Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-tj2md Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T18:58:34.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Senate Deliberation and the Future of Congressional Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2010

Frances E. Lee
Frances E. Lee
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Current circumstances might seem to present real opportunities for Congress to reassert itself relative to its weakened role during George W. Bush's presidency. Large, unusually cohesive Democratic majorities in both chambers; unified government; and an administration staffed with people who know Congress well—all this might lead one to expect a productive working relationship permitting Congress wide scope of action. Nevertheless, the Senate's internal deliberative processes threaten to create difficulties so significant that they may outweigh these developments. Looking to the future of Congress, changes in Senate procedures and practices are important not only because of their effects on the institution's internal power structure. Left unchecked, they are also likely to have implications for the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches of government.

Type
Symposium
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 227 - 229
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Binder, Sarah A., Mann, Thomas E., Ornstein, Norman J., and Reynolds, Molly. 2009. Mending the Broken Branch: Assessing the 110th Congress, Anticipating the 111th. Brookings Institution Report, http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2009/0108_broken_branch_binder_mann.aspx.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, and Knight, Jack. 1998. The Choices Justices Make. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, Louis. 2000. Congressional Abdication on War and Spending. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, James. 2008. “Mitch McConnell: The Power of 41 Senators.” Wall Street Journal, May 10, A9.Google Scholar
Howell, William G. 2003. Power without Persuasion: The Politics of Direct Presidential Action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulse, Carl. 2009. “Their Ranks Bolstered, and With Big Issues Head, Democrats Stumble.” New York Times, March 7, A11.Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas E., and Ornstein, Norman J.. 2006. The Broken Branch: How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 2003. “Supermajority Rule in the U.S. Senate.” PS: Political Science and Politics 36 (1): 31–36.Google Scholar
Oleszek, Walter J. 2008. Whither the Role of Conference Committees: An Analysis. CRS Report for Congress, August 12, RL34611.Google Scholar
Ornstein, Norman J., Mann, Thomas E., and Malbin, Michael J.. 2008. Vital Statistics on Congress, 2008. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Rudalevige, Andrew. 2005. The New Imperial Presidency: Renewing Presidential Power after Watergate. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schickler, Eric. 2001. Disjointed Pluralism: Institutional Innovation and the Development of the U.S. Congress. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 1989. The Transformation of the U.S. Senate. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, Barbara. 2007. Unorthodox Lawmaking: New Legislative Processes in the U.S. Congress. 3rd ed. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.Google Scholar
Wawro, Gregory J., and Schickler, Eric. 2007. Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar