American Government Articles

Article / Updated 07-18-2022

You can gather information about your representative from his or her Web site, but if you need to contact another member or staffer of the House of Representatives, try the email formula below. Of course, you can always call or go the old-fashioned way and mail a letter. Here’s the House contact information you'll need: The House of Representatives Web site: www.House.gov Clerk of the House: www.clerk.house.gov House e-mail addresses consist of the person’s first name and last name, separated by a dot, followed by @mail.house.gov. (Be aware that some people use nicknames and middle initials.) Congressional database http://thomas.loc.gov/ Capitol switchboard (House and Senate) 202-224-3121 Mailing address Rep. __________ United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20510 House offices The Capitol (H) Cannon (CHOB), 1st St. & Independence Ave. SE, three-digit room numbers, the first digit is the floor number Longworth (LHOB), Independence Ave. & New Jersey Ave. SE, four-digit room numbers starting with 1, the second digit is the floor number. Rayburn (RHOB), Independence Ave. & S. Capitol St. SW, four-digit room numbers starting with 2. In Rayburn, the second digit is the floor number. All of the buildings have maps to help you find individual office numbers. In Rayburn there are several subcommittee offices on the “B” level (where the cafeteria is also located).

Cheat Sheet / Updated 04-19-2022

If you’re planning a trip to Washington, D.C., follow some basic recommendations for protocol when visiting with a member of Congress or a White House staffer. Plan your trip to the Capitol Building around Congressional recesses, and be sure to have all the correct contact information for the House of Representatives and Senate to make travel easier and quicker.

Cheat Sheet / Updated 03-12-2021

If the thought of politics makes you cringe, don’t worry, you can get involved as little or as much as you like in politics. If you want to voice your concerns, use these handy resources to contact your representative, and when you do call, be prepared to offer some information to them. Use a checklist of things to look for (and not look for) when searching for a candidate worthy of your vote.

Article / Updated 02-03-2020

You should tell your children some facts about politics. Who knows? Maybe some or all of it will sink in. Your kids may not look as though they’re paying attention, but they’ll probably remember. After all, someday, when you suddenly go from being the dumbest parent in the world to being okay (if only by comparison to the even dumber parents of your kids’ friends), some of these points may have an impact on your children. Is voting a right or a duty? The first thing you need to know is that politics is not a sport for Monday morning quarterbacks. The very least that a democracy requires is for all responsible adults to familiarize themselves with the issues and the candidates and then cast informed votes in each election. Perhaps you’ve heard (or even said) some of the following statements: My vote doesn’t make a difference. It doesn’t matter who wins — the candidates are all the same. I don’t know the candidates. Politicians are all corrupt. I’m too busy. I just don’t want to get involved. Excuses such as these just don’t cut the mustard. Not one of them is a legitimate reason for not doing your duty, making your voice heard, and voting. Public service is a good and honorable profession When you hear the talk show hosts and comedians complain about government bureaucrats, remember that many good people work for the government because they want to make the country a better place for us and our children. These people aren’t paid much. Many people don’t treat them well, either. When you meet a government employee who goes out of their way to help you or to be accommodating, don’t forget to thank them and tell them that you appreciate their courtesy. Everyone likes to be appreciated, and government employees are no different from the rest of us. Never pin your future to the outcome of the next election If you decide to become active in politics yourself, that’s fine and dandy. Just remember that politics is an uncertain profession. It’s tough to know that your mortgage or rent payment is dependent on the outcome of an election. You need training and contacts outside politics to make certain that you can support yourself if the political tide goes against you or your candidate. You also need some savings in the bank so that you don’t have to call Mom and Dad to make the rent payment when you lose your job after you lose an election. There’s a relationship between financial security and political independence. This relationship doesn’t mean that rich people always make better officeholders. It does mean that officeholders who don’t fear temporary unemployment are more likely to do the right thing. That financial freedom permits officeholders to be true to their principles, even at the cost of reelection. Never trust anyone who lies, including a politician You’ve always been told to tell the truth. You’ve been told that little tiny lies are neither little nor tiny. You know that trust is a difficult thing to develop and an easy thing to lose. You expect people to trust you because they can count on you to be truthful. In turn, you should give your trust only to people who tell you the truth. Don’t trust anyone who lies to you. Politicians are no different from anyone else, so you should hold them to the same standard. If they lie about little things, they lie about big things, too. Also keep in mind that when someone lies, they aren't only disrespecting those to whom they lied, they're also revealing something about their character and about what you can expect from them in the future. Democracy is the best system of government Democracy in the United States is the best example