CONGRESSIONAL HISTORY SLIDES PART IIIHOUSE 1998 - TODAYSENATE 1870S-TODAY

HOUSE POST-GINGRICH

The Hastert Speakership (1998-2006) ---The Hastert Rule of floor management ---More leadership influence on conf.

committees ---New requirements for committtee

chairs ($$) ---Medicare Prescription Drug Plan 2003

HOUSE POST-GINGRICH

The Democrats are Back: The Pelosi Years ---100-hour agenda ---Some procedural reforms, but mostly more

of the same ---Asserting control over committee chairs ---Helping red-state Democrats, but not on

policy ---Setbacks: Murtha for Maj. Leader, No

changes on Iraq, successful Republican use of MTRWIs

The Senate: Decentralized & Individualistic Why have parties and committees been less

important in the Senate? 1.) Legacy of filibuster rule----motivates

bipartisanship and “maverickness” 2.) Legacy of weak Constitutional leadership 3.) Smaller size, clubby atmosphere 4.) Senate is a continuous body—fewer opportunities

for change 5.) Fewer restrictions on number & content of

amendments (easier to bypass committees) 6.) Senators have more committee assgts. (less

specialized, more generalist) – the Johnson rule 7.) Greater media focus on individual Senators

Late 19th Century

Polarized parties, but no centralized leadership

Politics of Western state admission – Senate gerrymandering?

The Allison-Aldrich gang ruled thru committee leadership

Slow evolution of Majority and Minority Leader positions from Caucus Chair positions

Effects of 17th Amendment (1913) States had already been gravitating toward

greater public role in Senator selection(ex. Lincoln-Douglas debates, primary elections)

Need for electoral success probably stimulated emergence of majority/minority leadership

Some evidence of more responsive (moderate) voting by Senators

Not much evidence of difference in kinds of candidates or Senators---but created even more potential for independence from party bosses

The Introduction of Cloture

Confrontation with Wilson over arming of U.S. merchant ships (February 1917)

Special session of new Senate elected in 1916: approved cloture procedure requiring 2/3 of all Senators (later changed to 2/3 of those present)

Did cloture really change anything? Changes in 1975 –

a.) Democratic supermajority b.) Threat of complete filibuster elimination c.) Byrd negotiated compromise: cloture

would take 3/5ths, Senate rules changes would still take 2/3rds

Senate Leadership (like “herding cats”) More dependent on individual personality

traits than institutional powers---Johnson: encyclopedic memory, aggressive personality (“the Johnson treatment”)

---Byrd: mastery of obscure Senate rules ---Baker and Dole: no place for presidential

candidates! ---Mitchell/Frist/Daschle: increasing

importance of media skills