A Beginner's Tour of the US Elections: The Power of the House of Representatives

Lee Haddigan continues his pre-election guide to US politics:

The House of Representatives is the lower house of Congress. It consists of 435 members, roughly apportioned to each state to reflect the distribution of the US population. Thus, America’s most populous state, California, has 53 members representing 37 million residents, an average of one Congressional District for every 690,000 Californians. The 25^th ranked state by population, Louisiana, with 4.5 million citizens, sends 7 Representatives to Washington. And Wyoming, the least populous of the states with 550,000 occupants, has just a single member, as do Montana, Delaware, South Dakota, Alaska, North Dakota and Vermont.

So, the seven least-occupied states have only 7 seats out of 435 in the lower house of Congress, but send 14 Senators out of 100 to Washington. The theory is that these different methods of representation protect the rights of the smaller states. As the current House is apportioned, the nine most populous states have a majority of 223 seats, but in the Senate, they have no more weight in membership than their smallest compatriots. Geographical loyalties have long since been replaced by adherence to the party line, but the principle of equal representation of the states in the Senate was important enough to the first Americans that the Constitution would not have been ratified without it.

Presently in the House, there are 255 Democrats, 178 Republicans, with 2 vacancies. These numbers, however, are set to drastically change in November. Real Clear Politics’ latest predictions give Republicans 222 likely or certain seats, Democrats 177, and 36 races are still too close to call.

There are widely divergent estimates as to how many seats Republicans will gain in the mid-terms, ranging from less than 40 --- made by Democrats still clinging to the hope they will retain a majority --- to the extremely optimistic claim of the Tea Party Express that Republicans can pick up 102 seats. But, partisan predictions aside, it is looking increasingly likely that the GOP will win enough contests to become the new majority party in the House. And because of the different rules that pertain to House procedures compared to those that apply to the Senate, a majority in the lower chamber is a much more potent weapon for a party opposed to the administration.

The principle that "the majority rules" determine House decisions, where the filibuster and the hold give a minority significant powers in the Senate. In the House, Representatives traditionally follow the line of the party leadership, where the role of the "Whip" is more important than it is in the Senate. The Whip manages the legislative agenda of his party on the floor of the House by "whipping up" support for legislation proposed by party leaders among the other members of the party. (The term derives from the British custom of having a ‘whipper-in", who kept the hounds focused on their job during a fox-hunt.  

Another British tradition incorporated in Congress is the exclusive right of the lower house to originate revenue (taxation) and appropriation (government spending) bills. Though this protection of the theory of ‘no taxation without representation’ is not as relevant today as it was when the Constitution was first ratified, it still gives the people, as represented in Congress, a significant check on the ability of the executive to arbitrarily raise revenue.

To some observers this theory may appear somewhat arcane and outdated, but the historical record shows that the only effective method for the people to retain their freedoms is for them to control the power of the purse.The Magna Carta, the foundation of American and British liberties, was only endorsed by King John after his barons refused to finance his rule without it. And since then, including the symbolic Boston Tea Party that gave its name to a current movement, the history of the establishment of democracy has been continually fought against the background of the electorate restricting the power of the executive to raise revenue without the consent of the people.

The President does not possess the power to raise taxes and set a budget without the support of a majority in both the House and Senate. In extreme cases, this can lead to a federal government shutdown, where non-essential services are no longer provided. Such a shutdown is a possibility after these mid-terms, but it is an extremely unpopular process with American citizens, and both parties are aware of the disastrous effects that causing a stoppage could have on their chances for 2012. 

A full explanation of the procedures involved in a shutdown, and ways past it, is best left until if and when it happens, but it does afford the opportunity of briefly explaining a check placed upon the legislature by the Constitution. If the Republicans gain a majority in both Houses of Congress, they will be in a position to set a budget that severely cuts government spending. The President, however, would have the power to veto, or reject, the proposed bill. To become law, the bill would then need to be passed again by the two Houses with a two-thirds majority to become law. Thus, the President can check the will of the electorate, and force the parties in Congress to look at ways to compromise and suggest an acceptable bill for a majority on both sides, but not completely prevent the will of the people from becoming law.