of representative government. Ever! People all over the world wish they had a system like the one in the States, where the majority rules with respect for the constitutional rights of a minority with whom they may disagree. That’s why so many people want to immigrate to the States — they see a land of opportunity and safety and want those things for themselves and their families. But someone is always complaining that the country is “falling off the wagon.” When your grandfather was your age, people told him that the U.S. experiment with democracy was going down the tubes. When your children are the age of your grandfather, people will tell them the same thing. The system in the United States is the best, and it will continue to be the best as long as good people stay involved. That doesn’t mean it can’t be improved; it can and should be. For example, lawmakers need to restore the notion that representatives need to adopt laws that improve the country and not think only about their reelection campaign when voting. Lawmakers need to remember that the Founding Fathers thought that compromise was not a dirty word, but rather the key to a successful country. But it’s still better than any other alternative. So, don’t listen to people who say that the country is on a slippery slope to decline and decay. Tell them that if they don’t like how things are, they should stop wringing their hands and get busy making things what they could be. Avoiding politics makes you more to blame for its failures, not less You can’t refuse to participate in politics and then complain that politics is corrupt. If good people refuse to involve themselves in politics, who does that leave? If the situation needs to be improved, you have a responsibility to work to make it better. The system can be improved. No matter how tough a task reforming politics looks to be, the longest, toughest journey begins with a single step. Learn the facts and form your own opinions Never trust anyone else to think for you. You owe it to yourself to find out the facts and draw your own conclusions. Don’t let gimmicks and slogans prevent you from thinking an issue through and deciding what outcome is best for you and your community or country. Just as you’ve learned not to accept at face value every advertisement you hear, don’t accept at face value everything a candidate tells you. Ask for proof; ask what the other side says. Think for yourself. No one else can do it for you. You have to wait ’til 18 to vote, but you don’t have to wait ’til 18 to help others vote wisely In the United States, generally the law recognizes that you have reached an awareness and maturity to be considered an adult at age 21. Intelligence, as we all know, isn’t age related. Even though you may not be an adult legally, the 26th Amendment to the Constitution, authored by Birch Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana, sets the United States voting age at 18. If you’re not legally an adult, yet you can vote, what is magic about 18, you might ask? You have to wait until you’re 18 to vote, because if you could vote earlier, the kid in your class who thinks William Henry Harrison played lead guitar for the Beatles could vote, too. (After that kid reaches 18, he still may think that, but hopefully he’s reached a point in his life where he has enough awareness and maturity to make a sound decision in the voting booth.) You don’t have to wait until you’re 18, though, to learn the facts, form your own opinions, and think for yourself. You can also use your energy and enthusiasm to work for the party or candidate of your choice. Find out what politics is all about by working on campaigns and gaining hands-on experience. If you’re willing to work hard, you can make a difference before you’re old enough to cast your first ballot. Politicians are just like the rest of us The younger you are when you become involved in politics, the sooner you’ll figure out that politicians are just people. Some of them are smart, and some of them are dumb. Some are honest; some aren’t. Some may be brave, but others are simply cowards. Few, if any, are complete angels. They’re people just like we are, with virtues and shortcomings. Many of them are worthy of your support, but some of them aren’t and should be defeated. But just as you can’t write off the whole human race because of a few bad people, you shouldn’t write off politics because of a bunch of bad politicians. When someone tries to tell you that all politicians are crooks, remind them that Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Barbara Jordan, John Lewis, and Barack Obama were all politicians — good politicians. Sure, some others have come along who’ve dishonored the offices they’ve held. But many others have performed brilliantly and made us proud to be Americans. You shouldn’t permit yourself to believe that all politicians are crooks because that may mean that only crooks will become politicians. When politicians make you promises, make sure you want what they’re promising Nikita Khrushchev, a famous politician in the former Soviet Union, once said, “Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river.” Listen when a politician makes promises. Ask yourself whether the person is promising to do what is right and good, not just for you but also for your community and country. Ask who has to give up something so that the politician can please those to whom they're making the promise. One of the greatest things about the United States is that we’re a country of many different backgrounds, religions, languages, and cultures united by our love for this nation of immigrants, this land of opportunity. We’re all willing to make sacrifices to see this country grow and prosper. Be wary of politicians who promise that your government can constantly give you things without asking for anything in return. If something looks too good to be true, it generally is.

