Last week was about the development, establishment and evolution of legislative power in the US. This week we do the same for executive power.
To recap some main points: In the fist set of slides I tried to trace the development of legislative power from the Security Clause in the Magna Carta through the Petition of Right, the British Bill of Rights and the Congress under the Articles of Confederation. The principle point was that legislative power took time to establish, and the specific powers and duties we see held by the legislature developed over those few centuries. I tried to make the point that what we see in Article One of the US Constitution is the result of that history.
The second set of slides walked through the ten sections of Article One and elaborated on each. Some of this material we had seen before when we had discussed checks and balances and federalism, and some we will discuss further when we look at elections.
The third set outlines how the institution has changed over time and looked at the development of two key institutions - the standing committee and the party. This was intended to illustrate how power flows through the institution, and how this flow can change over time. At different times in history, the Speaker and then committee chairs dominated the House. Right now, the political party does - and also is becoming dominant in the Senate as well. That is one of the principle facts of contemporary political life, so I hope that point came through.
This week I'll follow the same order and look at executive power.
As opposed to legislative and judicial power, executive power - as a distinct and separate entity - is far older than those two. At one point the executive also held legislative and executive power - this, as we know, is what made the executive tyrannical - this was the age of monarchy. in the first set of slides I look at the history covered in the section on the legislature, but from the point of view of the executive. How was the legislature gradually able to develop the power to contain the executive/monarch? As you know already, this took time. The executive in Britain - after the Norman Invasion - began developing an administrative structure that allowed for the direct execution of the laws. This included tax collecting and law enforcement. This is important for us because it shows that executive power is not just about the guy on top, but the administrative institutions that do the actual implementation of the law - the bureaucracy. Anyway - the entire point of the history we are covering is to show how arbitrary, autocratic executive power was slowly contained and how documents - like the Magna Carta - were essential in doing the containing.
The second set of slides focuses on Article Two of the Constitution - which is about the executive power. As with Article One, we will walk through it and comment on what it says. We will note the the section is far shorter that Article One, and quite a bit vague when it comes to presidential powers. This is important because it sets the stage for what we cover in the third set of slides.
The executive power has grown considerably over American history, and the the third set of slides attempts to outline the nature of the expansion, and put it in context. The Constitution created a dynamic commercial republic. The nation began growing immediately and newer needs and issues arose. Congress tends to respond to these by creating new executive institutions, which expands not only the scope of executive power, but allows for the executive branch to act in some cases without consulting Congress - all because Congress has allowed it to do so. In addition, we will note how the office of the presidency has been able to take advantage of improvements in media technology to reach out directly to the population, over the heads of Congress. When successful, this allows the president leverage over the legislature - all of which increases the institutions power.
As with each week - I'll do what I can to highlight stories that illustrate these concepts - especially those pertaining to expanded executive power. Send me whatever you can than does the same and I'll post them.
Here are the sections we will cover this week:
- The Executive: Definition and Historical Background
- The Executive: Constitutional Design
- Presidential Power and the Bureaucracy
These labels for old blog posts might be useful for putting this material in context. If you are confused about anything, email me a question and I'll post clarification.
- presidential powers
- Obama Presidency
- the bureaucracy
- presidential persuasion
Sunday, February 17, 2013
Saturday, February 16, 2013
From the National Journal: Courting the Twenty-Somethings
I've yet to list the specific proposals that President Obama laid out in his SOTU address last week - but that'll come soon. We should try to figure out the pros and cons associated with each as well as their likelyhood of being passed into law.
But all that assumes that the proposals were made in order to impact policy. Here's an argument there is a political aspect to those proposals as well. Specifically that they will help the president's party consolidate their appeal to the 20-somethings. |
When we start talking about parties, and party alignments we will hit the onglng question abotu which direction each party seems to be going, and specifcally whether we might be entering an era where the Democrats may dominate politics because their coalition is beginning to be larger than the Republican coalition. Is this part of that effort? It seems to be.
But all that assumes that the proposals were made in order to impact policy. Here's an argument there is a political aspect to those proposals as well. Specifically that they will help the president's party consolidate their appeal to the 20-somethings. |
Whatever its impact on the immediate policy debate, Obama’s speech marked a milestone in his effort to anneal the Democratic Party to that coalition’s priorities. Especially striking was how much of it seemed targeted directly at the massive and diverse millennial generation, born between 1981 and 2002. Obama addressed them repeatedly: by insisting that entitlement spending on the old must face some limits to prevent it from crowding out investment in the young; by framing climate change as a generational challenge; by pledging to provide young people with more training and to confront rising college costs; and by closing with a paean to citizenship that reflected their civic impulses. “They are the leading edge of where the country is headed ideologically as well as demographically,” one senior White House aide said.
. . . That course presents unmistakable risks. Obama’s social and environmental agendas could threaten Democrats running in red-leaning states and House districts, especially in the 2014 midterm election, when turnout among young people and minorities could drop. As Obama imprints this image on his party, Democrats are unlikely to hold majorities on Capitol Hill unless they can benefit more at the congressional level from the same demographic trends of growing diversity and rising education levels that are boosting their presidential position. And if economic growth doesn’t accelerate, young people and minorities could drift from the party.
But the direction Obama reaffirmed Tuesday will also challenge the GOP’s presidential prospects, no matter how Congress treats his proposals. As Hais and Winograd note, millennials represented under one-fourth of eligible voters in 2012 but will reach 30 percent by 2016 and 36 percent by 2020. Obama won three-fifths of them in 2012, and his coming collisions with Republicans on guns, climate, deficit reduction, and other issues will further identify the GOP with positions that polls show most millennials oppose.
When we start talking about parties, and party alignments we will hit the onglng question abotu which direction each party seems to be going, and specifcally whether we might be entering an era where the Democrats may dominate politics because their coalition is beginning to be larger than the Republican coalition. Is this part of that effort? It seems to be.
Now he's a bomb thrower
It looks like Senator Cruz continues to make quite the impression in the Senate. Here's the latest:
We'll keep tracking these stories as they come. Will these tactics come back to haunt the Senator or is he blazing a new trail for newly elected Senator? Is this proof that the Senate is becoming as divided as the House?
“I made promises to the people of Texas that I would come to Washington to shake up the status quo,” he said in e-mailed answers to questions, in lieu of speaking. “That is what I intend to do, and it is what I have done in every way possible in the responsibilities that have been granted to me.”
In a body known for comity, Mr. Cruz is taking confrontational Tea Party sensibilities to new heights — or lows, depending on one’s perspective. Wowed conservatives hail him as a hero, but even some Republican colleagues are growing publicly frustrated with a man who has taken the zeal of the prosecutor and applied it to the decorous quarters of the Senate.
Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said that some of the demands Mr. Cruz made of Mr. Hagel were “out of bounds, quite frankly.” Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, issued a public rebuke after Mr. Cruz suggested, with no evidence, that Mr. Hagel had accepted honorariums from North Korea.
“All I can say is that the appropriate way to treat Senator Hagel is to be as tough as you want to be, but don’t be disrespectful or malign his character,” Mr. McCain said in an interview.
Democrats were more blunt.
