Scanned by CamScannerScanned by CamScannerChapte.docx

Scanned by CamScanner
Chapter 13:The Bureaucracy
ADA Text Version
Learning Objectives
1. Describe the formal organization of the federal bureaucracy.
2. Classify the vital functions performed by the bureaucracy.
3. Explain the present Civil Service system and contrast it with
the 19th century spoils system.
4. Identify the various factors contributing to bureaucracy's
growth over time.
5. Compare the means by which Congress and the president
attempt to maintain control over the bureaucracy.
6. Analyze and evaluate the problems that bureaucratic
organization poses for American democracy.
Introduction
The very word "bureaucracy" often carries negative
connotations. To refer to an institution as a "bureaucracy" or
characterize it as "bureaucratic" is usually intended as an insult.
But the national bureaucracy, sometimes called the "fourth
branch of government", is responsible for practically all of the
day-to-day work of governing the country. While bureaucracy in
the United States, consistent with our tradition of more limited
government, is smaller than its counterparts in other
longstanding democracies, its influence extends to almost every
corner of American society. From delivery of the mail to
regulation of the stock market to national defense, federal

employees plan, regulate, adjudicate, enforce, and implement
federal law. Despite recurrent calls to "shrink" the size of
government, the federal bureaucracy remains the largest single
employer in the United States. This lesson examines the
bureaucracy's formal organization, its critical role in the
American economy and society, and its perceived weaknesses.
Study Questions
1. How did sociologist Max Weber define bureaucracy?
2. Identify the various functions federal bureaucracies perform
giving at least one example each:
a. Implementation
b. Regulation
c. Adjudication
d. Enforcement
e. Policy-making
3. How many people does the federal government employ? For
what percentage of GDP does federal spending account? How
does this compare to other economically advanced democracies?
4. Classify and distinguish the major types of bureaucracy in the
federal government:
a. Cabinet Departments
b. Independent Agencies
c. Independent Regulatory Commissions
d. Government Corporations
5. How does the federal bureaucracy select and recruit
personnel? Contrast the present civil service system with the
spoils system. What advantages does the present system
provide?
6. What factors explain the growth of bureaucracy over time
despite recurrent calls for limiting the size of government?
7. Identify those factors in the budget process making it
difficult to cut bureaucratic funding.
8. Describe the way Congress authorizes funding for the federal
bureaucracy.
9. How does Congress attempt to control the federal
bureaucracy?

10. How does the president attempt to control the federal
bureaucracy?
11. What special problems does bureaucratic independence
present in a democracy? Discuss with reference to the following
concepts:
a. Iron Triangles
b. The "Revolving Door"
c. The Capture Theory of Regulation
d. What obstacles do "whistleblowers" face?
12. How does current law balance the political rights of federal
employees with the need to ensure that federal employees are
loyal workers?
13. Summarize the arguments of those who have argued for
deregulation.Report an Online Accessibility Issue
Article 2:unctions of the Bureaucracy
ADA Text Version
Bureaucracy describes an organizational structure defined by a
specific set of procedures, protocols, and regulations, which
typically include hierarchy (clear chain of command and
communication), a division of labor and specialized functions,
and a clear system of rules and procedures to make decision-
making consistent, impersonal, and fair. In a modern
bureaucracy, employees are theoretically recruited and
promoted based on competence, though advancement through
the ranks is often due to political considerations as well. Private
businesses, government agencies, and small, citizen associations
(such as the Boy Scouts) may all be characterized by
bureaucratic organization.
The federal bureaucracy, or THE bureaucracy, refers to the
various departments, agencies, and regulatory commissions of
the federal government. The bureaucracy has as its primary
purpose the implementation of government policy. According to
the simplistic model of separation of powers, Congress makes
laws, the executive branch implements and enforces the laws,
and the courts interpret them. By this understanding, the
bureaucracy is an extension of the executive branch, helping it

achieve its basic function. While this is a fair generalization, it
obscures the fact the federal bureaucracy is much more than a
passive agent of the elected branches. It is, rather, a powerful
set of political players in its own right and fills several
important roles.
Policy Implementation
Without a doubt, putting the laws of Congress and orders of the
president into effect is the fundamental responsibility of the
bureaucracy. Neither Congress nor the president and his
advisors have the time or resources to do this job themselves.
This is why even the smallest federal bureaucracy tends to have
large numbers of employees. They translate law into policy by
issuing regulations, rules that carry the force of law directing
the operation of government programs. In other words, while
the rules are derived from the laws of Congress and orders of
the president, they are binding on all citizens as if they were
directly the laws of Congress, at least until overturned by
higher authorities or successfully challenged in court. All
federal regulation must be published and made available to the
public in the Federal Register, the bible of federal regulations.
By law, proposed regulations must be published and subject to
challenge through hearings or written complaints by interested
citizens before they take effect.
Policymaking
By virtue of its ability to issue implementing regulations
carrying the force of law, the bureaucracy exercises
considerable discretion in making policy as well. In passing
legislation, Congress cannot write laws that cover every
foreseeable circumstance that may arise during implementation.
Frequently, members of Congress lack the technical expertise to
draft legislation specific enough to accomplish its goals. This
leaves considerable discretion to bureaucratic agencies to
determine the content of those laws via regulatory function. For
example, few members of Congress are knowledgeable enough

in environmental science to determine what level of mercury in
water sources constitutes a credible safety risk; and members of
Congress cannot judge which new drugs are safe enough for
consumer use to be introduced into the market. These decisions
are left to the Environmental Protection Agency and Food and
Drug Administration, respectively. In policymaking, the devil is
often in the details, and these details are frequently left to the
federal bureaucracy.
Information Gathering
An obviously important, yet frequently overlooked, function of
the federal bureaucracy completes the policymaking cycle.
Bureaucratic agencies provide valuable research to help
Congress and the president make informed decisions. Good
decision-making requires, at a minimum, good information. The
president relies on the State Department to supply accurate
assessments of the political circumstances affecting foreign
policy options. The Department of Defense offers both Congress
and the president information about weapon systems needed to
maintain an effective national security position. In 2003, when
the Central Intelligence Agency provided erroneous information
to President George W. Bush about the existence of weapons of
mass destruction in Iraq, the consequences were highly
damaging for American public diplomacy and foreign policy.
Information gathered by government bureaucracies needs to be
precise and correct; without it elected policymakers would be
flying blind. Bureaucracies should provide the expertise that
elected officials lack.
Adjudication
Some bureaucracies, in their roles as bodies of dispute
resolution, exercise quasi-judicial powers through their ability
to hold regulatory hearings and determine whether individuals
or institutions are in compliance with federal regulations.
Examples of such bureaucratic entities include the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, which rules on

workplace discrimination, and the Securities and Exchange
Commission, which investigates and determines violations such
as insider trading on the stock market. Many remember the fines
imposed by the Federal Communications Commission on the
CBS television network after decency rules governing broadcast
television were violated when Janet Jackson's breast was
exposed during her 2004 Super Bowl halftime performance.
Millions of viewers around the country witnessed the incident
with surprise or outrage. But, administrative rulings by federal
commissions or agencies are subject to review by federal courts,
since the Constitution requires that judicial function rest with
the federal judiciary.
Enforcement
Many of the police powers of the federal government, mostly
derived from Congress' commerce clause authority, are vested
in federal bureaucracies with specialized law enforcement
missions and jurisdiction. The famous Federal Bureau of
Investigations (FBI) is a national police force authorized to
investigate and enforce violations of federal law. The Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) is the federal government's
frontline weapon in the now decades-old War on Drugs. The
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (a
classic example of bureaucratic mission creep), has its
specialized missions advertised in its somewhat cumbersome
title. Behind these various federal police agencies is an
extensive federally-run prison system populated by more than
200,000 inmates at the end of 2010.
CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING
Additional ResourcesWebsites
The Federal Register
The Federal Register contains most routine publications and
public notices of federal government agencies. At this site, you
can search, browse, and read the current issue of the Federal

Register.
USA.gov: The US Government's Official Web Portal
Home page of the US Government's Official Web Portal for all
government transactions, services, and information. It provides
direct online access to federal, state, local, and tribal
governments. Includes an organizational database for
understanding bureaucratic responsibilities.
Article 3:
DA Text Version
Federal bureaucracies are primarily distinguished from one
another by the appointment of their leadership and the degree to
which they enjoy policymaking independence from the president
and Congress. It is difficult to determine an exact count of the
number of federal agencies since certain agencies are formally
part of other agencies. Not counting the military, however, the
number exceeds one thousand federal agencies. The four major
categories of federal bureaucracies are: (a) cabinet departments
(Departments), (b) independent agencies, (c) regulatory
commissions, and (d) government corporations.
Cabinet Departments
Cabinet departments comprise the largest category of the
federal bureaucracy as measured by number of employees and
resources. There are fifteen cabinet departments with broad
charge for policy responsibilities such as Defense, Justice,
Health and Human Services, and the most recently created, the
Department of Homeland Security. With the exception of the
Department of Justice, which is headed by the Attorney
General, each department is commanded by a cabinet Secretary
who is appointed by the president (with confirmation of the
Senate) and answers directly to the president. This collective
group of department Secretaries comprises the president's
formal advisory committee—the Cabinet. These departments are
the government agencies most directly accountable to the
president, who can fire and replace ranking members at will,

though subject to political constraints. Departments have
elaborate subdivisions of bureaus, sections, and offices
responsible for sometimes highly specialized policy areas. For
example, the Internal Revenue Service is a bureau of the
Department of Treasury charged with the crucial task of
collecting revenue and enforcing tax laws. The mere fact that a
policy area has been elevated to the level of cabinet department
emphasizes its national importance.
The Department of Homeland Security
While the word "bureaucracy" often carries negative
connotations, bureaucracies actually perform the vital day-to-
day functions of government. But never has a bureaucracy's
mission been more important than that of the Department of
Homeland Security, created in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist
attacks. This video recounts the short turbulent history of the
Department of Homeland Security and assesses whether this
bureaucracy is fulfilling its mission of keeping America
safe.Video Focus Points
Look for answers to these questions when watching the video:
· What is the role of federal bureaucracy in governing the
United States?
· What are some of the strengths and weaknesses of federal
bureaucracy?
Independent Agencies
While the directors of independent agencies, like cabinet
Secretaries, are directly responsible to the president,
independent agencies are not formally part of cabinet
departments. Independent agencies are smaller and more
focused in their areas of responsibility. Familiar examples
include the Environmental Protection Agency, the Central
Intelligence Agency, and NASA (the National Air and Space
Administration). As a general rule, independent agencies enjoy

greater autonomy than cabinet departments, though they are
ultimately accountable to the president and Congress.
Regulatory Commissions
Regulatory commissions are created to regulate specific areas of
the economy or related workplace concerns. They are typically
the most independent of government bureaucracies, existing
outside the cabinet departments. Regulatory commissions are
designed to enjoy greater freedom from political influence. This
is seen most clearly in the limited ability of Congress or the
president to remove commission members, who are appointed by
the president and approved by the Senate to serve for fixed
terms. These terms are staggered to promote political diversity.
Prominent examples of regulatory commissions include the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). Arguably the most
powerful and independent of the regulatory commissions is the
Federal Reserve Board, established in 1913. This powerful
institution is the architect of the nation's monetary policy, one
of the two major tools available to government for influencing
the economy. Its seven members serve fourteen-year terms and
cannot be easily removed prior to completion of their terms. As
a result, monetary policy has been considerably insulated from
the political pressures to which the president and Congress are
vulnerable, although this has not been without some
controversy.
Government Corporations
Entities created by the government to operate like private sector
businesses are known as government corporations. As business-
like entities, they are organized with the autonomy to generate
revenues in areas where the private sector is perceived as not
meeting citizen needs. They differ conspicuously from cabinet
departments, agencies, and commissions, both by the practice of
charging for the services they provide and their ability, ideally

if not in practice, to make profits. But some well-known
government corporations, such as the US Postal Service and
Amtrak, have required considerable subsidies from the federal
government to remain viable. The US Postal Service,
specifically authorized by the US Constitution, exists to ensure
that all citizens have access to mail, though the recent success
of private sector competitors and the growth of email via the
Internet have challenged the rationale for government
sponsorship.
The Cabinet
The official site provides the names of the current president’s
cabinet members along with links to the executive departments.
Internal Revenue Service
Department of Homeland Security
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA)
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
The Federal Reserve Board
US Postal Service
Amtrak
Article 4:
Staffing the Bureaucracy
ADA Text Version
The modern federal bureaucracy has evolved to substantially
depoliticize the hiring and firing practices affecting government
employees, to ensure those hired for government positions are
competent, and to protect the basic civil liberties of government
workers whose political preferences may differ from those of
supervisors. However, the goal of creating a quality, apolitical

corps of government personnel inevitably conflicts with the
reality of bureaucracies being subservient to the direction of
political and partisan elected officials.
The Spoils System
In the early decades of the United States, federal jobs in the
much smaller bureaucracy were staffed through a spoils system
("to the victor go the spoils"), whereby federal jobs were
awarded almost entirely on the basis of loyalty to the victorious
political parties. Higher-level positions in government were
based on the practice called patronage, with elected officials
giving choice federal jobs to friends and supporters who were
important to their electoral success.
The Merit System
The 1881 assassination of President James Garfield by a
disgruntled individual who had failed to secure a federal job
gave new impetus to the cause of civil service reform. The
Pendleton Act of 1883 established a Civil Service Commission
and began a process of bureaucratic reform recognizing the
principle of merit. A merit system is one in which government
jobs are awarded on the basis of both educational and
professional qualifications and, as in the case of the federal
government, by an individual's performance on competitive
examinations related to the field of service. The present merit
system used to fill the vast majority of jobs in the federal
bureaucracy is called the civil service system. It consists of a
highly structured qualification/pay pyramid with levels known
as grades. The higher one's grade, the more the employee earns
in annual salary.
Compensation
It has been argued that federal employees are generally well-
compensated and enjoy good benefits compared to their
counterparts in the private sector. However, many critics
contend that federal workers are overpaid. While the average

salary of a federal worker compares favorably to the average
private sector worker (according to the United States Bureau of
Economic Analysis), it must be taken into account that federal
workers are better educated, on average, and more likely to
work in white collar jobs than individuals in the private sector.
It is also the case that federal employees in the highest-level,
high-profile positions make considerably less than CEOs in the
private sector. The debate over the compensation of federal
employees is also complicated, and politicized, by the related
controversy over the federal bureaucracy's relative inefficiency
and low productivity. However, federal bureaucracies must
balance values such as efficiency and responsiveness with
sometimes countervailing values such as fairness and
accountability. Almost by definition, private business operates
with a degree of freedom not afforded to federal bureaucracies.
Political Involvement
Another issue in bureaucratic employment has involved the
degree to which federal employees may exercise political
liberties as private citizens when they are held accountable to
elected officials selected by a very political process. At one
time the ability of federal employees to engage in political
activities was severely circumscribed by law. Government
workers were not permitted to engage openly in partisan
politics. The Hatch Act of 1939 prohibited federal employees
from working for political campaigns, donating to campaigns, or
volunteering with a political party. The Federal Employees
Political Activities Act of 1993 liberated federal employees to
engage in most every political activity that a private citizen
enjoys. They may even run for public office, although federal
employees may still not run for office in partisan elections.
Privatization
From the familiar blue-shirted neighborhood postal worker to
the American ambassador in a distant African nation, federal
bureaucrats are vital to the performance of effective

government. Not counting the armed forces, the federal
government is still the largest employer in the United States,
with approximately 2 percent of the national workforce on its
payroll. In a variety of contexts, however, the federal
government has increasingly explored outsourcing certain
services to private companies. This trend has been most visible,
and controversial, in the government's use of private military
companies to support US missions. According to a 2010
Congressional report, private military contractors made up as
much as 30 percent of the armed US forces in Afghanistan. The
government also deployed private military forces to New
Orleans and the Gulf area during its delayed response to
Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Proponents of outsourcing
government services, military or otherwise, point to cost
savings and efficiencies to be gained by turning to the private
sector. Critics highlight with equal concern the loss of
accountability inherent in such measures, citing as examples the
roguish behavior of military mercenaries and abuses in prisons
whose operations have been contracted to private companies.
Virtual Roundtable
In the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the 2010 Gulf oil spill, the
role of government bureaucracy in disaster relief situations has
been questioned. Is the government or the private sector more
effective when responding to large scale disasters, such as
Hurricane Katrina?
OPEN VIDEO ROUND TABLE
The Plum Book
Published after each presidential election, the United States
Government Policy and Supporting Positions (known as the
Plum Book) lists over 7,000 federal civil service leadership and