Article / Updated 02-03-2020

Before the 2000 election, most U.S. residents hadn’t thought about the electoral college since high school. A few people discussed changing the electoral college after the close election of 1960, but those discussions were short-lived. Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 by about a half-million votes, but George W. Bush won in the electoral college 271 to 267. In 2016, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by almost 3 million votes but lost the electoral college 304 to 227. To understand what happened in these elections, you need to understand the way the system of electing a U.S. president and vice president works. The following table lists the states that President George W. Bush won in 2000 and the electoral votes those states brought to his total: State Electoral Votes Alabama 9 Alaska 3 Arizona 8 Arkansas 6 Colorado 8 Florida 25 Georgia 13 Idaho 4 Indiana 12 Kansas 6 Kentucky 8 Louisiana 9 Mississippi 7 Missouri 11 Montana 3 Nebraska 5 Nevada 4 New Hampshire 4 North Carolina 14 North Dakota 3 Ohio 21 Oklahoma 8 South Carolina 8 South Dakota 3 Tennessee 11 Texas 32 Utah 5 Virginia 13 West Virginia 5 Wyoming 3 Al Gore’s populist campaign won the Northeast, except for New Hampshire. He also won the West Coast and split the Midwestern states with George W. Bush. Gore carried population centers, whereas Bush was more popular in rural areas. The following minitable lists the states that Al Gore won in 2000 and their electoral votes: State Electoral Votes California 54 Connecticut 8 Delaware 3 D.C. 3 Hawaii 4 Illinois 22 Iowa 7 Maine 4 Maryland 10 Massachusetts 12 Michigan 18 Minnesota 10 New Jersey 15 New Mexico 5 New York 33 Oregon 7 Pennsylvania 23 Rhode Island 4 Vermont 3 Washington 11 Wisconsin 11 If the 2000 election had been about who had greater support in the most square miles of the country, George Bush (and, in 2016, Donald Trump) would have been the winner by a long shot. (In the 2000 election, Bush won 2,463 counties, compared to Gore's 675.) If the election had been about who won the greatest number of votes, regardless of where they’re located, Al Gore (and, in 2016, Hillary Clinton) would have been declared the winner. Al Gore’s margin of victory in the popular vote was 3 percent. That may not seem like much, but it’s much larger than other presidential contests have had. In 1960, John Kennedy defeated Richard Nixon by 303 to 219 electoral votes. Even though the electoral votes weren’t close in 1960, Kennedy defeated Nixon by only 112,881 popular votes. Kennedy’s margin of victory was only one-tenth of 1 percent. George W. Bush didn’t win the popular vote, and his electoral vote margin was razor thin, but he did carry 30 of the 50 states. Part of the original justification for the creation of the electoral college was to guarantee that a successful presidential candidate must build a broad base of support around the country — and Bush did that. In the 2016 presidential election, the margin of victory in the electoral college was much larger. Donald Trump received 33 more electoral votes than George W. Bush and carried one more state. What is remarkable is how much larger the popular vote was for the losing candidate. How did a candidate fail to be elected when she received almost 3 million more votes? The answer is that the United States elects its president and vice president indirectly, by way of the electoral college. Changing the electoral college Changing the electoral college requires either a constitutional amendment passed by a two-thirds vote of Congress and ratification by three-quarters of the state legislatures or action in all 50 states. Given that seven small states would see their electoral impact diminished by change, it would be difficult to pass. Approximately 700 bills have been introduced in Congress over the last 200 years to change the electoral college and none has succeeded. The smaller states also realize that changing the electoral college could open discussion about the disproportional weight given to states with smaller populations in the Senate. For example, Wyoming routinely casts a little more than one-quarter of a million votes for presidential candidates in the general election, and New York casts more than 30 times that number. Both states have two, and only two, senators in the U.S. Senate. In other words, the vote of a voter in New York for senator is worth 1/30 of the vote of a voter from Wyoming — or North Dakota, Alaska, Montana. . . . You get the picture. Despite the fact that smaller states are in a position to essentially block electoral college reform, you'll still find proposals put forward that are meant to change the way Americans elect their presidents. One proposal involves direct election with instant-runoff voting, or IRV. Voters would rank their choices in order of preference. Ballots are counted for each voter’s first choice. If a candidate gains a majority, that candidate wins. If no candidate receives a majority, the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated. The voters who selected the losing candidate as their first choice then have their votes added to the total of their next choice. This continues until a candidate has a majority. This system is used in several countries and in the state of Maine for congressional elections. The other alternative to the electoral college is quite in line with the U.S. system of democracy. Rather than use the electoral college, people simply vote for candidates, and whoever gains a majority wins. Sounds simple, right? Not quite. Because this system allows multiple candidates to run, one candidate may have a difficult time getting more than 50 percent of the national vote. If a majority were required for election, runoff elections would then have to be held between the top vote-getting candidates from the first race, or instant-runoff voting would need to be implemented because the cost and difficulty of having more than one national election every four years might be prohibitive. All these proposals would require a constitutional amendment — a long row to hoe, practically speaking. One suggestion for reform that doesn’t require a constitutional amendment is the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, or NVIP. Sixteen states have signed on to NVIP. This compact is an agreement by these states to cast their electoral votes for the candidate who wins the popular vote nationwide. This compact has one caveat: The total number of electoral votes belonging to states that join the compact must surpass 270 — the number needed for victory — if it is to take effect. With the addition of Oregon in June 2019, the total electoral votes for states signing is 196, or about 75 votes short of the total needed to activate the compact. All the states that have signed the compact are Democratic states that voted for the losing Democratic candidates in 2000 and 2016.