“He basically came out and made the accusation about money from North Korea or money from our enemies, and he just laid out there all of this accusatory verbiage without a shred of evidence,” said Senator Claire McCaskill, Democrat of Missouri. “In this country we had a terrible experience with innuendo and inference when Joe McCarthy hung out in the United States Senate, and I just think we have to be more careful.”
We'll keep tracking these stories as they come. Will these tactics come back to haunt the Senator or is he blazing a new trail for newly elected Senator? Is this proof that the Senate is becoming as divided as the House?
So what makes this case different?
Thanks to the student who brought this up in class.
Earlier I posted a story about a man indicted for premedidated murder of the drunk driver who killed two of his sons. He walked home to get his gun, walked back and shot the driver. This seems to have made it premedidated - though we need to follow this up with more detail.
Well what about the man who beat a guy to death who was sexually assaulting his young daughter? He was not indicted by a grand jury, so will not be tried for any criminal actions related to the attack.
So why did an Alvin grand jury indict the former man, but a Lavaca County grand jury not make an indictment in a similar case? Law enforcement in Texas is localized, so decisions made in one place are not necessarily made elsewhere.
This might come down to what "premeditation" means, but are there differences in the nature of grand juries in each locality. To stir the pot a bit more. The Alvin Grand Jury indicted a Latino man, while in Lavaca County, the man was Anglo, and in this case the accused attacker was Latino. Did that play a role?
Earlier I posted a story about a man indicted for premedidated murder of the drunk driver who killed two of his sons. He walked home to get his gun, walked back and shot the driver. This seems to have made it premedidated - though we need to follow this up with more detail.
Well what about the man who beat a guy to death who was sexually assaulting his young daughter? He was not indicted by a grand jury, so will not be tried for any criminal actions related to the attack.
So why did an Alvin grand jury indict the former man, but a Lavaca County grand jury not make an indictment in a similar case? Law enforcement in Texas is localized, so decisions made in one place are not necessarily made elsewhere.
This might come down to what "premeditation" means, but are there differences in the nature of grand juries in each locality. To stir the pot a bit more. The Alvin Grand Jury indicted a Latino man, while in Lavaca County, the man was Anglo, and in this case the accused attacker was Latino. Did that play a role?
From Salon: The white South’s last defeat
This article might be a bit harsh to some, but I call attention to it because it tries to get to the heart of the differences between the South and the rest of the nation. This matters because the South has always been a distinct presence in American government and politics - and remains so to this day, though the author thinks things might be changing. The author if a native Texan and has written profusely on the relationship between the state and the nation.
It applies to both 2305 and 2306, the former because the southern representatives have become increasingly influential in the Republican Party and have made the party far more consistently conservative than it has been in the past. While this initially helped the national Republican Party win elections in the 1980s and 1990s - it may be making it less competitive now. In the effort to purify the party, conservatives have been driving out moderates - which lessens the size of the coalition. This has the obvious effect.
For 2306, it simply adds an additional point of view to what makes Texas - or at least that part of Texas that is southern (east of Houston and Dallas I'd say) - tick politically and culturally.
Some points from the article:
- The South is the only area of the country that has suffered severe defeats - the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement - and both were driven by the natioal government and included the use of federal troops to implement.
- While the US prided itself on being a "melting pot" the South never was - and only recently has become more diversified. Aside from the African - American population, the South was far more British and Scots-Irish in its background. This is less true now, so the South is now going through some of the internal conflicts that other states suffered back in the 1920s when waves of non-Anglo immigrants came to the US. The influx of diverse population is why the author argues the South is in the process of political change, but this will take time. Homogeneity still rules.
- As the white South declines in numbers, political techniques that allow the minority to place limits on the majority will become more and more common. The obstructionism we see in the US Congress, and between southern states and the US government are not only examples, but might be more common as diversity works its way slowly through southern society.
It applies to both 2305 and 2306, the former because the southern representatives have become increasingly influential in the Republican Party and have made the party far more consistently conservative than it has been in the past. While this initially helped the national Republican Party win elections in the 1980s and 1990s - it may be making it less competitive now. In the effort to purify the party, conservatives have been driving out moderates - which lessens the size of the coalition. This has the obvious effect.
For 2306, it simply adds an additional point of view to what makes Texas - or at least that part of Texas that is southern (east of Houston and Dallas I'd say) - tick politically and culturally.
Some points from the article:
- The South is the only area of the country that has suffered severe defeats - the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement - and both were driven by the natioal government and included the use of federal troops to implement.
- While the US prided itself on being a "melting pot" the South never was - and only recently has become more diversified. Aside from the African - American population, the South was far more British and Scots-Irish in its background. This is less true now, so the South is now going through some of the internal conflicts that other states suffered back in the 1920s when waves of non-Anglo immigrants came to the US. The influx of diverse population is why the author argues the South is in the process of political change, but this will take time. Homogeneity still rules.
- As the white South declines in numbers, political techniques that allow the minority to place limits on the majority will become more and more common. The obstructionism we see in the US Congress, and between southern states and the US government are not only examples, but might be more common as diversity works its way slowly through southern society.
From the National Journal: Death of the Swing Seat
In 2305 last we we looked at parties in Congress and how slowly over time they have become the dominant institution there. Charlie Cook discusses one of the factors which helps them consolidate their control, the fact that through party allies in the state legislatures districts have been gerrymandered to the point to where each party is guaranteed to hold a number of districts because they have been drawn that way. This point then also illustrates some of what we said in 2306 about the role of state legislatures and the items that dominate their agenda.
Cook points out that at best 1/4 of the seats in Congress are "swing seats" meaning that they are competitive. The Democratic and Republican candidate might each be likely to win the position. I've heard lower estimates. He uses this fact to point out how difficult it will be for Democrats to win back control of the US House in the 2014 elections. Republican dominated state legislatures - elected into office in the Tea Party wave of 2010 - designed a significant enough number of seats to give Republican a potential lock on the chamber through 2020. This suggests that the elections immediately following the census are very consequential because those are the legislatures that redraw districts.
Cook points out that at best 1/4 of the seats in Congress are "swing seats" meaning that they are competitive. The Democratic and Republican candidate might each be likely to win the position. I've heard lower estimates. He uses this fact to point out how difficult it will be for Democrats to win back control of the US House in the 2014 elections. Republican dominated state legislatures - elected into office in the Tea Party wave of 2010 - designed a significant enough number of seats to give Republican a potential lock on the chamber through 2020. This suggests that the elections immediately following the census are very consequential because those are the legislatures that redraw districts.
. . . notwithstanding all the Democrats in Obama districts and Republicans in Romney districts, the chamber has fewer swing districts altogether. Using The Cook Political Report’s Partisan Voting Index, which ascertains how the presidential voting patterns in each congressional district differ from the national average, we took a look at the 2004 and 2008 presidential-election results in congressional districts (the final PVI incorporating the 2012 results will be available in the next month or so), and compared them with previous years. In 1998, there were 164 swing districts, which we define as a district with a Democratic or Republican PVI of 5 points or less. The swing districts outnumbered the 148 solid “R” districts where Republicans had an edge of more than 5 points, and the 123 solid “D” districts where Democrats had an edge of more than 5 points.At one point there were more swing districts than safe Republican or Democratic districts. Not anymore. Does this contribute to the dysfunction currently on display in Congress?