support positions in the legislative and executive branches of
the federal government. The publication covers positions such
as agency heads and their immediate subordinates, policy
executives and advisors, and aides who report to these
officials.Books
Confessions of a Tax Collector: One Man's Tour of Duty Inside
the IRS, by Richard Yancey.
After failing at a number of jobs, Yancey joined the IRS as a
revenue officer when he answered a want ad in the newspaper.
At the start of his career, Yancey was ambivalent about working
for the IRS, but the longer he stayed with the organization the
more seriously he took his responsibility to collect from
delinquent taxpayers.
Report an Online Accessibility Issue
Article 5:
Issues with Modern Bureaucracy
ADA Text Version
Growth of the Bureaucracy
By comparative standards, the federal bureaucracy was tiny
until the outbreak of the Civil War in 1861. Before World War
I, it was still quite small by the standards of industrializing
nations. In 1940, federal spending accounted for less than 10
percent of gross domestic product (GDP), but with spikes in
defense expenditures during World War II, federal spending
reached a historic high of nearly 44 percent of GDP in 1943 and
1944. In 2003, it accounted for just under 20 percent. Since
then, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and ever-increasing spending
on Medicare and Social Security have pushed that percentage
even higher. The Great Recession of 2008 caused a spike in
government spending from nearly 21 percent of GDP in 2007 to
over 25 percent in 2008. While it is false to paint a picture of
the federal government as a creature that grows incessantly
(civilian federal employment declined in the 1990s), economic
crises like the Great Depression and frequent wars expand the

size of government. The expectation that government should
provide welfare services to a variety of groups—the old, the
poor, the sick, children—has also contributed to the
bureaucracy's expansion.
Because bureaucracy has grown to be such a pervasive part of
American life, it is no surprise that a growing bureaucracy has
come under increased criticism in a political culture that has a
strong, instinctive reflex toward limited government. Detractors
argue the federal bureaucracy is too big, too inefficient, and too
costly. Whatever the benefits of a welfare state and its attendant
bureaucracy, there is substance to these charges. Government
bureaucracies, in general, are vulnerable to a number of
pathologies traceable to the logic of their organization, purpose,
and political influences.
How Bureaucracy Evolved
The federal bureaucracy has grown from three cabinet
departments in George Washington's administration to fifteen
cabinet departments in 2010. What factors influenced the
growth of the federal bureaucracy? Test your knowledge about
how the federal bureaucracy evolved.
LAUNCH ACTIVITY
Inefficiency
Another common complaint leveled at the federal bureaucracy is
that it is inefficient and often ineffective. Government
bureaucracies are not disciplined by the need to make profits or
the threat of going out of business. As a result, they are more
prone to wasteful spending. Worse, interagency jealousy and a
lack of cooperation have led to turf wars, resulting in dark
outcomes. Critics, including the 9/11 Commission, have pointed
to the reluctance of complementary federal agencies, including
the CIA, FBI, and Department of State, to cooperate in the years
and months leading up to the September 11, 2001 terrorist

attacks as an important reason behind the US government's
failure to identify and prevent the attacks.
Government bureaucracies are institutions that seek to preserve
their existence and funding in a variety of ways. One of the
factors contributing to the "inertia of growth" is that in most
years funding for government agencies is premised on baseline
budgeting, which assumes that federal agencies will receive the
same resources they received in the past budget and must now
make the case for further increases in funding. Rarely,
especially in good economic times, are federal bureaucracies
asked to justify existing programs and expenses. Downsizing
government bureaucracy, even when the political will is
present, is also made difficult by the fact that federal law makes
it much more difficult to fire unionized federal employees than
for private companies to fire workers. Federal workers who
have become unnecessary may remain part of the government
workforce long after their usefulness has expired.
"Mission Creep"
It isn't only that government bureaucracies seek to preserve
existing functions and resources; they seek to expand their
functions and size. From a budgetary standpoint, the best
defense is a good offense. In a process that can be called
mission creep, bureaucracies perpetually, and often
successfully, attempt to find new reasons to justify their
existence, even when the original rationale for their creation has
disappeared. The evolution of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives is a classic example. Its predecessor
was originally charged with enforcing Prohibition during the
1920s and 1930s, but the prohibition of recreational alcohol
ended in 1933. The bureau's mission subsequently expanded
from the policing of illegal alcohol to cigarettes in the 1950s, to
illegal firearms in the 1960s, to illegal explosives in the wake
of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. To paraphrase a frequently
cited truism, "old bureaucracies never die, they just invent new
missions."

Iron Triangles
Other criticisms of bureaucratic behavior center on its negative
impact on democracy. Bureaucracies, in theory, are supposed to
represent the public interest as defined and formulated by
elected officials. But what if the influence of special interests—
interest groups, Congressmen seeking reelection, and
bureaucrats themselves—collude to frustrate what is truly in the
public's interest? This situation defines the chronic reality, and
often danger, of what political scientists sometimes refer to as
iron triangles—the tight, mutually beneficial relationships that
form between government bureaucracies, congressional
committees, and interest groups, not always for the greater good
of the citizenry.
In a classic example, one can point to numerous cases of
weapons procurement by the Department of Defense.
Manufacture of weapon parts for which the federal government
has contracted may be done by a suspiciously large number of
defense contractors and originate in a suspiciously large number
of states. Interest groups, in the form of private defense
companies, have a vested interest in making substantial
campaign contributions to members of important congressional
committees with authority to authorize funding for weapons
projects. Members of congressional committees stand to gain
campaign funds and bragging rights about jobs they have
brought to their districts if they award funding to these
companies. To complete the triangle, federal bureaucrats in the
Department of Defense charged with procurement contracting
may or may not experience an immediate payoff, but they may
later walk through the "revolving door" that leads from
government employment to employment with the private
defense companies. There may be no conscious awareness of
wrongdoing or ethical lapse, but rather a self-rationalization
about how the process and decisions served the interests of the
public. One must critically examine, however, the growing trend

of former government employees, including congressmen,
leaving government service to work for the companies with
which they used to interact on behalf of the federal government,
typically for far more money than they ever earned as modest
public servants.
Iron Triangles
Bureaucrats and congressional committees have close
relationships with interest groups wanting to influence
government policies. These strong alliances form iron triangles.
Every policy area has an iron triangle associated with it. Can
you select groups that would form alliances in an iron triangle?
LAUNCH ACTIVITY
The Revolving Door
This phenomenon of the revolving door in the political system,
despite federal time restrictions on when government employees
may accept jobs from such groups, has mushroomed in recent
decades. But the door is not one-way. Talented individuals from
the private sector are often solicited by the president to serve as
cabinet officials and federal appointees in the administration,
providing needed expertise. This passage of experienced
individuals back-and-forth between government and business,
while inevitable, points to the perennial problem of regulatory
capture, in which members of government agencies or
commissions charged with regulating specific industries, such
as the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Food and
Drug Administration, identify with and become overly
sympathetic to the industries they are charged with
regulating.Additional ResourcesWebsites
The Center for Public Integrity
This nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organization’s
mission is to “enhance democracy by revealing abuses of power,
corruption and betrayal of trust by powerful public and private

institutions, using the tools of investigative journalism.” The
website provides news and information on corruption,
mismanagement, and waste in government.Books
America in Space: NASA's First Fifty Years, by Steven Dick.
A bureaucracy with the mission to "pioneer the future in space
exploration, scientific discovery and aeronautics research,"
NASA's funding is often subject to a political tug-of-war in
Congress.
Article 6:Restraints on the Bureaucracy
ADA Text Version
Granting the propensity of all government bureaucracies and
bureaucrats to pursue their own institutional and personal
agendas, sometimes with the collusion of elected officials, how
do the three constitutionally established branches of national
government control a powerful federal bureaucracy and bring it
into compliance with the prerogatives of elected
representatives? Though the size of the federal bureaucracy, not
to mention sheer inertia, makes the task difficult, the tools
available to the three branches are considerable. Ultimately, the
executive, legislative, and judicial branches will prevail over
government agencies as long as the attention and will is there.
The President
The president influences the composition and direction of
government agencies through appointment power. The three
thousand or so direct appointments through which the president
fills high-level positions are sometimes referred to as
presidential plums. Presidents naturally try to appoint
individuals who share their political and policy preferences. The
president may also pressure government agencies by exerting
influence over the budget submitted to Congress through the
Office of Management and Budget. Within the limits of existing
legislation, the president additionally wields the power to issue
executive orders directing bureaucratic behavior. These orders
have the force of law and can change bureaucratic regulations.
Also, within the limits of congressional legislation, the