Article / Updated 02-03-2020

The answer is a resounding yes, but only if you’re registered to vote! If you don’t register, you declare yourself out of the game, and no one makes any effort to find out what you think or what you want. Officials don’t contact you to solicit your ideas or concerns because you don’t show up on their carefully compiled lists of registered voters. You must be registered if you want your opinions to count. Even if you don’t vote, the fact that you’re registered means that your support and opinions will still be solicited. If you don’t register, you don’t count and you don’t matter. Period. Elected officials make genuine efforts to know what you, as a registered voter, want them to do and not do. They hold town hall events to interact with average voters like yourself and to find out what’s on your mind and what worries you most about your city, state, or country. Successful elected officials — who, along with their families and staffs, have a deep and abiding interest in whether they keep their jobs — know that the key to reelection is understanding what the voters want and, within reason, delivering it. Your opinions are worth real money Your elected officials pay good money to pick your brain (provided you’re a registered voter). They hire special consultants to organize focus groups and professional pollsters to conduct surveys. The burning question is this: “What’s on your mind?” . . . followed by, “How can I get what’s on your mind into my mind so that you will keep me in mind come election day?” Focus groups Elected officials sometimes, particularly in an election cycle, pay large amounts of money to stage cozy little get-togethers, called focus groups. Focus groups are small, scientifically selected groups of voters in an official’s district. These voters, selected at random from the list of registered voters, are paid a small fee to meet for several hours with a political consultant to discuss issues and impressions in much greater depth than polls allow. Campaigns use focus groups to test “average” voters’ reactions to campaign themes, plans of attack that the campaign is thinking of using on the opposition, and defenses that the campaign may use to fend off attacks from the opposition. The small group doesn’t even know who’s paying for the session, which helps the consultant obtain their candid responses. These responses can help an official know whether the voters are paying attention to what they’re saying on the stump and whether the right information is being communicated. Because the focus group is such a small part of the electorate, usually no more than a dozen people, the campaign also conducts scientific polls on the information obtained in the focus group. But both of these expensive methods are used to discover what you think about the candidates and the issues. Elected officials and candidates spend all this time, money, and effort because they want to know what you want as well as what you think. And you didn’t think they cared. Polling Elected officials — particularly, occupants of higher offices (governor, senator, congressperson, and so on) — spend tens of thousands of dollars in every election year trying to find out what you think about the issues and about the officials themselves. Political pollsters even ask how you personally feel about the candidate — for example: Are they honest? Do they care about people like you? Are they intelligent? Are they trustworthy? Those same pollsters ask what you think about important policy issues. How do you feel that the state or country is doing? Are you better off now than two or four years ago? Are you (or is anyone in your family) afraid of losing a job? How do you feel about a particular tax increase proposal? Do you think education funding should be increased? Are you willing to increase sentences for violent crimes, even though the construction of more prisons will increase the tax burden? You get the idea. Contrary to popular belief, officeholders, if they’re smart, really want to do what most of the voters want done. If an officeholder can determine what you want and deliver that to you, the officeholder keeps getting elected and perhaps moves on to a higher office. That’s why elected officials and candidates pay huge amounts of money to campaign consultants: to find out what you, as a registered voter, want. Officials spend time and money inventing new ways or refining old ways of interacting with the average voter in their districts. Pollsters are paid tens of thousands of dollars to select voters at random and question them. These voters are a cross-section of the electorate in the official’s or candidate’s district. The pollsters are paid because of their expertise in drafting questions and analyzing the results of the interviews. This expensive expertise is just another way to permit the officeholder or candidate to communicate with you. The pollsters may not do a perfect job of finding out what you think and interpreting your opinions for the elected official. Sometimes, the method of asking the questions influences the answers. Sometimes, accidentally, the sample that the pollster selected is biased in favor of one group of voters. Polling may not be a perfect way to determine what you and other registered voters think, but it’s the preferred way. Almost every poll screens contacted people to determine whether they’re registered to vote and, if so, likely to vote. If your answer to either of these two questions is no, the interviewer writes you off as a nonperson and finds inventive ways to terminate the interview immediately. Spooky, isn’t it? Politically, you don’t exist. The elected official won’t know what you think about important issues, and probably doesn’t care. Either way, nobody will bother to ask. Giving voters what they say they want Once candidates or officeholders accurately determine what the voters want, they can fashion a way to deliver it. Sometimes, of course, voters want it all. People do have a tendency to ask their candidates to give them better roads, more prisons, extra dollars for education, and, while they’re at it, lower taxes. Sometimes voters want one thing one year and forget about it the next. Yes, as voters, people often have whims. And those whims can change as quickly as the length of women’s skirts. No matter how hard officials try, and no matter how good they are, they’re not magicians. Inconsistent goals may not be possible, no matter how much the voters want them. (Scientists still haven’t developed a tree that produces dollar bills.) So, without making the thoroughly unappreciated decision to raise taxes, an official may not be able to provide for all the increased services the voters want. Elected officials face the challenge of determining which item is most important to a majority of voters, whether they can deliver it, and how they can explain the impossibility of delivering on all goals. If delivering on the most important goal isn’t possible, officials still want to be in a position to demonstrate to voters that they’re fighting to get what they want and will keep doing so if people keep supporting them with their votes in the next election. For example, Governor Jill Shmoe may complain that too few of the dollars her state sends in taxes to Washington are returned by the federal government. She can meet with the state’s representatives and senators to ask for help in moving more federal dollars back to the state. She may write letters to the president. She may complain about the federal government in speeches and press conferences. Nothing may result from all this effort, but at least Governor Jill Shmoe would’ve demonstrated that she’s willing to fight for what her constituents feel is the state’s fair share of federal money. She’s responsive. She’s trying. This governor would deserve reelection if you agreed with her goals. On the other hand, you may disagree completely with what the polls say that “the people” want. You may think that Governor Shmoe is barking up the wrong tree completely. You may want to see someone else in office, promoting better ideas in a better way. But — and by now you know what’s coming — you have no say if you’re not registered to vote.