The number of swing districts dropped from 164 in 1998 to 132 by 2000, to 111 in 2002, then to 108 for two elections (2004 and 2006). The 2008 and 2010 cycles both had 103 swing districts, and the total slipped to 99 in the 2012 cycle. Currently, 190 districts have a Republican PVI over 5 points, 28 seats short of a majority; 146 districts have a Democratic PVI over 5 points, 72 seats short of a majority.
Friday, February 15, 2013
One solution to the electoral college problem
Make all the states the same size (not a serious proposal - but a fun look at the different regions in the US). Bad news, we lose Texas. Good news, Houston is its own state - and there is no state of Dallas.
Weekly Assignment #6
Hopefully you've gotten caught up with past assignments - I need to stress that the May 9th deadline for all work in class is a hard deadline - so don't get too far backlogged in your work. Also, next week I will ask you about your paper topic, so be prepared for that.
A have a separate question for 01,02,05 and 06
GOVT 2301: I want you to start compiling data that will help you address the subject of the 1000 word report. Right now, start looking at the results of the 5 most recent elections and describe broadly what was at stake in them. What were the dominant issues? Did they change? Why? Try to become experts on the elections of 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012.
GOVT 2302: What is the sequester? Its something that is supposed to happen soon, that's all I know right now. Why is it scheduled to take effect? Why are some people arguing that it is a bad thing? Why are some arguing that it is a good thing? What evidence are they offering for each position? How is it related to the broader topic of the fiscal cliff?
GOVT 2305: The first chapter of "Its even worse than it looks" discusses the new politics of hostage taking" which includes discussions about how filibusters are used and hold are placed on nominations for executive offices. As it happens we are in the middle of an event that might qualify as a "hostage taking" event - but then again it may not. I want you to think about what the authors are stating in that chapter and apply it to the facts associated with the current filibuster against the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense.
GOVT 2306: In some of the chapters in the book on Jesse Jones, the role he played in developing and guiding the Port of Houston are laid out. I want you to get familiar with that role, and the relationship the has with the city. Think about how the leaders of the city were able to use it to help grow the city. Then I'd like you to read through the material assembled by the Texas Sunset Review Commission about the Port of Houston Authority. Every ten or so years, each executive agency in the state has to - in essence - justify its existence. Usually they able to do so, but sometimes the commission makes unusual recommendations for reorganizing the commission. Read through the material and determine what the commission has recommended for the port authority, and what this would mean for how the port is run and who would control it.
A have a separate question for 01,02,05 and 06
GOVT 2301: I want you to start compiling data that will help you address the subject of the 1000 word report. Right now, start looking at the results of the 5 most recent elections and describe broadly what was at stake in them. What were the dominant issues? Did they change? Why? Try to become experts on the elections of 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, and 2012.
GOVT 2302: What is the sequester? Its something that is supposed to happen soon, that's all I know right now. Why is it scheduled to take effect? Why are some people arguing that it is a bad thing? Why are some arguing that it is a good thing? What evidence are they offering for each position? How is it related to the broader topic of the fiscal cliff?
GOVT 2305: The first chapter of "Its even worse than it looks" discusses the new politics of hostage taking" which includes discussions about how filibusters are used and hold are placed on nominations for executive offices. As it happens we are in the middle of an event that might qualify as a "hostage taking" event - but then again it may not. I want you to think about what the authors are stating in that chapter and apply it to the facts associated with the current filibuster against the nomination of Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defense.
GOVT 2306: In some of the chapters in the book on Jesse Jones, the role he played in developing and guiding the Port of Houston are laid out. I want you to get familiar with that role, and the relationship the has with the city. Think about how the leaders of the city were able to use it to help grow the city. Then I'd like you to read through the material assembled by the Texas Sunset Review Commission about the Port of Houston Authority. Every ten or so years, each executive agency in the state has to - in essence - justify its existence. Usually they able to do so, but sometimes the commission makes unusual recommendations for reorganizing the commission. Read through the material and determine what the commission has recommended for the port authority, and what this would mean for how the port is run and who would control it.
Woah . . .
Its a good thing the cold war is not on - the Soviets might have figured that this was a bomb. So how soon before we have congressional committee meetings about how we prepare for an asteroid strike? I suppose can all just duck and cover.
Caucuses with area members
Here is a lengthy list of the caucuses that area US House members belong to. We briefly talked about caucuses in some classes - informal organizations that allow members with shared interests to coordinate activities to promote that interest. Some of these have additional information available about them, some do not.
It's worth pointing out that when Republicans came to power in the House after the 1994 election, Speaker Gingrich wanted to consolidate his power - and that of the Republican Party - and weakened caucuses by cutting funds for staff. He did the same to committees. This is part of the reason parties are as strong as they are in Congress today. Other opposing organizations have been weakened. Since these organization once served to bring members together despite party membership, this may help explain the polarization we see today.
Anyway, here is the list. Some caucuses have more than one area member. That's what the numbers mean. Have fun.
It's worth pointing out that when Republicans came to power in the House after the 1994 election, Speaker Gingrich wanted to consolidate his power - and that of the Republican Party - and weakened caucuses by cutting funds for staff. He did the same to committees. This is part of the reason parties are as strong as they are in Congress today. Other opposing organizations have been weakened. Since these organization once served to bring members together despite party membership, this may help explain the polarization we see today.
Anyway, here is the list. Some caucuses have more than one area member. That's what the numbers mean. Have fun.
