taxpayers’
money
They focus too much on local interests, not the
national interest
They can amount to corruption, a form of bribes
They give incumbents an unfair advantage
what is pork barrel politics
Members of Congress may ask for money for projects in their state or district to be added, such as road building projects, an army base, investment in tourism, etc. This practice of claiming federal funds for a local project (in
return for support for the bill) is called (negatively) ‘pork barrelling’
examples of pork barrel
Gravina Island Bridge
$400m ‘Bridge to nowhere’
2005: Alaska Senator Ted Stevens gets earmark in spending bill for $400m bridge to island with 50 inhabitants
