Is Representation in the Congress Fair - Essay Example

Representation in the Congress: Is It Fair Or Not? of Introduction The U.S. Congress is the federal representative body in the country, making it the principal federal power in the United States. It is not by mistake that the Congress, the legislative branch of government, is described first in the U.S. Constitution before the executive and the judiciary. The main function of the Congress is to establish the national policy by legislation1. It also executes the policy through budgetary and legislative functions, rulemaking, delegation, and appointment-setting authorities. The President then implements the legislation and the budget of the Congress. The other core functions of the Congress are to control the treasury in all the government departments and branches and to approval appointments within the executive and judicial arms of the government as well as the military2. However, the Congress has delegated most of this authority to the President and the presidential appointees. A fair and representative Congress is a hallmark of US democracy. However, the current Congress rule, influences and the roles of the political parties and leaders in the Congress make Congressional representation rather unequal and unfair. Hence, the right courses of action ought to be taken to reverse this worrying trend that infringes on the rights of the citizens to equal and fair representation at all levels of government. This paper discusses the issue of unfair or unequal representation in the Congress, focusing on whether the representation is fair, giving relevant factors and issues to support the stance taken and the strategies by which the representativeness of the Congress can be achieved. Fair Representation in Congress Fair representation is a principle not only in the Congress but also in the Constitution. Fair representation is provided for in the Fourteenth Amendment and affirmed and clarified by the Supreme Court. In essence, it is stated that to the extent that is possible, no geographical or groups of residents in the U.S. congressional districts should have greater or less representation in the Congress than other similar groups or geographical areas. The concept of fair representation is that no single representative has more powers and rights than others, implying that the congressional districts and states have equal powers and rights. Hence, representation must be equal and fair. Unfortunately, achieving fair and equal representation in Congress has been quite elusive for the more than 200 years the Congress has been in existence3. The unfair and unequal representation is attributed to powerbrokers and power-seekers, who design, develop and write Congress’ internal rules. They create rules that grant specific individuals and groups more than their share of authority in both the Senate and the House. Consequently, some districts get a less share of authority, becoming less effective than others. No doubt, it is time the unfair representation in Congress is corrected4. Sources of Unfair Representation in Congress The first cause of unfair representation in Congress is the idea of seniority. For quite some time, the idea of seniority has ruled the House. New congresspersons sent to the House are expected to have limited or no influence, implying their districts would be practically unrepresented, except during a vote. This statement is particularly true for the first and second terms of a representative. Such new congressmen and women are expected to do the bidding of their party bosses and other senior congresspersons. Chances are high that if a new congressperson did the bidding of party bosses, he or she would be funded or supported for reelection and their districts or states would get some funding. Luckily, in recent times, the importance of seniority has considerably reduced. However, there are still some remnants of the practice, especially in the House rules. Currently, different representatives have varying levels of power. Thus, US citizens are, as a result of these rules, condemned to have different levels of influence in their representative body. Clearly, these rules have the effect of unfair representation, resulting in disproportionate representation and violation of citizens’ constitutional promises5. The second cause of unfair representation in Congress is power positions in Congress. Through party caucuses and seniority, extraordinarily powerful individual positions have emerged in Congress. These powerful positions are also coded in the rules of the House as well as the Senate. Although the Congress has the constitutional authority to make its rules and leadership and structures are necessary for the smooth operation of the Congress, these powerful positions have served to the detriment of fair representation. Because of these positions, some members, representing their districts, have formal authority over their colleagues form other districts. The result is highly unequal and unfair representation granted to some US citizens. The powerful and influential positions in Congress are the Speaker of the House, majority party leaders, and committee chairpersons. Expectedly, these individuals have more powers over the agenda and the proceedings of the House compared to other representatives. They also have the powers to derail or delay a legislation process, proposed and supported by their political rivals. Worse still, these powerful offices could belong to one political party; implying democratic representation would be non-existent in such scenarios. This scenario opposes the principle of fair representation in Congress, which calls for no preferred status and authority on one legislator over the other. The present Congress, with its unequal power and influence, thus does not pass the democratic representation test. The third cause of unfair representation in the Congress is the political parties, which are the nuisance of the Congress. In fact, the presence of political parties in the Congress is the major contributor of unfair representation. They cause contrived disagreements for party purposes, logjams, filibusters, mindless opposition and congressional submission to the President’s will and to members parties. In fact, parties are not defined as having any constitutional standing in the federal government, hence are considered private associations. Given that political parties are not elected by people to represent them in Congress, they lack legal authority to influence or control the government, like any other private interest groups. U.S. voters do not vote for parties; rather, they vote for individuals to represent their district or state. Hence, political parties should not wield much influence in Congress. Whereas in Europe, political parties have formal and legal places in parliaments, in the US, political parties have no such place under the laws and Constitution. Nevertheless, the US political parties have managed to covet the powers that parties have in European parliaments and used it to arrogate to themselves similar power. The Congress writes the rules of the House and the Senate with specific references to the political parties, giving specific authorities to the political parties and.  The rules give authorities and rights to the "majority" and "minority" leaders, codifying the concepts of only two parties and "party caucuses. For instance, under the rules, the two main parties are expected to propose committee memberships with proportionate members representing each party in the committees.  Again, the rules favor representatives of some districts, selected by party caucuses, giving them authority over representatives of other districts. Strategies to Correct Unfair Representation in Congress For congressional seniority-related unfair representation to be eliminated or reduced, the concept of seniority in both the House and the Senate should be abolished. The idea should be that each member is sent to represent his or her state or district. Hence, all members should have equal right to hearing just as each district has an inborn right. Eliminating the remnants of seniority favors in Congress will results in benefits associated with voters not facing the question of returning an aging member to Congress merely because he or she has will be powerful enough to bring federal dollars to the district or state6. On congressional power positions, it might be a bit difficult to eliminate the skewed power structures since the beneficiaries would be required to eliminate the same structures. Nonetheless, it must be done to ensure true democratic representation and decision-making. To solve this problem, the Speakership and committee chairmanships should be administrative offices instead of decision-making positions.  Speakers and chairpersons of committees should not have powers over Congress’ calendar or on the destiny of bills introduced to Congress. As for the problem of political parties in Congress, all references to political parties such as the majority and minority tags should be removed from House rules. In fact, references to political affiliation should be defined as ‘out of order’ on the floor of the House. In addition, seating arrangement in the House and Senate should not be party-based. Instead, state or region should form the basis of arrangement, if not random and rotated location, independent of seniority and party. Bibliography Brody, M., and Farnam, T. W. (2009). "Congress Travels More, Public Pays: Lawmakers Ramp Up Taxpayer-Financed Journeys; Five Days in Scotland.” The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved on May 10, 2015 from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB126092430041092995 Herrick, R. (2001). "Gender Effects on Job Satisfaction in the House of Representatives." Women and Politics, 23 (4): 98. Ritchie, D. A. (2010). The U.S. Congress: A very short introduction. Cambridge University Press. Smith, S., S., Jason, M. R., and Wielen, R. V. (2007). The American Congress, fifth edition. Cambridge University Press. Read More