president may reorganize government agencies to reflect policy
intentions.
Congress
Congress holds the power of the purse and can turn off the
financial spigot from which government bureaucracies are
funded. Though a cabinet department has never been abolished
once created, Congress has the power to completely abolish
government agencies should it wish to do so. It can cut or
reduce funding for particular programs. Congress can also use
oversight power, holding official hearings or conducting
investigations backed by the power to compel testimony by
relevant government bureaucrats, in order to monitor or
discipline government agencies. Because congressional
legislation is superior to regulations, it can use its lawmaking
power to change bureaucratic policies. The Senate also plays a
role in the appointment process, since its approval of
presidential appointments is required by the US Constitution.
The Courts
Finally, the federal courts exercise the same police power over
government agencies they exercise over all government actors.
Their judicial power permits them to declare bureaucratic
policies and actions illegal or even unconstitutional. They can
apply constitutional principles to ensure that individuals in
conflict with bureaucratic decisions receive a fair hearing of
grievances. It should also be mentioned that there is a federal
agency, the General Accounting Office, with the specific
mission of monitoring the spending of federal money by
government agencies. In the past, it has identified large amounts
of money that have been wasted or misspent by the bureaucracy.
Chapter 12 The presidency
Article 1:

ADA Text Version
Learning Objectives
1. Classify the various leadership roles assumed by modern
presidents.
2. Identify both formal and informal powers exercised by the
president.
3. Describe the president's role in the legislative process.
4. Evaluate events that have enhanced or undermined
presidential power.
5. Analyze the supporting role played by the vice president and
key institutions of the executive branch.
Introduction
The president is both head of state and head of government in
the US political system. While those who drafted the
Constitution anticipated a president who would typically play a
subordinate role to that of Congress, the relative balance of
power between Congress and the presidency has shifted
dramatically over the past century. As presidential power has
expanded, so have the size and function of the executive branch
which now comprises fifteen cabinet-level departments and an
astonishing variety of regulatory bureaucracies. The modern
president wears may hats, among them commander in chief,
chief diplomat, policy leader, and chief administrator. Though
perhaps overestimating his power in this regard, Americans
have increasingly looked to the president as steward of the
economy as well. This lesson examines the reasons for the
growth of presidential power in the modern era and the means
by which it is exercised.
Study Questions
1. Define the major roles the presidency occupies.
2. Identify the constitutional requirements for serving as
president of the United States.
3. What are the president's most important formal powers as
described in the US Constitution?
4. Explain the use of informal powers accumulated by modern
presidents:

a. Executive Orders
b. Executive Agreements
c. Executive Privilege
5. What role does the president play in the legislative/budget
process?
6. List the president's appointment powers. How does the Senate
influence the appointment process?
7. How did the Twenty-second and Twenty-fifth Amendments
impact the office of president?
8. Discuss the president's foreign policy powers. What tools
does Congress have to restrain the president's deployment of
combat troops? Have these tools been effective?
9. Describe the factors that most affect the success or failure of
presidential leadership.
10. What role does the vice president play in presidential
administrations?
11. What is the Executive Office of the President?
12. Who makes up the membership of the National Security
Council? What is the NSC's function?
13. Identify the most powerful Cabinet Departments.
14. What tools does the president use to maintain control over
the bureaucracy?
15. What does the phrase "imperial presidency" mean? Does the
United States have an "imperial presidency"?Report an Online
Accessibility Issue
Article 2:
Qualifications and Roles
ADA Text Version
Qualifications, Terms of Office, and Succession
Donald Trump By White House [Public domain], via Wikimedia
CommonsThe Constitution requires that the president be a
natural-born citizen of the United States, a minimum of 35 years
old, and a resident of the United States for at least 14 years.
The president is elected to a four-year term and is limited to

serving two terms since the adoption of the Twenty-second
Amendment in 1951. (The president may serve ten years if he or
she acquires the office as a result of the death or impeachment
of the former president.)
The Twenty-fifth Amendment, adopted in 1967, provides for the
appointment of a vice president in the event the office is
vacated, as well as the means by which a president may be
removed from office and replaced if incapacitated and unable to
serve. The Constitution also provides for impeachment, a
process allowing Congress to remove the president from office
in the event of wrong-doing, specifically for treason, bribery, or
other high crimes and misdemeanors. A president may be
impeached by a simple majority vote of the House of
Representatives, but it takes a two-thirds vote in the Senate to
actually convict and remove an impeached president from
office. Two presidents, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, were
impeached but neither one was removed from office.
Roles of the President
Article II of the US Constitution establishes the president as the
head of the executive branch. The president wears many hats in
the American political system, among them head of state, head
of government, commander in chief, and chief diplomat. The
president is the only elected official who is selected, albeit
indirectly, by the entire voting populace of the United States.
While many presidential powers are formally delegated by the
Constitution, a president's informal powers, developed over
time through political practice and Congressional or judicial
acquiescence, are often just as important in determining
presidential effectiveness.
In the federal system, the president is both head of state and
government, two roles that are clearly separated in
parliamentary systems. As head of state, the president serves as
spokesman for the entire country, discarding partisan identity,
and represents the United States with foreign governments. As
head of government the president is expected to be a policy

leader and is head of his political party in Congress. These two
roles sometimes exist in tension with one another. Article II
specifies that the executive power rests with the president. The
executive power encompasses the power to implement and
defend the laws of the country. It also implies the ability to act
with greater speed and efficiency than Congress. In the words of
Alexander Hamilton, one of the Founding Fathers of the United
States, the president is characterized by the ability to act with
"decision, activity, secrecy, and dispatch."
As commander-in-chief of the armed forces, the president
directs the use of the military and asserts civilian control over
it. Although only Congress has the formal power to declare war,
past presidents have used the commander-in-chief power, and
their responsibility to faithfully execute (uphold) the laws, to
initiate military action without a declaration of war, sometimes
without Congressional approval. As chief diplomat, the
president's formal powers include negotiating treaties (with the
advice and consent of the Senate) and receiving and appointing
ambassadors. Presidential practice has also recognized the
ability to conduct diplomacy by executive agreement, a less
formal agreement with foreign heads of state that does not have
the durability of a treaty nor require ratification by the Senate.
Defining Presidential Responsibilities
The president's job description requires him to fulfill seven
primary roles. While the Constitution mentions several of these
duties, others have evolved over time. This activity focuses on
the responsibilities associated with each presidential role.
LAUNCH ACTIVITY
The President's Roles
The president plays seven key roles in executing his duties. Can
you determine the principal presidential role in each of these
historical events?

LAUNCH ACTIVITY
The White House Online
The official website for the White House. This site is a source
for information about the current president, executive branch
news, and White House history.
American Presidents Life Portraits
The Peabody Award winning series profiles the men who have
served as chief executive of the United States. Provides an in-
depth look at each of the presidents, their lives, families, and
administrations.Books
Decision Points, by George W. Bush.
Bush’s memoir brings readers inside the Texas governor’s
mansion on the night of the 2000 presidential election, aboard
Air Force One during the harrowing hours after the attacks of
September 11, 2001, into the Situation Room moments before
the start of the war in Iraq, and behind the scenes at the White
House for many other historic presidential decisions.
My Life, by Bill Clinton.
Clinton's memoir chronicles his life growing up in Hope,
Arkansas, his education at Georgetown and Harvard, and his
ascent to state and national political life. Of particular interest
is Clinton's ability to build personal relationships with his
fellow politicians and political opponents.
The Reagan Diaries, by Ronald Reagan.
During his eight years as the 40th President of the United
States, Ronald Reagan kept a daily diary in which he recorded
his innermost thoughts and observations. They share insights
into the extraordinary, the historic, and the day-to-day
experiences of the president.
First Presidential Messages: Two Hundred Twenty Years of
Inaugural Addresses and Statements on Becoming President,
1789-2009, by George Otey.
This book contains 220 years of inaugural addresses, from
George Washington in 1789 to Barack Obama in 2009. In