Article / Updated 02-03-2020

Many of us — more than 255 million citizens in this country — are eligible to vote but only about 140 million voted in the 2016 national election. Every citizen of the United States who is at least 18 years of age may register and vote. Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia permit some form of same day registration. In all other states, you must register before Election Day in order to vote. Registration in those states stops in advance of an election — usually thirty days in advance! You must be registered to vote for any elective office in the United States, from president to township advisory board. You only have to register once, though, as long as you live at the same address and vote periodically. Upsides and downsides of registering to vote Maybe you’re not registered because you’ve convinced yourself that you should avoid politics, which is impossible. Political decisions will be made for you even if you elect not to participate. You still have to pay taxes even if you don’t vote. Elected officials make decisions about which streets get paved, which sidewalks get repaired, and which schools close without regard to your opinions, if you don’t vote. There’s no hole deep enough for you to bury your head in to avoid politics completely. You can’t run, and you can’t hide — so you may as well participate. Make a difference If you do participate, you can make the system better. It may never be perfect, but improvement is possible. With the knowledge you gain by reading this book, you can make your elected officials respond to you. Your voice will be loud enough to be heard by everyone. Voting is a valuable right that you, as an American, have. Many Americans take that right for granted . . . even the politicians. In the 2010 elections, a wave of voter reaction — a “throw 'em all out” attitude after years of inaction and deadlock by Congress — shook up both major political parties, changed the dominant party in Congress, and made the politicians brutally aware of the issues about which voters had been concerned for years, and which the politicians had bypassed. That reaction reminded every politician not to take the voters for granted. The politicians heard the discontentment among voters, and they had to respond. Become important Voting isn’t required in the United States, as it is in some other countries. The former Soviet Union used to brag about its 98 percent voter turnout on Election Day — but citizens faced stiff fines and punishment if they failed to turn out to support the government’s approved candidate. By contrast, this country gives us so many compelling reasons to vote, it’s a wonder the voting turnout here doesn’t come close to approaching that of the countries that demand it. When you vote and participate, elected officials have to consider what you think. They may not always do what you want, but they have to listen to your opinions. When you vote, you become someone important. Cynics are probably saying, “Yeah, but not as important as PACs (political action committees) and special interest groups with money.” Keep in mind, though, that a district (be it a small town or the entire country) has only so many voters. Although money is in potentially limitless supply for a candidate (it can be raised from many sources), it’s illegal to buy votes, and you can’t give someone else your proxy to vote for you — so the only way money can make a difference is if it’s used to communicate a message that makes you want to support the candidate who’s spending it. Your vote has the same weight as the vote of every other citizen. Rich or poor, young or old, male or female, Black or White, each vote is equally important. Wield your political power Each one of us has the same number of votes. You may not have an equal share of the world’s financial resources, but the secret ballot gives us all an equal amount of voting power. Each registered voter has one and only one vote to cast — regardless of what you hear to the contrary about certain big-city or downstate rural districts, where the concept of “vote early and vote often” is allegedly in force, or where that age-old question “Is there voting after death? — is supposedly answered in the affirmative. The vote of a person who has contributed $1 million to a candidate counts for no more than the vote of the person who has given nothing to a campaign. After all, winning elections is all about getting a majority of the votes cast. Votes are one-size-fits-all. Politicians need the votes of the “little people,” because this country has more “little people” than rich and powerful ones. Since John F. Kennedy was elected, the percentage of eligible voters participating in presidential elections has declined in almost every election. That statistic is true in local elections as well. When we all vote, we are a powerful force that can move mountains, or at least politicians. When we don’t, the small number of special interest voters have more clout because they are a bigger percentage of a smaller pie. The following figure illustrates just how few people who are eligible to vote actually do. The outer circle represents the number of people in the United States who are eligible to vote. The next circle in the figure represents the number of people who registered to vote in the 2016 elections. The next circle represents the number of people who actually voted in the 2016 presidential election. (The number of people who actually voted is the 2016 voting population.) The smallest circle is the group of people who voted in the primaries. Think how different things might be if everybody who could vote actually voted. After you register to vote, you can vote for the president, congressional representatives, and U.S. senators when your state has a contest. You can also vote in your state and local elections. Registering takes only a few minutes — less time than it would take to call your mother-in-law and wish her a good day, and it no longer costs a thing. It’s time well spent — after all, how often does someone enjoy calling their mother-in-law? You make the call because you want to stay on your mother-in-law’s good side. Register to vote because you want the government to stay on your good side. Registering to vote doesn’t require you to vote in any election; it’s a prerequisite for voting in all elections. Register to vote now. You can always decide later not to vote. If you later decide to vote, and haven’t registered, it may be too late.

