There are different factors and goals that motivate members of Congress. However, the number one goal for Congress members is to get re-elected in Congress. Therefore, they are motivated to raise funds, meets different groups of people, have trips back to their districts and choose their activities in a day to day basis. It is shocking to know that having power and influence in Congress, social prestige and making good policy are less important to most members of Congress than the primary goal which is getting re-elected. Several steps members of Congress take to get re-elected. First of all, raising money. Even though, raising money does not guarantee members of Congress getting re-elected, it helps them in their campaign and to make their voice heard by the voters. It is worth noting that usually the more money a member of Congress raises and spends the more likely he/she won’t get re-elected, because when he/she spends more money that other members, it usually means he/she is more vulnerable and that he/she is facing more powerful candidates. Second, what really makes a different in Congress …show more content…
First of all, party discipline which is relatively weaker system than other countries, but it is becoming stronger in the U.S. We can see the strength through the fact that it is much rare for members of Congress to vote against their party, and the member that does vote against their party will not be re-elected. Second, informal norms which is unwritten rules and not really parts of the rules of the constitution, party and organization, but they are norms of behavior that help the institution runs. For example, the idea of universalism and reciprocity, recognizing specialization of some members in some areas. Moreover, seniority, which gives more power and authority to those who has been members longer than
The excerpt “Congress: The Electoral Connection” written by David Mayhew centers around the fundamental arguments that discusses how members of congress are self-interested for reelection. Mayhew further elaborates on his idea by discussing the electoral activities that congress members devote their time into and resource from, which are advertising, credit-claiming, and position taking. Mayhew’s excerpt further examines the framework in how congress operates which contributes to the explanation of how and why congress partakes in the certain electoral activities.
Members of congress have three specific goals. The one that seems to be the most important
It is not uncommon to find members of Congress who have genuine goals of spearheading, designing or even just supporting good public policy. It would be harsh to say that every member of Congress is against good policy. However what is difficult for members of Congress is deciding what is more important, the wishes of their constituents or national policy. Although it is rare, members of Congress vote against the popular opinion of his or her district in order to make what would be considered good policy in the national interest. This hinders their chance of re-election but is necessary for America. In very rare cases members of Congress have gone against the wishes of their constituents for moral reasons like in the aftermath of 9/11. When voting on the 2002 Iraq War Resolution, I am certain that the last thing of the minds of members of Congress was re-election. A very conservative House of Representatives member Jimmy Duncan said ‘‘when I pushed that button to vote against the war back in 2002, I thought I might be ending my political career.” In times of crisis members of Congress have decide between what is right, not what their constituents believe is right. Another goal other than re-election that members of Congress have is their own future. For many, being a members of The House of Representatives is a mere stepping stone in their career on the way to better things. Therefore for some members of Congress, re-election does not worry them and gives them the freedom to act in an environment striped of the constant pressure of re-election. However, considering that most of the members of The House Of Representatives goals lie within the Senate or high executive positions, re-election is still on their mind, all be it in the form of a different
In the past century, people continued to express an increasingly discontent view of Congress especially true when one looks back before the Clinton Impeachment debacle As the size of the nation and the number of congressman have grown, the congress has come under attack by both public influences and congressman themselves. Yet looking at one congressman's relationship with his or her constituents, it would be hard to believe that this is the branch of government that has come under suspect. In “If Ralph Nader says congress is 'The broken branch,' how come we love our congressman so much?” author Richard F. Fenno, Jr., provides insight into this view and why, through congress coming under fire, constituents still feel positively about there congressmen. Although congress is often criticized, its fine tuned functioning is essential in checking the power of congress without hindering the making of legislation.
In this essay I will explore whether or not members of congress are still doing their job or just trying to keep their good reputation with their constituents for re-election time. The question of whether or not members of congress are doing their job effectively has been a great topic of controversy. Being a member of congress has turned into a long term struggle of constantly working towards reelection and trying to balance keeping their districts happy and still being a part of major legislature. Is there a way for members of congress to keep their district happy and still manage the bigger issues they are expected to deal with? Most Americans will complain that they are not happy and that their representatives are not doing their job in
In conclusion, even though some of the Congress processes and its structure seem to be made to slow things down and to reduce effectiveness, they exist to, as discussed in class, protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. After all, one of the main objectives of having a government is to create a balanced society, and to reduce the chances of having social convulsion and anarchy.
