15.4 Proposals for structural and procedural reforms
6 min read•july 30, 2024
Congress faces numerous challenges, prompting calls for reform. Proposals range from restructuring committees to changing leadership selection. These ideas aim to enhance efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness in the legislative branch.
Procedural reforms like filibuster changes and campaign finance overhauls are hotly debated. While some argue these would improve Congress's functionality, others worry about unintended consequences. The feasibility of reforms depends on political will, public support, and constitutional constraints.
Congressional Reform Proposals
Reforming the Committee System
Top images from around the web for Reforming the Committee System
Committee Reports - Federal Legislative History - Research Guides at Florida State University ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Congress: How is the legislative branch structured? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
Articles by PRS Team View original
Is this image relevant?
Committee Reports - Federal Legislative History - Research Guides at Florida State University ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Congress: How is the legislative branch structured? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Reforming the Committee System
Committee Reports - Federal Legislative History - Research Guides at Florida State University ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Congress: How is the legislative branch structured? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
Articles by PRS Team View original
Is this image relevant?
Committee Reports - Federal Legislative History - Research Guides at Florida State University ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Congress: How is the legislative branch structured? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- Proposals for reforming the committee system often focus on reducing the number of committees and subcommittees to streamline the legislative process and reduce jurisdictional overlap
- Some reformers advocate for changing the seniority system for selecting committee chairs, arguing that it rewards longevity over merit and can lead to entrenched power structures
- Critics argue that reforming the committee system could disrupt established expertise and relationships, making Congress less effective
- Supporters contend that reforms are necessary to make Congress more responsive to the public and to address issues of corruption and stagnation
Leadership Structure Reforms
- Proposals for leadership reform include for party leaders (Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader), rotating leadership positions, and more democratic processes for selecting leaders
- Term limits could prevent the concentration of power and encourage new perspectives in leadership roles
- Rotating leadership positions among members could promote fairness and diversity in decision-making
- More democratic processes, such as secret ballot elections, could make leaders more accountable to their caucuses
- Critics argue that leadership reforms could undermine the stability and effectiveness of party organizations in Congress
- Supporters believe that leadership reforms are necessary to combat gridlock, partisan polarization, and the outsized influence of special interests
Arguments for and Against Procedural Changes
Filibuster Reform
- The filibuster allows a minority of Senators to block legislation by extending debate indefinitely, requiring a 60-vote supermajority to invoke and end debate
- Proponents argue that the filibuster protects minority rights and encourages bipartisan compromise
- Critics contend that the filibuster has become a tool for obstruction and gridlock, making it difficult for Congress to address pressing issues (climate change, immigration reform)
- Proposals to reform the filibuster include:
- Lowering the cloture threshold from 60 votes to a simple majority (51 votes)
- Requiring filibustering senators to hold the floor and speak continuously (talking filibuster)
- Limiting the use of the filibuster to certain types of legislation (appropriations bills, executive nominations)
Reconciliation Process
- Reconciliation is a process that allows certain budget-related legislation to pass with a simple majority vote, bypassing the filibuster
- Supporters argue that reconciliation is necessary to enact important fiscal policies and to prevent a minority from blocking the will of the majority
- Opponents claim that reconciliation is being abused to pass controversial non-budgetary policies (healthcare reform, tax cuts) and that it undermines the deliberative nature of the Senate
- Proposals to reform reconciliation include:
- Narrowing the scope of reconciliation to apply only to deficit reduction measures
- Requiring a supermajority vote (60 votes) to pass reconciliation bills
- Allowing reconciliation to be used for both revenue and spending measures
Other Procedural Reforms
- Changing quorum requirements to ensure that a majority of members are present for important votes
- Limiting the use of unanimous consent agreements to prevent individual senators from blocking progress
- Streamlining the amendment process to reduce the use of "poison pill" amendments that derail legislation
- Enhancing by requiring more public hearings, disclosing lobbyist contacts, and improving access to legislative information
Structural Changes to Congress
Term Limits
- Term limit proposals aim to restrict the number of terms that members of Congress can serve, typically to two or three terms in the Senate and six to twelve years in the House
- Advocates argue that term limits would reduce the influence of special interests, encourage new ideas and perspectives, and prevent the entrenchment of power
- Opponents contend that term limits would deprive Congress of experienced legislators, shift power to unelected staff and lobbyists, and limit voter choice