addition to inaugural speeches, this compilation also records the
little-known remarks given by those Vice Presidents who have
assumed the higher office.
Article 3:Presidential Powers
ADA Text Version
Formal Powers
The Constitution endows the presidency with significant powers
in addition to his authority as commander-in-chief and chief
diplomat. The president helps set the agenda for Congress’
legislative and budgetary priorities using public proclamation
including the annual State of the Union address. Because the
president cannot directly introduce bills in the legislature, his
formal legislative power is largely negative, consisting of the
presidential veto allowing him to strike down bills that have
been passed by Congress. Congress may override a veto by a
two-thirds vote, but in practice, it is rarely able to muster the
required number of votes to do so.
The president also enjoys broad constitutional authority to make
appointments, including those to his own cabinet, federal judges
(most importantly, Supreme Court justices), and ambassadors.
The appointment power is crucial to the effective exercise of
executive power as it enables the president to exercise some
semblance of control over a huge executive branch and
sprawling federal bureaucracy. In all, there are approximately
4,000 individuals whom the president appoints to government
office. Most presidential appointments, however, must be made
with the advice and consent of the Senate.
The president also has the unqualified power to pardon
individuals and even entire classes of people. A pardon is an
executive act that releases individuals from criminal liability or
punishment. It has been used by presidents for purposes as
varied as freeing political campaign donors from prison and
absolving conscientious objectors and draft-dodgers of criminal

liability. The most famous presidential pardon was Gerald
Ford’s pardon of ex-president Richard Nixon for probable
criminal wrongdoing in the 1970s Watergate scandal.
Informal Powers
Through presidential practice and tradition, American
presidents have acquired informal powers that are not explicitly
listed in the Constitution, among them executive orders,
executive agreements, and executive privilege. Executive orders
are regulations issued by the president that have the force of
law. They are used to conduct much of the day-to-day business
of governance and direct the behavior of federal bureaucracies.
Executive orders may be used by presidents in their role as
commander-in-chief, as in President Harry S. Truman’s
executive order desegregating the military in 1947, or as a
means of implementing Congressional legislation.
Executive agreements can be thought of as an informal treaty,
taking the shape of a public agreement between the president
and another head of state. Unlike a formal treaty, executive
agreements do not require ratification by a two-thirds vote in
the Senate.
Executive privilege is an implied presidential power allowing
the president to keep confidential certain information related to
national security or certain communications within the
executive branch. In recent decades, executive privilege has
been scaled back by a series of Supreme Court decisions
defining formidable exceptions to when a president may invoke
the concept. For example, in its US v. Nixon (1974) decision
dealing with the Watergate scandal, the Supreme Court ruled
executive privilege does not permit the president to defy a court
order mandating the release of information necessary to conduct
a criminal trial or investigation.
Limits of Presidential Power: Watergate
In 1974, President Richard Nixon invoked executive privilege to
avoid releasing evidence that could implicate him in the cover-

up of the Watergate break-in. Eventually the Supreme Court was
forced to test the limits of presidential power. In this video,
Watergate special prosecutor Archibald Cox recalls the dramatic
events that led to Nixon’s resignation and offers his perspective
on the legal questions surrounding Nixon’s use of executive
privilege.Video Focus Points
· Was President Nixon subject to judicial process?
· What was President Nixon's reason for not wanting to turn
over the tape recordings?
· What was the Saturday Night Massacre?
Article 4:
Expansion of Presidential Power
ADA Text Version
Although the balance of power between the president and
Congress is constantly evolving, the power of the presidency
has grown immensely over the past two centuries, particularly
in the 20th century. The Framers would be startled by the scope
of presidential power today. In the late 18th and 19th centuries,
this generally occurred when assertive presidents pushed the
prior boundaries of the office or found their powers temporarily
expanded by the necessities of war, as with Abraham Lincoln
during the Civil War. However, the most extraordinary
expansions of presidential power occurred during the 20th
century when a combination of war, economic crisis, and
technological changes created conditions favorable, even
necessary, for a more powerful presidency.
War
War, which always favors the unity and speed of the executive
branch over the deliberation and compromise that characterize
Congress, has played a primary role by elevating the importance
of the president’s power as commander-in-chief. A useful case

study is the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, who carefully
guided the United States into World War II through gradual
commitment of American military resources and personnel in
defense of Great Britain against the Germans. Once war was
formally declared with Japan and Germany, Roosevelt moved
quickly to expand his control over military aims and the
economy, while also organizing the questionable internment of
hundreds of thousands of Japanese American citizens on the
West Coast.
Nuclear and Terrorist Threats
The Cold War and the dawning of the nuclear age also
accelerated presidential independence in foreign policy and
national security. In an era when it takes less than thirty
minutes for a nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missile to
strike the United States when launched from halfway around the
world, credible deterrence requires a president who is willing to
authorize the use of American nuclear weapons without
consulting Congress. The dangers of such an explosive situation
came close to realization during the Cuban Missile Crisis in
1962, when Soviet nuclear missiles were staged in Cuba, just
ninety miles from American soil. During a tense thirteen day
standoff between President John F. Kennedy and the Soviet
Union, the United States came close to the brink of nuclear war.
In recent years, the post-9/11 terrorist threat has further
emphasized the need for presidential leadership that can act
quickly when confronting emerging threats, while also
highlighting the potential abuses of such leadership. The ability
of presidents to commit US armed forces to various combat
missions without a formal congressional declaration of war is
now well-established, despite the passage by Congress of the
War Powers Act in 1973, intended to limit presidential
deployment of troops.
Economic Crisis
Economic crises have also tended to concentrate power in the

presidency. While the president must still rely on Congress to
raise revenue and appropriate money through the legislative
process, Congress is much more likely to defer to the president
when attempts to deflect economic collapse seem urgent.
Franklin D. Roosevelt again provides the classic case study.
Upon taking office in 1933 amidst the Great Depression, he
requested and received authority from Congress to expand his
executive powers to combat the country’s enormous economic
problems. The broad range of federal programs and federal
bureaucracies created by Roosevelt’s administration laid the
foundation for the country’s modern welfare state. More recent
examples of the relationship between economic crisis and
presidential power can be located in both the Bush and Obama
administrations’ assertion of authority over industries
considered “too big to fail” such as the banking and automobile
manufacturing sectors.
The Media
Modern media technologies have also contributed to the
elevation of presidential power with regards to Congress. Radio
and television allows presidents to connect more directly and
personally with the American public, exercising the power of
the bully pulpit to influence public opinion. Some presidents,
such as Franklin D. Roosevelt with his famous fireside radio
chats and Ronald Reagan with his movie actor’s charisma, have
been able to exploit media technology more effectively than
others. Modern media however, such as twenty-four-hour cable
news and the Internet, have proved a double-edged sword when
it comes to presidential power. Compared to the first half of the
20th century, modern media is much more aggressive in its
coverage of presidential foibles and less deferential in its
treatment of a president’s private life. Bill Clinton’s scandal
involving Monica Lewinsky and Nixon’s Watergate cover-up
vividly illustrate the media’s power to both cripple a presidency
and, in the right hands, serve as an effective governing tool.

The Imperial Presidency
Presidential power is generally at its peak in the realm of
foreign policy and national security where presidents enjoy
fewer constitutional restraints and where the importance of
speed and decisive leadership can literally be a matter of life
and death. Congressional attempts to limit the president’s
ability to initiate combat or deploy troops using his power as
commander-in-chief have proven ineffective for the most part,
leading some critics to decry the rise of an imperial
presidency that subverts the traditional scheme of separation of
powers envisioned by the Constitution and its Framers. But in
the realm of domestic policy, such criticisms fall flat except in
rare times of emergency. There the ability of the president to
act independently is drastically curtailed, dependent as the
office is on Congressional approval of spending, revenue, and
statutory authorization. It is in domestic policy that separation
of powers reasserts itself with a vengeance, sometimes causing
even the most popular presidents to appear weak and
ineffective. As with all political institutions, however, the
relationship between the presidency and the other branches is
fluid and constantly evolving in response to both internal and
external factors.
Presidential Power
Driven by the extraordinary actions of certain presidents, and
often initiated by national crises, presidential power has
increased over the last two centuries beyond what the Framers
imagined in the Constitution. But is the increasing
concentration of power in the executive branch a threat to the
other branches of government? This video explores the factors
that have contributed to the growth of presidential power and
the resulting effect on the balance of power in
government.Video Focus Points
· What is executive privilege? How have presidents used this
informal power?

· Why does presidential power expand during times of crisis?
· What tools does Congress have to restrain the president's
deployment of combat troops? Have these tools been effective?
Measuring Presidential Power
Personality and management style can affect a president’s
power in office. How do other factors influence presidential
power?
LAUNCH ACTIVITY
Virtual Roundtable
While the Framers of the Constitution envisioned a president
who would play a subordinate role to Congress, the relative
balance of power between Congress and the presidency has
shifted dramatically during the past century. Should the
President have the power to take actions not specifically
authorized by law or the Constitution?
Cuban Missile Crisis
Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs
has created this website as a resource on the Cuban Missile
Crisis of October 1962. The site includes primary sources such
as historical photographs, key documents, and audio and video
resources, all of which bring the crisis to life and show how it
was experienced by key players.
FDR’s Fireside Chats
The American Presidency Project hosts audio of President
Franklin Roosevelt’s fireside chats from 1933 to 1944.Books
The Imperial Presidency, by Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.
Schlesinger traces the growth of presidential power over two
centuries, from George Washington to George W. Bush,

examining how it has both served and harmed the Constitution
and what Americans can do about it in years to come. The book
popularized the phrase “imperial presidency.”
Rivals for Power: Presidential-Congressional Relations, by
James A. Thurber.
Thurber delves deep into the lengthy power struggle between
the president and Congress. He interviews leading scholars and
former public officials to explore the historical, political, and
constitutional issues dividing the two branches.
Article 5:
The Executive Branch
ADA Text Version
While the president is the unchallenged head of the executive
branch, the job of governance would be almost impossible
without a number of key institutions and players to carry out the
myriad tasks.
The Vice President
Although the vice president is second in rank to the president
within the executive branch, vice presidents have traditionally
held
little real power while in office. Although they may cast tie-
breaking votes in the Senate as part of their formal
constitutional role, Senate ties are a relatively rare occurrence.
Therefore, vice presidents play a role that is primarily political
once in office: promoting the president's policies, attending
fundraisers, and providing leadership in narrowly focused
policy areas. When choosing a vice presidential candidate, a
president's chief consideration is almost always political: who
will best help win the election by securing votes in key states?
The Cabinet
The president oversees fifteen permanent, formal bureaucracies
known as cabinet departments. They are dedicated to the

formation and implementation of specific policy areas and their
traditional importance is largely a function of their history. For
example, the Department of State has formal responsibility for
diplomacy, while the Department of Defense is responsible for
the armed services. Other department titles such as Treasury,
Agriculture, Education, etc., are usually self-explanatory. The
most recent addition to the cabinet departments, the Department
of Homeland Security, was in direct response to the devastating
terror attacks of September 11, 2001, and the government's
sobering awareness that we have entered a new epoch of
terrorist threats. Most cabinet departments are headed by
officials who hold the title secretary, appointed by the president
and confirmed by the Senate. The only department not headed
by a secretary is the Department of Justice, led by the attorney
general.
The White House
The White House, home of the president and seat of presidential
power, is itself a large bureaucracy that must be staffed and
managed. Throughout much of US history, this function was
carried out in relatively ad hoc fashion by presidential advisors
and other political appointees. In 1939, however, President
Franklin D. Roosevelt established the Executive Office of the
President (EOP) to organize White House affairs. The EOP has
expanded over time to include a diverse set of mini-
bureaucracies and actors. The Office of Management and
Budget oversees development of the president's budget, a huge
and important task when one considers the federal budget is
measured in trillions of dollars. The Council of Economic
Advisors is a team of prominent economists who forecast
economic conditions and assist the president in formulating
effective economic policies for the country. The National
Security Council (NSC), created in 1947 at the dawn of the Cold
War, plays a prominent role in identifying top priorities in
national security and the appropriate strategies for addressing
them. Almost all important national security decisions made by

the president are made after consideration of the NSC's
recommendations. The NSC consists of the president, vice
president, the secretaries of state and defense, the Joint Chiefs
of Staff (representing the four branches of the armed services),
and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Other
important officers and advisors are included in meetings of the
NSC when needed.
The day-to-day operations of the president's immediate office is
largely organized by members of the White House staff who
have no independent legal authority, but wield power based
upon their proximity to and personal relationship with the
president. Prominent among these staff members is the
president's Chief of Staff, who manages the president's schedule
and political strategy, but also oversees other members of the
White House staff. Staff members also include the White House
Counsel, who provides legal advice directly to the president,
and the Director of Communications, responsible for shaping
and effectively marketing the president's policies to the press
corps and the American public.
The Vice President
The official site provides a biography, the latest news, and
video of events involving the vice president.
The Cabinet
The official site provides the names of the current president’s
cabinet members along with links to the executive departments.
The Office of Management and Budget
The official site contains detailed information about the
president’s budget including fact sheets, historical tables, and
archives of past presidential budgets.
National Security Council
The official site includes the latest news on events related to
national security as well as detailed information on topics

involving national security.
White House Staff
The official site lists the names and titles of the current White
House Staff members with brief biographies.
Report an Online Accessibility Issue
Article 1:
ADA Text Version
Learning Objectives
1. Explain the constitutional basis and organization of
Congress.
2. Compare and contrast the rules governing each chamber of
Congress.
3. Describe the composition of Congress.
4. Define and distinguish between Congress' legislative and
oversight functions.
5. Assess Congress' current role and power in the political
system with the aid of historical perspective.
Introduction
Congress has been called the "first branch" of government
because it is the first branch described in the US Constitution
and the branch charged with carrying out one of the most basic
functions of government: making law. One might also consider
it first for other reasons; it is the most broadly representative
institution of government (since 1916 members of both the
House and Senate have been placed by direct election) and the
framers expected it to be the most powerful branch of

government (one of the reasons they divided Congress into two
chambers). Congress also boasts "the power of the purse." Only
Congress can pass the legislation needed by the national
government to tax, spend or borrow. Although Congress
experienced a relative decline in its power relative to the
presidency over the past century, it still occupies a central
position in the democratic process. This lesson explores the
organization, composition, and law-making function of
Congress and evaluates Congress' relationship with the other
branches of government.
Study Questions
1. Why is Congress frequently called "the first branch"?
2. What are the two major functions of Congress? What is
"bicameralism" and why did the framers design Congress with
this principle in mind?
3. How is representation in Congress determined?
4. Describe the process by which Congress exercises its law-
making function. How does a bill become law?
5. In what way do political parties affect the legislative
process?
6. Identify the titles and powers of the respective majority and
minority leaders of the House and Senate. Who are their
supporting officers? Does the US Constitution require these
positions?
7. Compare the impact of chamber rules on the House and
Senate and their significance for legislative outcomes.
8. Distinguish among the following types of committees:
a. Standing
b. Joint
c. Conference
d. Select
9. Discuss the costs and benefits of Congressional committees'
prominent role in the legislative process with reference to the
following ideas:
a. Specialization
b. Efficiency

c. Public versus local Interest
10. Distinguish between reapportionment, redistricting and
gerrymandering. How do political parties use gerrymandering to
achieve victory in elections? What is a safe seat?
11. Is gerrymandering ever illegal? What difference does the
use of racial considerations in gerrymandering make when
courts consider the legality of redistricting plans? Define three
common gerrymandering strategies:
a. Cracking
b. Packing
c. Stacking
12. How well does Congress reflect the demographic diversity
of the United States?
13. How does a typical Congressperson apportion his or her
time in office?
14. Analyze the relationship between Congress and the
Presidency. Which branch is the "stronger" branch and what
factors does your answer take into account?
15. What factors have contributed to the growth of presidential
power in the 20th century?
16. What is the relationship between Congress and the federal
judiciary?
Article 2:Powers of Congress
ADA Text Version
Article I of the US Constitution establishes Congress as the first
branch of government. As the legislative branch, its major
powers include making laws, taxing and spending, regulating
interstate commerce, declaring war, and oversight over the other
branches and the bureaucracy. Through checks and balances
specifically listed in the Constitution, it vets presidential
appointees to judgeships and executive branch positions. The
Senate must confirm judicial appointees and ratify treaties by a
two-thirds vote. The House has the power to impeach, and the
Senate to try any officer of the government, including the
president.
Congress may also propose constitutional amendments to the US