9-11 Commission Caucus
10th Amendment Task Force
Aerospace Caucus
Algeria Caucus
Alzheimer’s Taskforce
Anti-Terrorism Caucus
Army Caucus
Arts Caucus
Asian Pacific American Caucus
Autism Caucus
Balanced Budget Amendment Caucus
Beef Caucus
Bi-Cameral Congressional Caucus on Parkinson’s Disease
Bipartisan Congressional Prayer Caucus
Bipartisan Congressional Refugee Caucus
Brazil Caucus
Building a Better America Caucus (BABAC)
Career and Technical Education Caucus
Children's Caucus - 2
Children and Families Task Force
Childhood Cancer Caucus
Coal Caucus
Coastal Caucus
Community College Caucus
Congressional Black Caucus - 2
Congressional Hispanic Conference
Congressional Vision Caucus
Conservative Caucus RSC
Constitution Caucus
Cyber Security Caucus
Cystic Fibrosis Caucus - 2
Democratic Israel Working Group
Democratic Outreach Task Force
Diabetes Caucus - 2
Diversity and Innovation Caucus
Entertainment Industries Caucus
Ethiopia and Ethiopian-Americans Caucus
European Union Caucus
Faith and Values in Politics Task Force
Fight & Control Methamphetamine Caucus
Fire Services Caucus – 2
French Caucus
Friends of Jordan Caucus
Friends of Norway Caucus
General Aviation Caucus
Gulf Coast Caucus
Gulf of Mexico Caucus
High Tech Caucus – 2
Homeland Security Task Force
House Aerospace Caucus
House Hunger Caucus
Human Rights Caucus
House Trade Working Group
Immigration Reform Caucus
Immigration Task Force
India and Indian Affairs Caucus
Interstate 69 Caucus
International Conservation Caucus
Internet Caucus
Israel Allies Caucus
Judicial Branch Caucus
Katrina Task Force
Labor and Working Families Caucus
Law Enforcement Caucus
Manufacturing Caucus
Men’s Health Caucus|
Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus - 3
Multiple Sclerosis Caucus
National Guard and Reserve Caucus
National Guard and Reserve Components Caucus
National Marine Sanctuary Caucus
National Wildlife Refuge Caucus
Native American Caucus
Natural Gas Caucus – 3
Nigeria Caucus
Out of Iraq Caucus
Pakistan Caucus
Pell Grant Caucus
P.O.R.T.S (Ports Opportunity, Renewal, Trade, and Security) Caucus – 2
Port Security Caucus
Ports to Plains Caucus
Progressive Caucus
Property Rights Action Caucus
Recycling Caucus - 2
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus
Republican Study Committee
Rice Caucus
Rural Caucus
Science and National Labs Caucus
Second Amendment Task Force
Songwriters Caucus
Sportsmen's Caucus
Sudan Caucus
Steel Caucus
Taiwan Caucus
Tea Party Caucus
TEX-21 Congressional Caucus
Traumatic Brain Injury Task Force
Tri-Caucus
Turkey and Turkish Americans Caucus
Urban Caucus
US-Afghan Caucus
USO Caucus
Victims Right’s Caucus – 3
Vision Caucus
Western Caucus
Wireless Caucus
Women’s Issues Caucus
10th Amendment Task Force
Aerospace Caucus
Algeria Caucus
Alzheimer’s Taskforce
Anti-Terrorism Caucus
Army Caucus
Arts Caucus
Asian Pacific American Caucus
Autism Caucus
Balanced Budget Amendment Caucus
Beef Caucus
Bi-Cameral Congressional Caucus on Parkinson’s Disease
Bipartisan Congressional Prayer Caucus
Bipartisan Congressional Refugee Caucus
Brazil Caucus
Building a Better America Caucus (BABAC)
Career and Technical Education Caucus
Children's Caucus - 2
Children and Families Task Force
Childhood Cancer Caucus
Coal Caucus
Coastal Caucus
Community College Caucus
Congressional Black Caucus - 2
Congressional Hispanic Conference
Congressional Vision Caucus
Conservative Caucus RSC
Constitution Caucus
Cyber Security Caucus
Cystic Fibrosis Caucus - 2
Democratic Israel Working Group
Democratic Outreach Task Force
Diabetes Caucus - 2
Diversity and Innovation Caucus
Entertainment Industries Caucus
Ethiopia and Ethiopian-Americans Caucus
European Union Caucus
Faith and Values in Politics Task Force
Fight & Control Methamphetamine Caucus
Fire Services Caucus – 2
French Caucus
Friends of Jordan Caucus
Friends of Norway Caucus
General Aviation Caucus
Gulf Coast Caucus
Gulf of Mexico Caucus
High Tech Caucus – 2
Homeland Security Task Force
House Aerospace Caucus
House Hunger Caucus
Human Rights Caucus
House Trade Working Group
Immigration Reform Caucus
Immigration Task Force
India and Indian Affairs Caucus
Interstate 69 Caucus
International Conservation Caucus
Internet Caucus
Israel Allies Caucus
Judicial Branch Caucus
Katrina Task Force
Labor and Working Families Caucus
Law Enforcement Caucus
Manufacturing Caucus
Men’s Health Caucus|
Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus - 3
Multiple Sclerosis Caucus
National Guard and Reserve Caucus
National Guard and Reserve Components Caucus
National Marine Sanctuary Caucus
National Wildlife Refuge Caucus
Native American Caucus
Natural Gas Caucus – 3
Nigeria Caucus
Out of Iraq Caucus
Pakistan Caucus
Pell Grant Caucus
P.O.R.T.S (Ports Opportunity, Renewal, Trade, and Security) Caucus – 2
Port Security Caucus
Ports to Plains Caucus
Progressive Caucus
Property Rights Action Caucus
Recycling Caucus - 2
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Caucus
Republican Study Committee
Rice Caucus
Rural Caucus
Science and National Labs Caucus
Second Amendment Task Force
Songwriters Caucus
Sportsmen's Caucus
Sudan Caucus
Steel Caucus
Taiwan Caucus
Tea Party Caucus
TEX-21 Congressional Caucus
Traumatic Brain Injury Task Force
Tri-Caucus
Turkey and Turkish Americans Caucus
Urban Caucus
US-Afghan Caucus
USO Caucus
Victims Right’s Caucus – 3
Vision Caucus
Western Caucus
Wireless Caucus
Women’s Issues Caucus
Thursday, February 14, 2013
From the National Journal: Republican Leaders Worry Their Party Could Divide in Two
There's concern in Washington that Rand Paul might make an independent run for the presidency and split the Republican Party in half and lead to further realignments that might impact the Democrats as well, especially if Hillary Clinton does not run.
A leading Democratic consultant released a memo detailing the chances of a third party candidate: The State of the Union.
Both reads are based on the idea that each of the two major parties - despite their dominance of the political process - are weak and vulnerable. Might we soon witness a seismic shift in the nature of the party system?
A leading Democratic consultant released a memo detailing the chances of a third party candidate: The State of the Union.
Both reads are based on the idea that each of the two major parties - despite their dominance of the political process - are weak and vulnerable. Might we soon witness a seismic shift in the nature of the party system?
From the Texas Tribune: Part-Time Legislature Can Create Financial Hardship
This fits our recent 2306 discussion of the design of the governing institutions in Texas, and especially the consequences of a part-time, amateur legislature.
The state's founders envisioned the part-time Legislature as a place where there would be no room for full-time politicians. Tying lawmakers to their districts for all but five months every two years would keep them connected to the constituents they had been elected to serve. But in the modern Legislature, the paltry pay that goes along with being expected to earn a living elsewhere can have the opposite effect — narrowing the ranks of potential office-holders to only those who can afford to do it full time.
That’s because for most members, the demands of public office aren't quite limited to January through May in odd-numbered years. The needs of their constituents and the issues they must follow to make public policy don’t go away during the interim, nor do the campaigns they must orchestrate to stay in office.
“When I decided to run, I looked at, well, 140 days every other year, you can probably hold your breath that long,” said former state Rep. Rob Eissler, a Republican from The Woodlands who was first elected in 2002.
As his responsibilities as a lawmaker grew, that impression quickly changed, he said.
“It starts to engulf you. You lie in bed at night trying to think of ways to make things better, and that you have opportunity to do it,” he said.
Hagel's nomination to Defense Secretary to be filibustered
Which would be both unprecedented and a further indication that the partisanship that has calcified the House is doing the same to the Senate. Since we haven't talked this over that much in class, here's background:
- Hagel has rough outing before ex-colleagues.
- Chuck Hagel survives, now faces full Senate.
- Why Republicans are filibustering Chuck Hagel.
- Chuck Hagel blocked: Harry Reid doesn't have the votes.
- Harry Reid sets state for Chuck Hagel showdown.
We've yet to fully wade into the controversies over the filibuster, this helps remedy that.
- Hagel has rough outing before ex-colleagues.
- Chuck Hagel survives, now faces full Senate.
- Why Republicans are filibustering Chuck Hagel.