Article / Updated 02-03-2020

Both major U.S. political parties hold conventions during the summer of a presidential election year. Delegates to each convention ratify the party’s choice for president and nominate the choice for vice president. Independent candidates for president don’t undergo the nominating process; after all, independent candidates don’t represent a party. Because they don’t have to secure a party’s nomination for president, they don’t enter primaries or caucuses or hold conventions. Sending delegates to the national convention The national conventions are held every four years in the summer of the presidential election year. The party to which the current president belongs holds its convention in August; the other party, or out party, traditionally holds its convention in July. The national committee of each party decides where to hold its convention. The national committees of both parties consist of party officials from the 50 states and representatives of other groups within the party organizations. Each state party decides how it selects its representatives to the national committee, subject to national party rules. The rules for each party may differ in the same state. For example, in 2020, Democrats in Kentucky will hold a primary but Republicans in Kentucky will caucus. Conversely, Republicans in the state of Washington hold a primary; Democrats in Washington, a caucus. Each political party can decide how it wants its nominee chosen. Democratic and Republican Party representatives, called national delegates, meet at the party’s national convention to vote for the nominees for president and vice president. Each state has a number of delegates allocated to each party based on the population and the relative strength of each party in the state. The total number of delegates is different for each party, but each party’s nominee must win a majority of those delegates in order to win. Conventions don’t choose presidential nominees At one time, the national conventions chose presidential nominees — often requiring drawn-out fights with repeated ballots before settling on a choice. The results could be a genuine surprise. The national conventions no longer choose the nominees in most cases. Presidential primaries and caucus or conventions determine which candidates have enough votes to be the nominees. Generally speaking, the conventions simply ratify those choices. However, if there is no clear winner after the primary and caucus season, there is always the possibility of a brokered convention — one where the delegates choose the nominee. The national conventions rubber-stamp the primary, caucus, and convention selections that occur in each state from February to June of the election year. The trend in the United States in the past 25 years has been toward primary selection for the national delegates based on the primary showings of the presidential candidates. In some states, voters express their preference for presidential candidates, and the delegates are selected later by way of a different selection process. In other states, voters directly select the delegates. The ballot may or may not indicate which candidate the delegate is supporting. The selection process varies from state to state, and from party to party within the same state. For example, in 2016, Democrats used the primary in states whereas the Republicans used a caucus or state convention to choose their delegates. In 1968, only 17 states chose their delegates by primary. In 2020, more than 40 states will use this method. Because the national conventions ratify the choices of voters and party leaders, those voters participating in the primaries, conventions, and caucuses play a much more important role in the selection of the presidential nominees than ever before. By voting in your presidential primary or participating in your party’s caucus or convention, you have an important role to play in who will be the next president of the United States. These days, most delegates go to a convention committed to vote for a certain candidate on the first ballot. That’s particularly important because all the nominees of both parties have been selected on the first ballot ever since the time Democrats required three ballots to nominate Governor Adlai Stevenson of Illinois for president. What happens at the national conventions? The national conventions play a less important role than they once did in selecting nominees, but they still perform other useful functions. Here are some of the roles that national conventions fill: Approve the selection of the presidential nominees. Approve the selection of the vice-presidential nominees. Adopt party platforms. Adopt the rules that govern the parties for the coming four years. Showcase the candidates and future candidates of the parties. Rally the troops for the fall campaign. Selecting the vice president No method is in place for the general public to choose nominees for vice president. The choice of vice president is in the hands of the convention delegates. The conventions traditionally defer to the nominee for president to choose a running mate, who is then presented for nomination to the convention. Presidential nominees have to consider the wishes of the delegates because the delegates have the right to reject the presidential nominee’s choice if it meets with disfavor. Occasionally, presidential candidates generate excitement and a spirited campaign by throwing the nomination of a vice presidential candidate to the delegates to choose. See the nearby sidebar, “When the convention chose the running mate,” for details. Sometimes, the choice of a running mate provides the only element of suspense in the convention proceedings. The delegates often don’t know the nominee’s choice for a running mate until the convention actually begins. George H. W. Bush made his surprise announcement of Indiana Senator Dan Quayle as his choice for vice president as the Republican National Convention began in New Orleans in 1988. Adopting platforms Conventions adopt platforms, which are declarations of principles and policies for the national parties, and thereby develop a consensus approach to important issues of the day. The platforms define who the parties are and what they stand for. Platforms can also serve as the framework for discussing the issues to be debated in the fall election campaign. Unifying the party Each party’s convention adopts the rules for governing the party for the next four years and resolves questions about how to run the party. The convention serves to focus party members’ attention on the opposing party and candidates rather than on rifts within the party itself. The various factions of the parties that supported losing candidates during the nominating season are encouraged to focus on issues that unite them rather than on issues that divide them. The convention showcases the party nominees, calls attention to the party’s rising stars, and unifies the party faithful. National conventions serve to unite the Republicans or Democrats in a common cause: electing a national ticket. Parties spend a great deal of time and money organizing these conventions. After the 2012 national conventions, for which each party received $18.5 million from the federal government, Congress changed the law. The parties no longer receive federal money directly. Instead, the federal government gives $50 million to local law enforcement in the city where each convention is held to provide security at the conventions. Now each party raises millions from private sources to run their quadrennial conventions. The Politics of the Conventions At national conventions, everything is organized because the organizers want nothing left to chance. Even the placement of the state delegations is the subject of much debate and jockeying. Every delegation wants to be seen on television. Every delegation wants to be immediately in front of the stage to be able to see the nominees and other dignitaries up close and personal. Who gets to address the conventions and what the speakers get to say are also rigidly controlled matters. With the possible exception of former presidents, speakers must submit their remarks in advance to those party leaders in charge of the convention and receive clearance for what they want to say. If you watch conventions on television, you see many floor demonstrations. Delegates march around the floor waving signs and chanting. These demonstrations appear to begin spontaneously in the crowd and spread through the hall, gathering force as they go. Those “spontaneous” demonstrations are actually carefully orchestrated. Delegates are told not only when to demonstrate but also which signs to wave. The convention organizers distribute many signs of different shapes and colors during the convention. Delegates may be told to wave the red, square signs at one point and the blue, rectangular ones at another. Creating the right effect Campaigns leave nothing to chance at their national conventions because appearance is important when the national media is watching closely and where some cable networks are providing gavel-to-gavel coverage. If the event is staged properly, it can emphasize the unity of the party and its enthusiasm for its candidates. A successful convention can set the mood for the fall campaign and project an image of confidence. A poorly executed convention can have a negative impact on a party’s chances in November. In 1992, the Republican Party heavily emphasized family values and religion. The speeches at the convention struck many viewers as strident and extreme; the language Pat Buchanan used to appeal to "traditional family values," for example, was so extreme that many political observers have ever since referred to it as his “raw meat” speech. The strong language may have appealed to Republican delegates sitting in the audience, but it frightened the less partisan voters, particularly women, watching the convention at home. Many convention follow-up stories cited public opinion research that showed voters’ uneasiness by what was viewed as the exclusionary message of the Republican convention. Concentrating partisan energies Although everything is carefully scripted, the conventions are great unifying and energizing forces for Democrats and Republicans alike. When the delegates leave the convention, they’re part of something bigger than themselves. That something the delegates are part of has a clearly defined objective: victory in November. The delegates leave eager to get home and accomplish the objective. The conclusions of the conventions unleash a flood of energy that flows across the country into every state in the union. The timing of the floodgate’s opening is also important because the conclusion of the national conventions signifies the start of the fall campaign. Play your role as a voter Today, more people have the opportunity to participate in presidential selection because more states are using the primary selection method. Millions of Americans participated in selecting the nominees of both parties in 2016, but the overall percentage was still very low. This lack of participation has been true for a while — only 28.5 percent of the voting-age population in primary states bothers to vote for presidential candidates. The record primary turnout was 2008, when 30.4 percent of voting age citizens cast ballots. More people have to participate in the selection process. Democracy works well only when people inform themselves about the issues and the candidates and make their wishes known. Reading this book is a great way to become informed about the process and prepare to participate on every level, including helping to choose the next president of the United States. If you don’t like the alternatives, change them. Run for office yourself or persuade good people to do so. Work for their election. Tell your neighbors and friends to vote for them. Contribute to their campaigns. Get off your duff and make things better. If you think that money plays too big of a role in politics, get campaign finance reform laws passed in your state. Start a movement to change the campaign finance laws on the federal level. Even constitutional amendments to change the consequences of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision are possible if there’s enough momentum behind them. Every journey begins with a single step. If you take that step, you may start a movement to improve democracy in the United States, which would be a pretty good legacy to leave your children.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

