Additional Powers of Congress

Lesson Objectives 1.You will analyze the practice of congressional oversight. 2.You will assess congressional power over the presidency through advice and consent. 3.You will list and evaluate different forms of direct patronage used by congressional members.

I. Introduction: In addition to the powers to make laws, Congress has at its disposal an array of other instruments through which it influences the government. The powers of Congress can be called “weapons of control” to emphasize the fact of Congress’s power to govern and to call attention to what governmental power means.

II. Oversight: Oversight is the effort to oversee and supervise how legislation is carried out by the executive branch.

Individual senators and members of the House can engage in informal oversight simply by calling or visiting administrators, sending out questionnaires, or talking to constituents about programs. But in a more formal sense, oversight is carried out by committees or subcommittees of the Senate or House, which conducts hearings and investigations in order to analyze and evaluate bureaucratic agencies and the effectiveness of their programs.

The purpose may be to locate inefficiencies or abuses of power, to explore the relationship between what an agency does and what a law intended, or to change or abolish a program. Most programs and agencies are subject to some oversight every year during the course of hearings on appropriations, the funding of agencies and government programs. Committees and subcommittees have the power to subpoena witnesses, take oaths, cross- examine, compel testimony, and bring criminal charges for contempt (refusing to cooperate) and perjury (lying).

Hearings and investigations resemble each other in many ways, but they differ on one fundamental point. A hearing is usually held on a specific bill, and the questions asked there are usually intended to build a record with regard to that bill. In an investigation, the committee or subcommittee does not begin with a particular bill, but examines a broad area or problem and then concludes its investigation with one or more proposed bills.

III. Advice & Consent: The president has the power to make treaties and to appoint top executive officers, ambassadors, and federal judges, but only with the advice and consent of the Senate. For treaties, two-thirds of those present must concur; for appointment, a majority is required.

The power to approve or reject presidential request also involves the power to set conditions. The Senate only occasionally exercises its power to reject treaties and appointments, usually when opposite parties control the Senate and White House. Only nine judicial nominees have been rejected by the Senate during the past century, while hundreds have been approved.

More common is a senatorial hold on an appointment. Any member of the Senate can place an indefinite hold on the confirmation of a mid- or low-level presidential appointment. The hold is typically used by senators trying to get concessions from the White House on some other matter. Since Bush came to power in 2001, the Democratic minority in the Senate has actively scrutinized judicial nominations. They have prevented final confirmation votes on a dozen conservative nominees, for which President Bush complained frequently during the 2004 re-election campaign.

Judicial nomination politics have been common during Bush’s second term. In May 2005, Senate Majority Leader Frist, responded to continual obstructionist tactics by the minority Democrats on confirming Bush nominees to the federal courts. Frist threatened the “nuclear option,” a procedural tactic to close down a filibuster that only required majority approval instead of the normal three-fifths requirement for cloture.

Had this occurred it would have constituted a procedural watershed in the Senate, making it more similar to the majoritarian House. A group of fourteen senators, seven from each party, brokered a compromise in which the minority agreed to reserve the filibuster for “extraordinary circumstances.” This permitted many of the controversial nominees for judgeship to be confirmed.

As for treaties most presidents frequently resort to executive agreements with foreign powers instead of treaties. The Supreme Court has held that such agreements are equivalent to treaties, but they do not need Senate approval. Some presidents conclude secret agreements. U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War developed due to a series of secret agreements. In response, Congress passed the Case Act (1972), which requires that the president inform Congress of any executive agreement with sixty days of its having been reached. This provides Congress with the opportunity to cancel agreements that it opposes. However, its strongest power is that Congress can limit the president’s ability to conduct foreign policy through executive agreement by refusing to appropriate the funds need to implement an agreement.

IV. Direct Patronage: Another instrument of congressional power is direct patronage, providing direct benefits for congressional constituents. The most important type of direct patronage for members of Congress is the pork barrel.

The pork barrel, legislation designed to create a federal project, grant, or contract and to set the location in the congressional district of the bills author. Often congressional leaders will use pork- barrel projects in exchange for votes on other issues. Or they may use them to build support for a piece of legislation. The most important rule of pork- barreling is that any member of Congress whose district receives a project as part of a bill must support the entire bill.

Other Forms of Direct Patronage; Intervening with federal administrative agencies on behalf of constituents and supporters. Getting an appointment to one of the military academies for the child of a constituent. Introducing a private bill, a proposal to grant some kind of relief, special privilege, or exemption to the person named in the bill. 75 percent of these bill deal with providing relief for foreign nationals who cannot get permanent visas to the U.S. The other 25 percent deal with giving money to individual citizens for injuries allegedly received from a public action.

The End!