To see the concrete ways a Republican majority in the House of Representatives will hamper the agenda of President Obama, we first need to look at the role of the Speaker of the House. The Speaker possesses the authority as the primary leader of the majority party in the House of Representatives, where the majority rules, to place obstacles in the way of legislation that an executive, in a polarized House, can find impossible to overcome.

First, the Speaker appoints the members and chairs of the House committees that are responsible for preliminary consideration of proposed legislation. The majority party seats members in proportion to its numerical advantage in the House, and the chair controls the agenda. The Speaker decides which committee a proposed law is sent to, and with a chair and members representing the majority party at the Speaker’s behest, he or she in practice can control which legislation actually make it out of committee for debate by the House as a whole.

Once there, debate is limited to matters set by the powerful Rules Committee, on which nine of the 13 members are from the majority party. The Committee decides if amendments to the bill, and which amendments, can be voted on by the House. When discussion begins, the Rules Committee establishes the length of time debate can take place before a vote is called. And during that time on the floor of the House the Speaker as the Presiding Officer (chairperson), or their appointee, decides who will be recognized or called upon to give a speech or present a motion.

Another responsibility of the House in theory, and in practice residing in the office of the Speaker, is the requirement to scrutinize the actions of the Executive Branch of the government.  The Constitution includes the provision for the House of Representatives to impeach federal officials for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors". After the House has approved ‘articles of impeachment’ by a simple majority vote, the matter is sent to the Senate where the allegations are tried with the whole upper house acts as the court. For impeachment to succeed, a two-thirds majority is needed in the Senate; a supermajority that makes it a very hard proposition, as Republicans found in 1998 when trying to impeach President Clinton, to remove a president from office.

Another part of the House’s mandate to inspect government allows the Oversight Committee to call federal officials as witnesses to an investigation. A majority party hostile to the administration can use that procedural function to frustrate the operational efficiency of government departments.

The current Speaker of the House is the self-confessed San Francisco liberal Nancy Pelosi, who is proving an especially divisive figure in this election. Commentators describe her as the most powerful Speaker since the death of Sam Rayburn in 1961, and she acknowledges that since becoming Speaker in 2007 she has denied Republicans full access to House procedures –-- a consequence, she maintains, of similar Republican tactics when she was in the minority. 

Critics of Pelosi’s tenure as Speaker argue that she has usurped the role the Framers of the Constitution intended for the House of Representatives. They maintain that she (in continuation of a trend shown by both parties) has attempted to turn the lower house into an extension of, or rubber stamp for, the Executive Branch. They point to the numerous bills that were written in the Speaker’s office by a few executive supporters, bypassing the longstanding prerogative of House committees to determine the content of legislation. They also note how Pelosi has created new committees, for examle the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, to advance the agenda of the administration when traditional House committees exhibit dissent at the message coming from the White House.

And as a rallying cry for their contention that the majority leadership of the House of Representatives has become too powerful, especially when allied with a sympathetic administration, opponents of Pelosi highlight her remarks defending health care reform back in March that; “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.” Critics interpret this as the leadership and its experts will decide for the people what is to be included in legislation, and it is merely the responsibility of the lower house to pass the bill without debate or amendment.

Not surprisingly, these concerns with liberal control of the lower house have been voiced by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank associated with a Reaganite political persuasion. But, somewhat surprisingly Heritage is leading calls for reform of the recent autocratic inclinations of party leaders in the House of Representatives. They believe the House of Representatives should reclaim its traditional role of being a chamber that is responsive to the wishes of the people, so they have recommended proposals that include the introduction of term limits for all leadership positions within the House.j

Published this Monday, Heritage’s "Four Immediate Reforms to Change the Culture of Congress" is unlikely to garner much support come November 3. The Republican Party is coming to Congress after the mid-terms with the aim of holding the Obama Administration to account for its record after two years, not to change the procedures whereby it can bring the fullest pressure to bear on the executive. With the House of Representatives likely to be controlled by a Republican majority, intent on bringing a wrecking ball to the foundations of Obama’s liberal policies, why restrict the means of doing so?

Tomorrow, we will look at three of the House races to show how the divergences of opinion that are dividing the electorate will affect the next session of the lower house of Congress.