After Congress passes a bill, it doesn't become law without the president's signature, and if he vetoes it, it may not be enacted at all (although Congress has the option of overriding the veto). Thus, the president is an immensely powerful presence throughout the legislative process despite his small constitutional role. The president's role in legislation begins while legislation is being formed. "There's no lobby more powerful than the President of the United States," a powerful lobbyist once said. That lobbyist is right. In our system of government, the president can't command, because the president must go to Congress like anyone else and convince the members to do what he wants. Congress can accept or reject the president's recommendations. Having said that, remember that the president is unlike any other lobbyist. The major difference, of course, is that the president is the highest elected official of the land, leads the executive branch of the government, oversees the economy, and serves as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, making him responsible for the defense of the nation. A majority of the people gave him a mandate to govern, and, as a result, he speaks for the entire nation at home and abroad. When he speaks, he can talk to the entire country at once, if he so desires. The president has a team of legislative liaisons, political advisors and policy specialists constantly monitoring congressional activity. They stay in touch with the congressional leadership of both chambers, helping to shape legislation as it moves through Congress. The White House can't monitor all bills, but it pays close attention to those that it thinks are important, and if it wants changes, it often gets them, especially when the president's party is in power in one or both of the chambers. All that it takes is a word to the leadership or the appropriate legislator. When the opposing party is in power in one of the chambers, the president has a much tougher job because lobbying has to be much more active, especially when Congress seems bent on passing legislation the president doesn't like. The president's lobbying efforts are just like yours: It takes salesmanship. The president and his officials have to convince a majority of Congress to go along with his desires. However, three differences exist between you and the president when it comes to lobbying Congress: He's the president and you're not. He has many more tools at his disposal to convince members of Congress to do what he wants. He has a veto. When the president wants something, he can draw on a wide variety of instruments to convince members to accede to his desires. He can Promise them federal benefits like public works projects in their states or districts. Aid their pet projects and programs. Campaign for them at election time. Mobilize the entire country on behalf of his agenda or against his opponents. Command more media attention than any other official. Raise more money than any other public figure on behalf of his supporters. Place friends, constituents, and relatives of supportive members in official positions. Propose all sorts of honors and awards for friends and allies. Appeal to members' sense of duty and patriotism. One of the president's most effective tools is the official hospitality of the White House. Having members over for breakfast or lunch or inviting them to a state dinner replete with glamorous celebrities produces an extraordinary effect even with veteran lawmakers accustomed to public attention. The White House actually is a rather modest building, but it exerts a hypnotic effect on its invited guests. Given the president's power, knowledge and influence, by the time a bill reaches his desk, it's usually shaped to his liking, especially when he's working with a friendly Congress. However, when Congress is in unfriendly hands, it may pass legislation that the president doesn't like and the president, therefore, may have to use the ultimate constitutional tool: the veto. Wielding the veto After Congress sends the president a final bill, he has 10 days to act on it in one of two ways: Sign it into law. If he doesn't want to sign it but doesn't want to veto it, he can simply ignore it and it becomes law in ten days (excepting Sundays) while Congress is in session. Veto it. The word "veto" literally means "I refuse" in Latin, and the president has the constitutional power to stop a piece of legislation in its tracks, even after it's been through the entire legislative process. It's the Constitution's ultimate executive check on legislation. The president can veto a bill in two ways: • The return veto: The return veto mechanism is a straightforward provision in the Constitution. The president simply refuses to sign the legislation into law and sends it back to Congress with a message explaining why the legislation wasn't signed. • The pocket veto: In a pocket veto, the president neither vetoes a bill nor signs it — but if Congress adjourns during the 10-day period when the president has the bill, the bill doesn't become law. In other words, the president puts the bill in his pocket, waits out the Congress, and nothing happens. Overriding a veto When the president vetoes a bill, the legislation is dead unless Congress takes action. Congress can override the veto, and in doing so, passes the bill over the president's formal objection. Overriding a presidential veto requires a two-thirds majority vote of the members present and voting (in other words, those who are actually in the chamber rather than two-thirds of the total) in each chamber. An override vote is a momentous step and difficult to win. In recent years the mere threat of a veto has been enough to convince members not to proceed with provisions that the president doesn't like.