- Chuck Hagel blocked: Harry Reid doesn't have the votes.
- Harry Reid sets state for Chuck Hagel showdown.
We've yet to fully wade into the controversies over the filibuster, this helps remedy that.
Recorded Votes in the 113th Congress as of today
For chewing on in 2305:
- Recorded votes in the House.
- Recorded votes in the Senate.
- Public laws passed so far.
Area congressional committee membership
For informational purposes, here are the standing committees area US House members, and Texas' two Senators serve on. Some committees have several area members. This tells us which are considered to be especially important to the local community.
Area representative Michael McCall chairs the Homeland Security Committee and two committees on this list are chaired by Texans: The Science, Space and Technology Committee is chaired by Lamar Smith, who represents the San Antonio, Bandera area and Jeb Hensarling - who represents the area southeast of Dallas - chairs the Financial Services Committee.
More to come.
Texas Senators:
- Armed Services
- Commerce, Science and Transportation
- Finance
- Judiciary - 2
Texas Representatives:
- Appropriations
- Energy and Commerce - 2
- Financial Services
- Foreign Affairs - 4
- Homeland Security
- Judiciary - 2
- Science, Space and Technology - 4
- Ways and Means
Area representative Michael McCall chairs the Homeland Security Committee and two committees on this list are chaired by Texans: The Science, Space and Technology Committee is chaired by Lamar Smith, who represents the San Antonio, Bandera area and Jeb Hensarling - who represents the area southeast of Dallas - chairs the Financial Services Committee.
More to come.
Links to area US Reps and Sens
For informational purposes, here are links to the offiial websites of area US House Representatives and Texas' two Senators:
Senators:
- John Cornyn
- Ted Cruz
House:
2nd District - Ted Poe
7th District - John Culberson
8th District - Kevin Brady
9th District - Al Green
10th District - Michael McCaul
14th District - Randy Weber
18th District - Sheila Jackson Lee
22nd District - Pete Olson
29th District - Gene Green
36th District - Steve Stockman
I've yet to find a good map of the local area with the new districts drawn on them, but click here for an interactive map to get more detail.
Senators:
- John Cornyn
- Ted Cruz
House:
2nd District - Ted Poe
7th District - John Culberson
8th District - Kevin Brady
9th District - Al Green
10th District - Michael McCaul
14th District - Randy Weber
18th District - Sheila Jackson Lee
22nd District - Pete Olson
29th District - Gene Green
36th District - Steve Stockman
I've yet to find a good map of the local area with the new districts drawn on them, but click here for an interactive map to get more detail.
Sen. Cruz is no wallflower
Newly elected Senators are expected to spend the first part of their term of office keeping quiet, deferring to senior members and learning how the Senate operates. Not so our new Senator Ted Cruz. His actions in the Senate add to the suspicion that increased polarization in Congress as a whole is affecting the Senate - which normally is built for compromise.
The question is whether this behavior will limit his effectiveness in the long run:
But the story points out how Cruz began his carreer and suggests that this helps explain his unusual influence within the chamber - at least among Republicans:
Meaning that he already has connections with the establishment and Tea Party wings of the party and is a broker between the two. The fact that two senior Republicans feel the need to cozy up to him suggests that he can help determine whether they will face a Tea Party Challenger in the primaries next year. So he may be calling some shots in the party This is clever.
He has been in office for barely six weeks, but already the senator from Texas, a favorite of the conservative Tea Party movement, has shown a provocative, in-your-face style that has won him criticism and praise.
Cruz, 42, has been chided by Democrats and even fellow Republicans who say he trampled Senate etiquette during contentious hearings in which he went after former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, Democratic President Barack Obama's nominee for defense secretary.
While some Republican leaders have sought to broaden the party's appeal with a more moderate tone on a range of issues, Cruz has unabashedly - and often dramatically - cast himself as a hard-line conservative with a distaste for compromise.
The question is whether this behavior will limit his effectiveness in the long run:
But some analysts said Cruz's confrontational approach also put him at risk of being marginalized and portrayed as a political bomb thrower in a gridlocked Congress.
"He talks about issues from an ideological perspective. But has shown no sign of being someone who could sit down and work out a solution to a complicated problem," said political scientist Cal Jillson of Southern Methodist University in Dallas.
Norm Ornstein, a congressional analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, said Cruz had been pushing the limits on standards of behavior in the tradition-bound Senate.
But the story points out how Cruz began his carreer and suggests that this helps explain his unusual influence within the chamber - at least among Republicans:
. . . Cruz, a Harvard Law School graduate who was a clerk for former Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist and served as Texas solicitor general, has also built bridges with more established Republicans eager to court the party's conservative wing and promote a rising Hispanic star.
Party leaders gave him a plum speaking slot at last year's national convention, and sought-after appointments to the Senate Judiciary and Armed Services committees once he was elected. They also made him vice chairman of the Senate Republican campaign arm, which will recruit and back candidates in the 2014 elections.
The top two Senate Republicans, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and John Cornyn of Texas, both hope to avoid primary challenges from conservatives next year and have sought to strengthen their relationships with Cruz.
Cruz accompanied McConnell on a congressional visit to Israel and Afghanistan last month and won an admirer in the process. McConnell told the National Review Online afterward that Cruz was "ready for prime time on day one, which is pretty unusual for somebody who just got sworn in."
Meaning that he already has connections with the establishment and Tea Party wings of the party and is a broker between the two. The fact that two senior Republicans feel the need to cozy up to him suggests that he can help determine whether they will face a Tea Party Challenger in the primaries next year. So he may be calling some shots in the party This is clever.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
From the Dallas Morning News: A quick primer on Texas House’s “supplemental bills”
Something to file away as we prep for a look at the Texas budget, and the budgetary process.
The Texas House’s chief budget writer has filed five bills that could constitute the “supplemental appropriations” package. Once upon a time, the supplemental was one bill that tweaked spending in the second fiscal year of the current two-year budget — in the same session in which lawmakers would write the next two-year budget.
In recent sessions, though, budget writers made things very hard to follow. Some supplemental bills spend money across all three fiscal years, while one passed in 2011 actually cut more spending than it added. You couldn’t just look at the supplemental bill to see how they closed out the cycle about to end.
House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jim Pitts, you might say, is keeping us on our toes.
This year, he has introduced a five-bill, supplemental package. It actually goes beyond mere spending, or appropriating of money: Some of the bills would undo accounting tricks and tax-collection speed ups that lawmakers approved last session. They did those things to avert making deeper spending cuts as they bridged a two-year, $27 billion budget shortfall.
We should note that this year, the GOP legislative leaders are remarkably eager to “re-set the gimmicks.” For instance, they’re stopping a school-payment delay before it happens. When last used in 2003, lawmakers waited for four years of economic recovery before opting to re-set the gimmick for future use. Gimmick intolerance probably plays into some Republican leaders’ apparent strategy of not rewarding school districts that have sued the state over school finance by undoing $5.3 billion of school cuts passed in 2011.The story then looks into those bills.
Cities as social networks
We discussed this idea in a few classes this week, especially regarding Governor Perry's attempt to lure California jobs here. If one is to move from Palo Alto to Texas, one would have to expect that the social environment - and the business opportunities that would accompany it - would be the same. Is that true? Cities offer opportunities to connect with others - does Texas provide the same connections that California offers? Here's a look that idea.
Houston: The nation's 60th most literate city
Not a good result for a city trying to increase its economic status.
Central Connecticut State University puts together an annual list of the most literate cities in the US and no Texas city did especially well, with the possible exception of Austin that came in at 22.5 - tied with NYC.
The study used six factors to make its rankings:
Ouch
- Commentary from Atlantic Cities.
- And the Fort Worth Star Telegram:
Central Connecticut State University puts together an annual list of the most literate cities in the US and no Texas city did especially well, with the possible exception of Austin that came in at 22.5 - tied with NYC.
The study used six factors to make its rankings:
1 - The number of bookstores per 10,000 population - Houston came in 60th.The top cities were Washington DC, Seattle, Minneapolis, Atlanta and Boston
2 - Education level, which was a mix of the percentage of people with high school diplomas and bachelor's degrees or higher - Houston came in 56th
3 - Internet resources, which was measured by a variety of factors including the number of online book orders and visits to the city's online newspaper - Houston was 21st.
4 - Libraries, which was measured by the number of branches per capita and the number of volumes owned - Houston came in 73rd.
5 - Total newspaper circulation - Houston came in 41st.
6 - The number of magazine and journals published per capita - Houston came in 56th.
Ouch
- Commentary from Atlantic Cities.
- And the Fort Worth Star Telegram:
The back-of-the-pack rankings for Texas cities come as no surprise to Peggy Rudd, who recently retired as director of the Texas State Library and Archives Commission, which provides support for 560 public libraries statewide.
You get what you pay for, she said.
"The problem is, public libraries are so underfunded and reclamation costs a hell of a lot more than doing it right the first time," she said.
"I guarantee you we're at the bottom or close to it when it comes to spending. It's one of those situations: Thank God for Mississippi because without them we could be in last place. It's sad but true," said Rudd, who saw the Legislature cut funding for the library and archives by 64 percent two years ago.
The cuts included $14 million in state support for local libraries, she said.
. . . Rudd is not optimistic about a Texas turnaround on libraries or literacy.
"The Legislature is talking about more cuts," she said. "To me, it is so shortsighted. If you really want to improve education in Texas, why would you ignore the resource that has 560 outlets scattered across the state that are perfectly prepared to address the problem of literacy?
"Yet the Legislature does ignore them and look where we are."
Some feedback on the SOTU Address
The NYT covers the speech here and The Dish links to various reactions here - including a few live-blogs.
The consensus opinion is that the speech targeted policies that would favor the middle class and that Obama spoke with some confidence without being overly partisan - all the while laying out a few potential landmines for Republicans: like his proposal that the minimum wage be increased. He laid out a case for governmental involvement in developing the middle class while the Republican response tried to argue against it. Might be a good point to raise in class. We can isolate the precise goal laid out in the speech and figure out whether the public or private sector is in a better position to achieve them.
A few pointed out that Joe Biden looked very Mardi Gras with his purple tie and green - Newtown - ribbon. He just needed a touch of gold somewhere.
There were no flareups involving Ted Nugent that I heard of - big disappointment. He looks like he regretted showing up:
The consensus opinion is that the speech targeted policies that would favor the middle class and that Obama spoke with some confidence without being overly partisan - all the while laying out a few potential landmines for Republicans: like his proposal that the minimum wage be increased. He laid out a case for governmental involvement in developing the middle class while the Republican response tried to argue against it. Might be a good point to raise in class. We can isolate the precise goal laid out in the speech and figure out whether the public or private sector is in a better position to achieve them.
A few pointed out that Joe Biden looked very Mardi Gras with his purple tie and green - Newtown - ribbon. He just needed a touch of gold somewhere.
There were no flareups involving Ted Nugent that I heard of - big disappointment. He looks like he regretted showing up:
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
What would you do?
A very sad local story raises a troubling question:
An Alvin father remained in the Brazoria County Jail Monday, charged with murder in the alleged revenge killing of a drunk driver who plowed into his truck, killing his two young sons last December. David Barajas Sr., 31, a construction worker, is being held in lieu of $450,000 bail in the fatal shooting of 20-year-old Jose Inez Banda minutes after the Dec. 7 crash that claimed the lives of Barajas' 11- and 12-year-old sons.
"The whole incident is extremely tragic," said Brazoria County sheriff's lead investigator, Dominick Sanders. "The grand jury reviewed it and has indicted him for murder."
Tests showed Banda's blood alcohol was twice the legal limit when his Chevrolet Malibu rear-ended the Barajas' family's Ford 250 truck that had run out of gas on an unlit county road near Alvin, investigators said. The inebriated driver failed to swerve or even apply his brakes before plowing into the truck and crushing Barajas' sons, David Jr., 12, and Caleb, 11.I was surprised to read that he was indicted for muder considering the circumstances until I read this:
During a two-month investigation, authorities located a witness who reported seeing David Barajas walk from the crash scene to his nearby home and return to Banda's car, after which the witness heard gunshots.He - allegedly - walked home, got a gun and killed the driver. That makes this less a crime of passion than a premeditated act .... but still. So if you were on the jury, how would you rule?
Who sets transportation policy?
Free Press Houston looks at the politics behind Segment E of the Grand Parkway - the world's longest "ring road," which will eventually have a segment near our campus.
The story involves the ability of supporters of the road to build over wetlands and an archaeological site.
The story involves the ability of supporters of the road to build over wetlands and an archaeological site.
Who sets education policy?
The Texas Legislature is reviewing the tests used to assess high school students amidst concerns that the focus on assessments has had a negative impact on the education kids are getting in K-12.
The Washington Post posted an article from a recently retired high school teacher apologizing for the poor students he has had to pass on to colleges, but argues that their poor performance is due to the time spent figuring out how to answer multiple choice tests, not how to think at a deeper level about subject matter. He pins blame on the fact that education policy is not set by educators, but by corporations that benefit from the use of tests because they design and implement them:
The Washington Post posted an article from a recently retired high school teacher apologizing for the poor students he has had to pass on to colleges, but argues that their poor performance is due to the time spent figuring out how to answer multiple choice tests, not how to think at a deeper level about subject matter. He pins blame on the fact that education policy is not set by educators, but by corporations that benefit from the use of tests because they design and implement them:
During my years in the classroom I tried to educate other adults about the realities of schools and students and teaching. I tried to help them understand the deleterious impact of policies that were being imposed on our public schools. I blogged, I wrote letters and op-eds for newspapers, and I spent a great deal of time speaking with and lobbying those in a position to influence policy, up to and including sitting members of the US House of Representatives and Senate and relevant members of their staffs. Ultimately, it was to little avail, because the drivers of the policies that are changing our schools—and thus increasingly presenting you with students ever less prepared for post-secondary academic work—are the wealthy corporations that profit from the policies they help define and the think tanks and activist organizations that have learned how to manipulate the levers of power, often to their own financial or ideological advantage.A useful look at how public policy is actually shaped. I'll catch up on what the legislature is doing regarding education policy - and assessment (the STARR test especially) soon.
Why aren't there more journalists - and other media types - in Congress?
Good question asked in class today. I do not know.