- Term limits have been proposed at both the federal and state levels, with mixed results
- Several states have enacted term limits for their legislatures, with some evidence of increased turnover and diversity
- Attempts to impose term limits on Congress through constitutional amendment have failed to gain sufficient support
Campaign Finance Reform
- Campaign finance reform proposals seek to reduce the influence of money in politics by limiting contributions, requiring disclosure, or providing public financing for campaigns
- Supporters argue that campaign finance reform is necessary to prevent corruption, level the playing field for candidates, and restore public trust in government
- Critics claim that campaign finance regulations infringe on free speech rights, benefit incumbents, and fail to address the underlying causes of political inequality
- Key elements of campaign finance reform include:
- Limiting the amount that individuals and groups can contribute to campaigns (contribution limits)
- Requiring disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures to promote transparency
- Providing public financing for campaigns to reduce the reliance on private donations (matching funds, vouchers)
- Regulating the activities of independent expenditure groups (Super PACs) and dark money organizations
Other Structural Reforms
- Changing the size of Congress to improve representation or efficiency
- Increasing the number of House members to reduce the ratio of constituents to representatives
- Reducing the size of the Senate to streamline decision-making and reduce the influence of small states
- Altering the electoral system to promote competition and accountability
- Implementing ranked-choice voting or proportional representation to encourage more diverse political participation
- Establishing independent commissions to prevent partisan
- Modifying the balance of power between the branches to enhance
- Strengthening congressional oversight powers over the executive branch
- Limiting the president's ability to unilaterally initiate military action or declare national emergencies
Feasibility of Congressional Reform
Factors Affecting Feasibility
- The feasibility of reform proposals depends on factors such as public support, political will, constitutional constraints, and unintended consequences
- Reforms that require constitutional amendments, such as term limits, face higher hurdles than those that can be enacted through legislation or rule changes
- Proposals that challenge entrenched interests or disrupt existing power structures may face strong opposition from those who benefit from the status quo (incumbent politicians, lobbyists, donors)
- Public opinion and grassroots activism can play a significant role in generating momentum for reform
- Scandals, crises, and perceptions of congressional dysfunction can create windows of opportunity for change
- Sustained public pressure and mobilization can overcome institutional resistance and force action on reform proposals
Evaluating Reform Proposals
- The potential impact of reforms on congressional effectiveness and responsiveness is difficult to predict and may vary depending on the specific proposal and context
- Some reforms, such as streamlining the committee system or improving transparency, could enhance Congress's ability to address issues and communicate with the public
- Other reforms, such as term limits or campaign finance restrictions, could have unintended consequences that reduce institutional knowledge, empower outside groups, or limit democratic choice
- Evaluating reform proposals requires careful consideration of trade-offs, empirical evidence, and potential alternatives for improving congressional performance and accountability
- Incremental reforms, pilot programs, and sunset provisions can help test and refine proposals before full implementation
- A combination of structural, procedural, and cultural reforms may be necessary to address the complex challenges facing Congress in the 21st century
- Successful congressional reform requires building broad coalitions, compromising on details, and adapting to changing circumstances
- Bipartisan support and leadership buy-in can increase the chances of enacting and sustaining reforms
- Engaging diverse stakeholders, including members of Congress, experts, advocacy groups, and the public, can help build legitimacy and support for reform efforts
Key Terms to Review (18)
Barack Obama: Barack Obama is the 44th President of the United States, serving two terms from 2009 to 2017. He was the first African American to hold the presidency and is known for his efforts in promoting healthcare reform, economic recovery, and foreign policy initiatives during a time of significant political polarization.
Bipartisanship: Bipartisanship refers to the cooperation and collaboration between two major political parties, typically in the context of governance and legislation. This concept is significant as it emphasizes the importance of finding common ground, especially in a polarized political environment, where differing party ideologies can hinder progress. The goal of bipartisanship is to pass laws and reforms that benefit the public by leveraging support from both parties.
Campaign for accountability: A campaign for accountability refers to organized efforts aimed at ensuring that public officials, government agencies, and institutions are held responsible for their actions and decisions. This term often connects to various proposals for structural and procedural reforms designed to enhance transparency, foster ethical conduct, and empower citizens to engage in the political process, thereby promoting a more responsive and responsible governance system.
Checks and balances: Checks and balances is a system that ensures no single branch of government becomes too powerful, allowing each branch to monitor and limit the actions of the others. This dynamic is crucial in maintaining the balance of power among legislative, executive, and judicial branches, fostering cooperation and accountability.
Cloture: Cloture is a procedural mechanism in the U.S. Senate used to end a filibuster and bring a debate to a close, allowing the Senate to move forward with voting on a bill or nomination. This process is crucial for maintaining order and efficiency in legislative proceedings, especially when dealing with controversial issues that could lead to prolonged debates.
Common cause: A common cause refers to a shared issue or interest that unites individuals or groups to advocate for reform and positive change, particularly in the context of governance and public policy. It plays a crucial role in promoting ethics reforms and transparency measures by bringing stakeholders together to push for accountability, integrity, and responsiveness in government institutions. This collective effort often aims to build trust between the government and its citizens, ensuring that the public's needs are addressed through structural and procedural reforms.
Earmarking: Earmarking refers to the practice of designating specific funds for particular projects or programs within legislation. This process allows lawmakers to allocate federal budgetary resources to local projects, often ensuring that funding is directed toward specific initiatives that might not receive support in broader budget discussions.
Filibuster reform: Filibuster reform refers to the changes proposed or enacted to alter the rules governing the filibuster, a procedural tactic used in the U.S. Senate to delay or block legislative action. These reforms aim to make it easier for the majority party to advance legislation and overcome the obstacles posed by prolonged debate, which can hinder the legislative process and contribute to gridlock.
Gerrymandering: Gerrymandering is the practice of manipulating electoral district boundaries to favor one political party over another. This tactic can significantly influence election outcomes and power dynamics within the legislative branches, affecting how representatives are elected and how diverse the representation is in government.
Institutionalism: Institutionalism is a theoretical approach that emphasizes the importance of institutions in shaping political behavior and outcomes. It focuses on how formal rules, organizations, and norms influence the actions of political actors, and how these institutions evolve over time. In the context of structural and procedural reforms, institutionalism highlights the need to understand and potentially alter existing structures to improve governance and enhance political effectiveness.
Markup process: The markup process is the stage in the legislative process where a committee or subcommittee reviews and amends a bill before it is presented for a vote. This phase is crucial as it allows lawmakers to modify the text of the proposed legislation, adding provisions, striking out sections, and refining language to ensure clarity and effectiveness. The markup process can significantly influence the final form of a bill, making it a vital component of legislative deliberation and decision-making.
Newt Gingrich: Newt Gingrich is a prominent American politician who served as the 50th Speaker of the House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. He is known for his role in leading the Republican Party during the 1990s and for orchestrating the 'Contract with America,' which significantly impacted the dynamics between majority and minority parties in Congress, alongside influencing proposals for structural reforms and leadership responsibilities within the House.
Pork-barrel spending: Pork-barrel spending refers to the allocation of government funds for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative's district. This practice often leads to funding unnecessary projects that serve more to benefit individual constituents than the overall public good. It is typically associated with the legislative process where lawmakers draft bills that include such spending, as well as proposals for reforms aimed at reducing wasteful expenditures.
Public choice theory: Public choice theory is an economic theory that applies the principles of economics to political science, emphasizing how self-interest and incentives influence the behavior of politicians, bureaucrats, and voters. It explores how individual decision-making within the political arena can lead to collective outcomes, often highlighting inefficiencies and failures in public policy due to the misalignment of interests among different stakeholders.
Redistricting: Redistricting is the process of redrawing the boundaries of electoral districts to reflect changes in population and ensure fair representation. This practice is essential because it helps maintain equal voter representation based on demographic shifts, often influenced by census data. Redistricting can also lead to political strategies, where districts may be shaped to favor one party over another, connecting it to discussions about campaign finance, accountability mechanisms, and proposals for reforming electoral processes.
Separation of Powers: Separation of powers is a fundamental principle of governance where the responsibilities and powers of government are divided among different branches to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful. This structure promotes a system of checks and balances, ensuring that each branch—legislative, executive, and judicial—can limit the powers of the others, fostering accountability and protecting individual freedoms.
Term limits: Term limits are legal restrictions that limit the number of terms an elected official can serve in a particular office. They are intended to promote political turnover and prevent the entrenchment of power by long-serving incumbents, thereby encouraging fresh ideas and perspectives in government.
Transparency: Transparency refers to the openness and clarity with which government actions, decisions, and processes are conducted, enabling the public to understand and evaluate governmental activities. This concept is crucial in fostering trust between citizens and government institutions, as it allows for scrutiny and accountability.