Power is the main influence on Congress members. Without power there would not be a need of money, people wanting the best career for reasons other than to be successful, and Republican and Democratic parties who dominate all parties who have other views. Power is great or marked ability to do or act, strength, might, force. A certain member or party who has a lot of force in Congress can persuade other Congress men or women to vote for what they are told. The people who are tricked into schemes tend to be young members or those seeking approval and power themselves. These plans and wishes for control can cause loss of confidence and criticism of government, not only Congress. If members are found guilty of pressuring, paying money, among other things they can be brought to trial. In the end, this costs the country money to hold a trial that will most likely go to supreme court who have enough trials to take care of. Not all Congress members play mind games and vote for what they believe is best for the public good. The hard part is voting for who you believe is the best fit to make those decisions.
...ilities of Congress is that minorities and factions exist: dissent takes place, not disagreements. Verbal brawls take place rather than actual argumentation, and that is what kills democracy. That is why things never get done.
These desires interact with one another in different ways, giving rise to the need for different strategies employed by members of House and Senate. When members' reelection needs and personal policy preferences are similar within the party and differ substantially between parties, as we see in a highly polarized Congress, it makes sense for them to organize their parties and endow their leaders with the resources necessary to facilitate the achievement of their goals. Scholars have argued that the contemporary parties are elaborately organized so as to facilitate joint action toward collective goals, while also providing members with much-prized opportunities to participate in the legislative process. An increased reliance over the past three decades on special rules in the House to achieve legislative goals rather than compromise and negotiation has become the norm, rather than the
Congressional terms have no limits. Controversy exists between those who think the terms should be limited and those who believe that terms should remain unlimited. The group that wants to limit the terms argues that the change will promote fresh ideas and reduce the possibility of decisions being made for self-interest. Those who oppose term limits believe that we would sacrifice both the stability and experience held by veteran politicians. They also point out that our election process allows the voter to limit terms, at their discretion. While experience and stability are important considerations, congressional terms should be limited to a maximum of two.
Many Americans in today's society will find it difficult to answer the question of what Congress exactly does and why it exists. Others simply don't care and see Congress as a failed system where nothing gets done. Lee Hamilton, in his book Why Congress Works and Why you Should Care, proves these people wrong and gives an insider's look at what Congress actually does do and how it affects every American each day.
Did you know that in order for a bill to become a law it must go through the house of representatives and Senators?The house of representatives and the senators are alike in many different ways.Congress has many different roles that they do for example a role that they have to do are when someone make a bill that wants to be passed it first has to be introduced to congress then the congressmen discusses it out then pass it to the president.Another role congress has is that they have the power to declare war and make laws.
Stephen Medvic, In Defense of Politicians, discusses why Americans feel that politicians are dishonest. In 2007, a Gallup poll about honesty and ethical standards for occupations, showed that only 12 and 9 percent of people felt that Congressmen and State office holders held high standards, (Medvic p. 2). In addition, Americans tend to like their representatives more than the members of Congress because they view them as actual people. Americans view Congress as a group of politicians who are greedy and not representing their interests, (Medvic p. 4).
Running for a position of power is a tough thing to do. There are many things to worry about: your image, your policies, and, especially, your voters. While running for Congress is not as stressful as running for president, it has it own set of obstacles: making a “home style,” representing the people well, and making useful public policy. Listening to the words of Richard Fenno, John Ellwood, and Eric Patashnik can make doing these things a whole lot easier.
I attended the congressional hearing on Capitol Hill to hear testimony on the Global Nuclear Weapons Environment on Wednesday, March 8, 2007 at 2:30 PM in Room SR-222, Russell Senate Office Building. The hearing was conducted by the subcommittee on strategic forces which is one of subcommittees within Senate Armed Services Committee. They discussed and examined the global nuclear weapons environment. It was a first former hearing of the strategic forces subcommittee for this year.