Media people are hired by folks in Congress and the executive branch to face other media people, but they do not actually hold the office generally. Again, I don't know why.
We discussed this after looking at the graph below on the occupations members of Congress hold. I tried to explain why there are so many lawyers in Congress and mentioned that the principal-agent model of representation suggests that lawyers might be worth "employing" as a representative since lawyers are used to dealing with laws - its what they do. That's not a fully satisfactory answer though.
I do know that lawyers firms and law schools are fertile places places for political activity and recruitment. They are terrific places to tap into political networks that can lead to being recruited to run for office. The same may hold true for business people.
It does occur to me that we probably don't know enough about why certain occupations are over and under represented in Congress. This certainly matters for effective representation - there are 108 business people and 1 union representative in the House. That explains a lot. If anyone reads this that knows of relevant research. let me know what's out there - thanks.
Media people are hired by folks in Congress and the executive branch to face other media people, but they do not actually hold the office generally. Again, I don't know why.
We discussed this after looking at the graph below on the occupations members of Congress hold. I tried to explain why there are so many lawyers in Congress and mentioned that the principal-agent model of representation suggests that lawyers might be worth "employing" as a representative since lawyers are used to dealing with laws - its what they do. That's not a fully satisfactory answer though.
I do know that lawyers firms and law schools are fertile places places for political activity and recruitment. They are terrific places to tap into political networks that can lead to being recruited to run for office. The same may hold true for business people.
It does occur to me that we probably don't know enough about why certain occupations are over and under represented in Congress. This certainly matters for effective representation - there are 108 business people and 1 union representative in the House. That explains a lot. If anyone reads this that knows of relevant research. let me know what's out there - thanks.
Sandy Hook v Ted Nugent
The State of the Union Address is tonight - which is how presidents fulfill the requirement that they provide information from time to time on the state of the union - and will feature several invited, symbolic guests.
The most interesting: survivors of the Sandy Hook shooting and ..... Ted Nugent.
I can't wait for the visuals.
The most interesting: survivors of the Sandy Hook shooting and ..... Ted Nugent.
I can't wait for the visuals.
Study Guide Questions for this week's 2305
We have three separate section to cover this week. Here are the study guid question for them on the wiki:
Section One: The Development of the Legislature:
- What is a legislature and what does it do?
- What is a "bicameral" legislature? What are its chief components and what are main features of those components?
- Be familar with basic terms used to describe various aspects of the legislature?
- What was the Magna Carta? What circumstances led to its drafting? Why did it have limited impact initially?
- What was the Petition of Right? Who presented it to whom? What was its purpose? What specific accusations were made in the Petition of Right?- Be familar with the conflict between the British Parliament and the Stuart Monarchs.
- What was the British Bill of Rights? What was its content? What was its principle accomplishment?
- Be familiar with the history of assemblies during the US colonial era. Why were asemblies formed? What were their priniple functions?
- What grievances against the British monarch focused on abuses of legislative power? What specific things did they claim about the king's actions and his intent?
- What type of legislative system was establihed under the Articles of Confederation? What were the advantages and disadvantages of that design? What deficiencies led the Federalists to call for a constitutional convention to discuss remedies to these defects?
Section Two: The Constitutional Legislature:
- What aspects of the legislature as designed in the Articles of Confederations were unaccesptable to the Federalists? What did they hope to achieve with a new design?
- What types of legislatures did James Madison and Alexander Hamilton (separately) introduce to the convention? How were the proposals received?
- Be able to identify the material covered in each of the ten sections of Article One.
- What are the principle differences between the House and the Senate? What - or whom - is each institution responsible to? How does the design of each make them distinct from each other? What controversies were involved in the design of each?
- Be familar with basic details of House and Senate Elections.
- How detailed is the design of Congress in the Constitution?
- What specific positions of power in the legislature are created in the Constitution?
- What does the Constitution say about the bill making process?
- What protections does the Constitution grant members of Congress from other branches?
- What parts of the Constitution have allowed Congress to expand its powers?
- What checks does the Constitution grant Congress over the other two branches?
- What impact has gerrymandering had on the House? on the Senate?
- What specific powers are granted to the national government in Section 8? Why those specific powers? What limitations are placed on the national government in Section 9?
Section Three: Parties and Committees in Congress:
- How have the structures of each chamber - the House and the Senate - changed over time?
- Does power in the Senate work the same as power in the House?
- What specific types of committee have been established over time in Congress? What is a standing committee and what role does it play in the bill making process?|
- Be familiar with the specific positions of power in Congress. What types exist and what powers do they have? What limits exist on their powers?
- What special powers do the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate have over their respective institutions?
- Parties in the US first developed in Congress.Why and how?
- What leverage do the parties in Congress have over their members?
- What accounts for the strength of political parties? What factors can weaken them?
- What special advantages do the majority parties in the House and Senate have over each chamber?
- What are the goals of members of Congress and how do these goals help us understand - and predict - their behavior?
- What is the current state of conflict between the parties in Congress?
- What is unified and divided government? What are the arguments in favor and against each?
- What are the different positions in each party and what do they do?
- How have the parties changed on recent decades? Has this change made the legislative process easier or more difficult?
Section One: The Development of the Legislature:
- What is a legislature and what does it do?
- What is a "bicameral" legislature? What are its chief components and what are main features of those components?
- Be familar with basic terms used to describe various aspects of the legislature?
- What was the Magna Carta? What circumstances led to its drafting? Why did it have limited impact initially?
- What was the Petition of Right? Who presented it to whom? What was its purpose? What specific accusations were made in the Petition of Right?- Be familar with the conflict between the British Parliament and the Stuart Monarchs.
- What was the British Bill of Rights? What was its content? What was its principle accomplishment?
- Be familiar with the history of assemblies during the US colonial era. Why were asemblies formed? What were their priniple functions?
- What grievances against the British monarch focused on abuses of legislative power? What specific things did they claim about the king's actions and his intent?
- What type of legislative system was establihed under the Articles of Confederation? What were the advantages and disadvantages of that design? What deficiencies led the Federalists to call for a constitutional convention to discuss remedies to these defects?
Section Two: The Constitutional Legislature:
- What aspects of the legislature as designed in the Articles of Confederations were unaccesptable to the Federalists? What did they hope to achieve with a new design?
- What types of legislatures did James Madison and Alexander Hamilton (separately) introduce to the convention? How were the proposals received?
- Be able to identify the material covered in each of the ten sections of Article One.
- What are the principle differences between the House and the Senate? What - or whom - is each institution responsible to? How does the design of each make them distinct from each other? What controversies were involved in the design of each?
- Be familar with basic details of House and Senate Elections.
- How detailed is the design of Congress in the Constitution?
- What specific positions of power in the legislature are created in the Constitution?
- What does the Constitution say about the bill making process?
- What protections does the Constitution grant members of Congress from other branches?
- What parts of the Constitution have allowed Congress to expand its powers?
- What checks does the Constitution grant Congress over the other two branches?
- What impact has gerrymandering had on the House? on the Senate?
- What specific powers are granted to the national government in Section 8? Why those specific powers? What limitations are placed on the national government in Section 9?
Section Three: Parties and Committees in Congress:
- How have the structures of each chamber - the House and the Senate - changed over time?