Article / Updated 03-26-2016

As soon as you start working with the United States Congress, you begin hearing about this bill or that bill. It's as if someone named Bill is everywhere in Washington. In the congressional context, a bill is simply a proposal, an idea, that's written up in legislation and presented to the Congress. Starting with an idea It all starts with an idea, a simple concept. You take that idea to your representative or senator because you see a need, you have a cause, and you want it to become a law. Remember that only members of Congress can propose resolutions that are considered by the entire body. Your task comes down to convincing a member to actually want to introduce your idea. Anyone can write up, or draft a bill, but only a member of Congress can introduce it. However, the more work that you do for members, the easier it is for them to work on your behalf. When you have a bill that you want Congress to consider, writing it up in legal language and presenting it to your representative or senator as a draft is a good idea. Lobbyists routinely draft legislative proposals. Figuring out how to write a bill is easy. Just look up an existing bill on the congressional Web site and follow that format to compose your proposal. Although your representative may make a few changes, he and the staff won't have to do as much work creating the bill by themselves. Looking at the types of legislation Several kinds of bills can be introduced and each one has a special designation. Bill The bill is the most common form of legislation. It's an idea, a proposal, and in the House it receives the designation H.R. for House of Representatives (not House Resolution as many people think). In the Senate it gets S. for Senate. A bill becomes law when it's approved by both the House and Senate and reaches the president's desk for signature. After it's signed by the president, it's no longer called a bill, but becomes an "Act." Resolution A resolution is much the same as a bill, except that it's usually concerned with the operation of the House or Senate. In other words, it's about something that concerns only the institution and doesn't need to be signed by the president. In the House, such a resolution is designated H. Res. and gets a number, and in the Senate, it becomes S. Res. Joint resolution A joint resolution is virtually identical to a bill. Contrary to what one would expect given the name, it can be proposed in either the House or the Senate and it goes through the same procedures as a bill and must be signed into law by the president. One slight difference between a bill and a joint resolution is that a joint resolution frequently has a preamble, a paragraph explaining the justification for the bill with all the "Whereas" resolving clauses that are a feature of legislative language. Joint resolutions are also used to amend bills already under consideration. A joint resolution gets the designation H.J.Res. in the House and S.J.Res. in the Senate. The only time a joint resolution differs in its procedure for consideration is when it's an amendment to the Constitution. Then it has to be approved by two-thirds of both houses to pass, and it's also sent to the states for ratification rather than being signed (or not) by the president. Concurrent resolutions A concurrent resolution can be introduced in either house and doesn't go to the president for signature. It isn't a bill and doesn't create any law. Usually, concurrent resolutions are used to express facts, principles, and opinions of the two houses. After being passed by both houses, concurrent resolutions are transmitted to the U.S. archivist rather than the president. In the House, they are designated H.Con.Res. and in the Senate, S.Con.Res. Many people dismiss concurrent resolutions as having no teeth because a "sense of resolution" has no power behind it. It's merely an expression of opinion and usually reflects the lowest common denominator: For example, "It is the sense of the House and Senate that all Americans should support Motherhood and Apple Pie." One example in the 107th Congress was S. Con.Res. 44, resolving that, in light of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, the House and Senate paid tribute to those who died and those who survived the attack. This resolution didn't enact a law, but it expressed a congressional sentiment. However, dismissing the role that concurrent resolutions can play would be a mistake, especially as part of an overall lobbying campaign. When effectively used to show the sentiments of the Congress where a particular cause or measure is concerned, concurrent resolutions can lead to real legislation, can warn opponents of the strength behind a measure, and can encourage supporters inside and outside Congress. Private bills While many people look to Congress for help with personal problems, sometimes such assistance must be approved by the entire Congress in the form of a bill. Your representative or lawyer can tell you whether that will be the case with any proposal you may make. The use of private bills has declined considerably. For example, in the 96th Congress (from 1979-1981), 123 private bills were passed, but by the 104th Congress (from 1995-1997), the number had dropped to only 4. Members are leery of private bills because they have the potential for creating trouble for the member if it turns out that the beneficiary doesn't have the cleanest record. In the past, private bills were mostly used to assist people who had a grievance or demand on the executive branch. Moreover, the need for them has declined because today there are more ways to appeal to executive agencies than there were in the past. Nonetheless, private bills are an option that usually fall into the following categories and go to the following House committees: Armed services decorations issues are handled by the National Security Committee. Civil service issues go to the Government Reform and Oversight Committee. Claims against the government. Domestic claims go to the Judiciary Committee; foreign claims go to the International Relations Committee. Immigration issues (for example, naturalization, residency status, and visa classification) go to the Judiciary Committee. Medical issues (for example, Food and Drug Administration approvals and health maintenance organization enrollment requirements) go to the Commerce Committee. Patents and copyright questions go to the Judiciary Committee. Public land issues (for example, sales, claims, exchanges, and mineral leases) go to the Resources Committee. Taxation issues (for example, income tax liabilities and tariff exemptions) go to the Ways and Means Committee. Vessel documentation issues go to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Veterans' benefit issues go to the Veterans' Affairs Committee. Private bills almost always are introduced only in the House since they deal with individuals and the House is the direct representative of the people (as opposed to the Senate, which represents states). If they get through subcommittee and committee consideration, they then move to the floor where all the private bills are considered together on the first and third Tuesdays of each month (although the House can decide to call them up at any other time when everyone agrees). Private bills usually go sailing through and routinely are approved by a voice vote. However, whenever two members object to a private bill, it goes back to the committee for reconsideration or is held for further consideration until the next batch of private bills comes up.