Constitution by a two-thirds vote of both the House and Senate.
In the event no presidential candidate reaches the necessary 270
Electoral College votes or there is a tie, the House selects the
president while the Senate selects the vice president.
Congress also has the power to conduct hearings and
investigations to gather information or pursue criminal wrong-
doing. Congressional hearings are sessions during which
members of Congress invite various experts or witnesses to give
testimony about issues of concern. Their purpose is to help
Congress legislate more effectively by providing it with better
information. Congress has held hearings on everything from the
9/11 attacks to telecommunications policy to steroid use among
professional athletes. Congressional investigations are hearings
devoted to fact-finding about alleged criminal activity or
scandals. Congressional investigations have been used to
investigate alleged communists in the film industry, organized
crime, and even presidential malfeasance, as in the Watergate
and Iran-Contra hearings. Congress can use its power to compel
witnesses to appear before it (subpoena) or face contempt
charges. Some cynics believe that congressional hearings and
investigations provide members of Congress an opportunity to
grandstand and court media publicity favorable to their careers.
Virtual Roundtable
Congress boasts "the power of the purse"—the authority to tax,
spend, or borrow. In recent decades, annual government
spending has exceeded tax revenues, forcing the government to
borrow money and increasing the size of the national debt. Why
does Congress continue to engage in deficit spending? Is the
national debt a serious threat to America’s prosperity and
security?
Additional ResourcesBooks
Master of the Senate, by Robert Caro.
Before Lyndon Johnson assumed the presidency, he spent

twelve years as an outspoken leader in the US Senate. Caro's
biography covering this period studies not only the ruthlessly
ambitious young Senator, but also the social and psychological
aspects of the Senate as an institution.
Lessons Learned the Hard Way, by Newt Gingrich.
Part memoir, part manifesto, this book by former House Speaker
Newt Gingrich discusses the triumphs and failures of the
Republican Congress. Gingrich was a leader in the "Republican
Revolution" of the House in 1994, ending nearly 40 years of
Democratic majority.
Last Lion: The Fall and Rise of Ted Kennedy, by Peter S.
Canellos.
This biography delves deeply into Senator Kennedy's nearly
half-century legislative career. It also focuses on his personal
drama, including his academic struggles, the deaths of all three
of his brothers, and his long battle with brain cancer.
Article 3:Membership
ADA Text Version
A candidate must meet the following requirements in order to
hold office in the House of Representatives or the Senate:
Minimum Age
House of Representatives – 25 years old
Senate – 30 years old
Minimum Length of Citizenship
House of Representatives – 7 years
Senate – 9 years
Resident of the State They Represent
House of Representatives – Yes
Senate – Yes
Although members of Congress come from a variety of

backgrounds, they do not faithfully reflect the ethnic and
socioeconomic diversity of the country. Most members,
particularly in the Senate, are disproportionately well-educated,
more affluent, white and male compared to the US population.
A high percentage of members have advanced degrees,
particularly law degrees. While turnover in Congressional
membership was once rather high, most members now serve for
long periods of time. The advantages enjoyed by incumbents,
those who already hold office in Congress, over their
challengers are considerable, particularly in the House of
Representatives where the incumbent reelection rates are
routinely more than ninety percent. Elections tend to be more
competitive in the Senate where incumbents are more likely to
lose elections.
Article 4:Structure and Organization
ADA Text Version
The House and Senate
Congress is bicameral, consisting of two chambers. The lower
chamber is the House of Representatives with 435 members.
Seats in the House are apportioned on the basis of population,
with each state guaranteed at least one representative. The
House is considered "the people's House" due to electing
members every two years, representing smaller geographic
districts, and its special authority to initiate bills dealing with
taxation. Under the original, unamended Constitution, the House
was the only directly elected institution in the federal
government.
The upper chamber is the Senate with 100 members.
Representation in the Senate is distributed equally with each
state having two Senators. The US Senate has traditionally been
viewed as a more deliberative body, with members able to take
a longer-term view due to their longer terms of office. Under
the original Constitution, Senators were appointed by their
respective state legislatures, but in 1916 the Seventeenth

Amendment democratized the Senate by enabling citizens in
each state to directly elect their Senators. The Senate plays a
greater role in foreign policy, having the power to ratify treaties
negotiated by the president by a two-thirds vote. The Senate
also plays a crucial role in the president's selection of public
officers including federal judges, ambassadors, and cabinet
heads, who the Senate must confirm by a majority vote.
Congressional Leadership
Paul Ryan, Speaker of the House By United States Congress
[Public domain or Public domain], via Wikimedia
CommonsLeadership in the House of Representatives is more
formalized than in the Senate. The Speaker of the House is the
highest ranking officer designated by the Constitution and is
generally the most powerful member of Congress. The Speaker
presides over House proceedings and exercises considerable
influence over the legislative agenda. The Speaker also serves
as the spokesperson for the House and the majority party while
maintaining communication with the president. While the
Speaker is expected to consistently apply the rules of the House,
he or she is elected by the majority party and is expected to
favor that party.
The Speaker's principal assistant is the majority leader. The
majority leader consults with party leaders to formulate the
party's legislative program and steers the program through the
House. The minority party in the House selects a minority
leader, whose duties correspond to those of the majority leader;
however, the minority leader has no authority over the
scheduling of legislation. Each political party has a whip, an
elected party member who keeps intra-party communications
intact and attempts to discipline party voting behavior,
particularly on bills important to the House leadership.
Leadership in the Senate is less formal as power rests more with
individual members. The Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority
Leader By NASA/Bill Ingalls [Public domain], via Wikimedia
CommonsConstitution designates the vice president of the

United States as the President of the Senate. Because the vice
president can only vote in the event of a tie in the Senate, he
typically only appears when a tie vote looks like a distinct
possibility. The formal acting head of the Senate is the
president pro tempore, an honorific position awarded to the
most senior member of the majority party. Real power in the
Senate lies with the Senate majority leader who is elected by the
members of his or her party. The Senate minority leader is the
majority leader's counterpart and is selected by the minority
party.
Congressional Committees
Congress does most of its work in committees—shaping
policies, hearing from interest groups, and forming legislation.
How does Congress divide its responsibilities into committees?
Which committee assignments are more important or more
prestigious? Check your knowledge of congressional
committees with this quiz.
LAUNCH ACTIVITY
The House and Senate
The House and Senate are two separate institutions making up
one branch of government, the Congress. Are you familiar with
the basic differences between the House and Senate and their
membership?
Article 5:Apportionment and Redistricting
ADA Text Version
Article I of the Constitution requires that Congress undertake
a census of the country every ten years so seats in the House of
Representatives may be reapportioned to reflect changes in state
populations. When a state gains or loses seats in the House, or
when the former opposition party takes control of a state
legislature, this typically leads to redistricting. Redistricting is

the redrawing of electoral boundaries for House districts within
a state. According to the US Supreme Court decision Baker v.
Carr(1962), electoral districts for the House must be drawn as
closely as possible to reflect the principle of one-person-one-
vote. In other words, House electoral districts should have equal
populations.
Gerrymandering
A potential downside of redistricting is the opportunity to
redraw districts to favor one political party over another. The
use of redistricting for political advantage is known as
gerrymandering, named after a curiously and much-ridiculed
salamander-shaped district created under Rhode Island
Governor Elbridge Gerry in 1812. Gerrymandering typically
disregards such non-political features as natural communities or
geography and instead aims to maximize the number of seats a
particular party is likely to win in the next election.
Gerrymandering can be used to create safe seats in which the
opposition has virtually no chance of winning. The creation of
safe seats explains why incumbents enjoy an often crushing
advantage over challengers when running for reelection.
Gerrymandering for the advantage of a political party is known
as partisan gerrymandering. Partisan gerrymandering often
overlaps with racial gerrymandering, which is the use of race as
a factor in drawing electoral districts. Because certain racial or
ethnic groups such as African Americans and Hispanics reliably
vote Democratic, both Republicans and Democrats cannot help
but consider race when seeking to redistrict in a way that
maximizes partisan advantage. Because of the Fourteenth
Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection, racial
gerrymandering is more suspect than mere partisan
gerrymandering. The US Supreme Court has ruled that use of
race as a factor in redistricting is permissible as long as it is not
too dominant a factor and as long as it only favors, not harms,
minority representation.
One significant trend in the nature of Congress over the past