- Does power in the Senate work the same as power in the House?
- What specific types of committee have been established over time in Congress? What is a standing committee and what role does it play in the bill making process?|
- Be familiar with the specific positions of power in Congress. What types exist and what powers do they have? What limits exist on their powers?
- What special powers do the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate have over their respective institutions?
- Parties in the US first developed in Congress.Why and how?
- What leverage do the parties in Congress have over their members?
- What accounts for the strength of political parties? What factors can weaken them?
- What special advantages do the majority parties in the House and Senate have over each chamber?
- What are the goals of members of Congress and how do these goals help us understand - and predict - their behavior?
- What is the current state of conflict between the parties in Congress?
- What is unified and divided government? What are the arguments in favor and against each?
- What are the different positions in each party and what do they do?
- How have the parties changed on recent decades? Has this change made the legislative process easier or more difficult?
Moonbeam v Goodhair
The Texas Tribune uses the fight between Governor's Brown and Perry (Moonbeam and Goodhair) over jobs to look more deeply at the different cultural attitudes each has towards government. Here's content from the story:
It is a lovely thing when two political avatars slug it out in public. The little radio advertisement has so far become a weeklong conversation about the relative virtues of the nation’s two biggest states.
In other words, Perry got just what he wanted. The first part of persuading someone to move is getting them to consider that idea.
Behind the ads and the commentary is a serious competition between the states for economic pre-eminence. In that corner, Athens. In this one, Sparta. Each serves as the other’s foil, the Ali to its Frazier, the Moriarty to its Holmes, the red to its blue. Each sees itself as the economic, cultural and political engine of the future.
Over the past decade, Texas has been knocking the feathers out of the competition, adding jobs faster than any other state. That’s one of Perry’s brags and would have been a centerpiece of his 2012 presidential campaign, had he kept that effort alive long enough to need a centerpiece.
Not from Texas? Here’s one argument heard lately in California: Perry and Texas didn’t create all those jobs. They stole them. When Countrywide Financial (may it rest in peace) moved from California to Texas in 2004, Texas threw $20 million at the company, which in turn promised 7,500 jobs. Even the rosiest spin on that deal failed to add to the number of jobs in the universe. It just relocated them.
I like the Texas as Sparta and California as Athens reference. Sparta was famously austere - though it was very much a socialist system, so I'm not sure how far to take the analogy. And austerity seems to be reserved for the poor. The powerful in Sparta lived simple lives - I don't think you can say that about those in Texas. But Athens did throw a great deal of resources at public works, and California prides itself on doing the same.
More seriously, each state has a different orientation towards economic development, and this should be explored more fully. Over the past few decades, Texas has actively courted major corporations and encouraged them to move here by offering them a business friendly environment, which means that labor is kept cheap and regulations are kept low. Workers find it difficult to assemble into unions in order to drive up wages and enhance workplace safety. The ability of workers and consumers to use the courts to address problems has also been made more difficult in a number of ways: limits on awards and losers pays rules among others. Texas also keeps public sector costs low, most recently by cutting education and health expenditures. It's a top-down model for development, at least that seems the case to me.
California seems to have taken the opposite approach to economic development. It developed a first class education system - including some of the nation's top universities - and used them as centers of research. The products of this research was then spun into the technology that lead to a variety of business enterprises that we are all familiar with: Hewlett-Packard, Apple, and Google among many others. This seems to me to be a bottom-up approach to economic development. Make sure people have the technological skills to develop ideas, and train a workforce necessary to sustain and grow that idea.
This is a start, but I think a more thorough look at the differences between the two states - in this and many other areas - is worth pursuing.
And a concluding question: The key criticism the story has about Texas' approach to economic development is that we don;t create jobs as much as we poach them from elsewhere. I wonder about the data backing this assertion up. Of the top corporations in Texas, how many started in Texas and how many relocated here?
More seriously, each state has a different orientation towards economic development, and this should be explored more fully. Over the past few decades, Texas has actively courted major corporations and encouraged them to move here by offering them a business friendly environment, which means that labor is kept cheap and regulations are kept low. Workers find it difficult to assemble into unions in order to drive up wages and enhance workplace safety. The ability of workers and consumers to use the courts to address problems has also been made more difficult in a number of ways: limits on awards and losers pays rules among others. Texas also keeps public sector costs low, most recently by cutting education and health expenditures. It's a top-down model for development, at least that seems the case to me.
California seems to have taken the opposite approach to economic development. It developed a first class education system - including some of the nation's top universities - and used them as centers of research. The products of this research was then spun into the technology that lead to a variety of business enterprises that we are all familiar with: Hewlett-Packard, Apple, and Google among many others. This seems to me to be a bottom-up approach to economic development. Make sure people have the technological skills to develop ideas, and train a workforce necessary to sustain and grow that idea.
This is a start, but I think a more thorough look at the differences between the two states - in this and many other areas - is worth pursuing.
And a concluding question: The key criticism the story has about Texas' approach to economic development is that we don;t create jobs as much as we poach them from elsewhere. I wonder about the data backing this assertion up. Of the top corporations in Texas, how many started in Texas and how many relocated here?
From the Texas Tribune: Handicapping the High Court on School Finance
The Texas Tribune looks at the road ahead for the lawsuits against school funding in Texas. The authors points out that the Texas Supreme Court is likely to hear the case around the time that the Texas primary will be held, and that three of the Justices will be up for election:
In a previous decision in 2005, the justices argued that there was evidence that the public education system was unlikely to improve - to be adequate as required by the Texas Constitution - unless funding was increased. Funding as we know has been cut since then. So does this suggest that the court will agree with the district judges who argued that the education cuts were unconstitutional? Not necessarily. Governor Perry, who supports sustaining the cuts has appointed the bulk of the new members of the court:
Parties involved in the litigation estimate that with a direct appeal, it would take the high court about a year to reach its final decision, sometime in spring 2014 — either right before or right after the primaries. There are three justices up for re-election then: Chief Wallace Jefferson, Jeffrey Boyd and Phil Johnson. A special session would likely take place that fall. If the legal process were more drawn out, the final decision could land just before 2015, leaving lawmakers to consider it during the 84th regular session.
In a previous decision in 2005, the justices argued that there was evidence that the public education system was unlikely to improve - to be adequate as required by the Texas Constitution - unless funding was increased. Funding as we know has been cut since then. So does this suggest that the court will agree with the district judges who argued that the education cuts were unconstitutional? Not necessarily. Governor Perry, who supports sustaining the cuts has appointed the bulk of the new members of the court:
The two-thirds of schools districts suing the state believe that reaction has not taken place, and that what the court originally saw as an impending constitutional violation has turned into a real one.
But there has been high turnover among the justices who considered that case. Four who participated in the decision remain on the bench: Nathan Hecht, who wrote the opinion, Jefferson, Johnson and Paul Green, who were all in the majority. Don Willettrecused himself.
Since then, four new justices have joined the court: Debra Lehrmann, a former Fort Worth family court judge; Eva Guzman, a former Houston appellate judge; Boyd, Gov. Rick Perry’s former general counsel; and John Devine, a social conservative activist and former Houston trial court judge. Perry first appointed all of them except Devine, who won a primary against incumbent David Medina.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)