two decades has been its increased polarization. Ideological
differences between Republicans and Democrats have
noticeably intensified and indicators suggest there are fewer
moderates. Many veteran congressmen have complained about a
decline in civility and a more combative atmosphere than used
to exist. Part of the responsibility for this change in tone lies
within the political parties themselves. However, much of it can
be traced to the ever-increasing sophistication and success of
gerrymandering. The creation of safe seats for Republicans and
Democrats means that electoral contests for the House are won
or lost at the primary level. It is mainly voters who are more
ideologically driven or politically committed who vote in
primary elections and such voters select more partisan and
ideologically pure candidates.
Gerrymandering
This video explores the impact of gerrymandering on
Congressional politics and examines the 2003 Texas
redistricting battle, a classic case of gerrymandering.Video
Focus Points
· How do political parties use gerrymandering to win elections?
· What is "packing and cracking"?
· Do racial considerations make any difference when courts
consider the legality of redistricting plans?
Crossing the Line: Congressional Elections and Gerrymandering
This activity focuses on different ways of drawing
congressional districts.
Article 6:
he Legislative Process
ADA Text Version
Congress' primary responsibility is to make laws. While the

process by which a bill becomes a law is fairly straightforward,
the politics of legislation is much more complicated. To become
a law, a bill must be passed by both chambers of Congress in
identical language. A bill may be introduced in either chamber,
though bills dealing with taxation must originate in the House.
In Committee
The real legislative work of Congress is done in committees. In
order to become a law, a bill must win committee approval and
withstand debate in both chambers. In both chambers, a bill is
typically assigned to the appropriate subcommittee; the
subcommittee holds hearings and revises the bill (often referred
to as markup). If the subcommittee approves of the bill, they
send it to the full committee. The full committee then meets to
decide what action to take—do nothing, rewrite the bill, or refer
the bill to the House or Senate for debate and a vote by the
entire chamber.
On the Floor
At this point in the process, a key difference between the House
and Senate emerges. Even after a bill has been approved by a
full committee, getting it to the floor of the House for a vote by
the full membership requires favorable action by the Rules
Committee. The Rules Committee exercises strong control over
how long House members may debate the bill and whether
members can offer amendments to a bill. If the House
leadership wishes to prevent any amendments to a bill, the
Rules Committee may adopt a closed rule. Or, it may impose a
restricted rule that allows only specific types of amendments to
a bill or an open rule that permits unlimited amendments to a
bill.
Unlike the House, the Senate does not have a Rules Committee.
Instead, it relies on a unanimous consent agreement negotiated
between the majority and minority leader to govern
consideration of a bill. The agreement specifies when a bill will
be considered on the floor, what amendments will be

deliberated, and when a vote will be taken. It does not limit the
length of time members can spend debating a bill. Senators
cherish the tradition of unrestricted floor debate, and may use it
to their advantage to prevent a vote on a bill. Known as
a filibuster, a senator may speak as long as possible to force
leadership to drop the bill in order to move on to other work. In
practice, a filibuster can be stopped by a vote
of cloture requiring the support of three-fifths (60) of the
Senate's members. To avoid filibusters and other forms of
obstruction, less controversial legislation in the Senate is
usually debated under unanimous consent agreements,
agreements negotiated by the majority and minority leadership
that limit debate and specify the conditions under which
amendments may be offered to a bill.
House and Senate Legislative Rules
The House and Senate are separate institutions with their own
rules for conducting legislative business. How do the House and
Senate rules for conducting business differ?
LAUNCH ACTIVITY
Passing a Bill
As the House and Senate members debate the bill, they engage
in extensive vote-trading—agreeing to support another
member's bill in exchange for the promise of future support for
their own bill. After a bill is passed by one chamber, it must
then go through a similar process in its sister chamber where
more changes are usually made. A conference committee,
consisting of members of both chambers of Congress, works out
a compromise version of a bill that can be approved by both the
House and the Senate. When a bill is passed by both chambers,
the president may either sign the bill or choose to veto the bill.
However, Congress has the power to override the president's
veto with a two-thirds vote of both chambers.

How a Bill Becomes Law
Before a bill becomes a law, it goes through a series of steps in
the House and Senate. Can you identify the proper sequence for
making a bill into a law?
Congressional Earmarks
Congressional earmarks—items in appropriation bills that
provide "special funds" requested by only one representative or
senator—have become a symbol of government waste. While
lawmakers use them to "bring home the bacon" to their districts,
critics claim earmarks contribute to a steadily increasing
appetite for spending that threatens the financial health of the
country. This video explores the controversy over earmarks and
illustrates why they are a by-product of the legislative
process.Video Focus Points
· How does Congress use earmarks to exercise its "power of the
purse?"
· What are the pros and cons of earmarks?
· Define the terms iron triangle, logrolling, and pork
barrel.Current Events
· ActBlue, the Democrats’ Not-So-Secret Weapon
· How Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is Bringing Her Instagram
Followers Into the Political Process
· Why the Perfect Red-State Democrat Lost
· Democrats Pick Off Another Republican House Seat in
California
· They Battled Over the Supreme Court, but Stuck Together on
Criminal Justice ReformAdditional ResourcesWebsites
US House of Representatives Live Video
Live and on-demand video access to the floor proceedings of the
US House.

US Senate Live Video
Live and on-demand video access to the floor proceedings of the
US Senate.
Taxpayers for Common Sense
An independent and nonpartisan voice for taxpayers working to
increase transparency and expose and eliminate wasteful and
corrupt subsidies, earmarks, and corporate welfare. The website
includes a comprehensive earmark database of congressional
pork projects.
Article 7:
Public Opinion of Congress
ADA Text Version
Even though Congress is the most representative institution of
federal government, it remains the least popular branch. In
public opinion polls, Americans routinely give Congress the
lowest public approval ratings of any of the three branches. On
the other hand, when polled most Americans say they believe
their own congressperson is doing a good job of bringing
tangible benefits to their home districts and states. These
seemingly contradictory attitudes are referred to as Fenno's
Paradox.
Note: To view Gallup's latest congressional job approval
ratings, select the Congress and the Public link.
Why do Americans think so poorly of Congress but
overwhelmingly respect their own congressperson? The answer
to this question lies in the nature of Congress itself. Congress
was not designed to work quickly or efficiently. Its very
structure, divided into two separate chambers and host to 535
individuals representing different parties, interests, and
geographical constituencies means any progress depends on
large amounts of negotiation, compromise, and logrolling. This
give-and-take can result in legislation that looks less than
principled and contains seemingly glaring examples of wasteful
spending.
Conflict is inherent in the legislative process as well. With so

many individuals representing clashing interests, achieving
legislative consensus is a messy and contentious affair. This
noisy combination of conflict, compromise, and parochialism
alienates American voters and results in Congress' low approval
ratings. Even when members of Congress are able to reach
consensus on important issues, they may find themselves in
conflict with the president who wields veto power over
legislation. When relations between the president and Congress
are poor, the result can sometimes be gridlock, a state of affairs
where the government is unable to agree on or carry out
important policy goals.
Yet in two key respects, Congress does exactly what is intended
in our constitutional system. First, it acts as a deliberative body
representing the various geographic parts of the republic.
Secondly, it operates as a brake on the power of the presidency,
fulfilling its role in the separation of powers system. And its
two distinct chambers, the House and the Senate, serve as
internal checks and balances on each other. While Americans
love to criticize Congress as an institution, they generally
support (and reelect) their individual congressperson. For the
most part this is because members do a very good job of
bringing tangible benefits in the form of job contracts and
federal money to their home districts and states. This is the
answer to Fenno's Paradox: if Congress seems muddle-headed in
serving the national interest, its members generally do a good
job of serving local interests, confirming former Speaker of the
House Tip O'Neill's maxim that “all politics is local.”
Virtual Roundtable
Congress is consistently rated the least popular branch of
government, yet individual legislators are often popular with
constituents and are usually reelected. Why do public attitudes
about the legislative branch exhibit this paradox?

Scanned by CamScannerScanned by CamScannerChapte.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from todd331

More from todd331 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Scanned by CamScannerScanned by CamScannerChapte.docx