Congress has evolved since 1789
Congress has evolved since 1789, as discussed by the Congress itself and its members. It has significant changes, as discussed by both federalists and antifederalists. The federalists sought to organize a more powerful Congress, which would strengthen the federal government to make the structure if the nation was powerful. On the other hand, the antifederalist wanted to have a congress that held more American representatives but with limited powers to protect all citizen’s rights. All these pertain to the House of Representatives and the Senate.
Congress was organized in districts according to how they were represented in the federal papers. For example, Madison had argued that for every 30,000 citizens, there should be one representative. He meant to have too much power but in the hands of a few people. It means that the power lied in the hands of a few representatives; however, due to industrialization, there was a need for more representatives from a different sector of the nation to account for each sector.
In the beginning, the average age of a congress was 57.6 years for a member of the House and 62.9 years for the Senate. The majority of the members of Congress had only college education while today they hold degrees. Moreover, most of the members were the members if Christianity, mainly the protestant denomination. Additionally, many are the Catholics, which is the largest single religious denomination. Other denominations are today represented as well as other religions such as Muslim, Hindu, and Jews. Congress has also evolved because it has 55 African Members of the House and 3 in the Senate, whereby two of them are delegates. There are also Hispanic serving in the Congress where 45serves in the House, two are delegates, and five are in the Senate.
Earlier, the antifederalist was against the federalist proposals of representations. They argued that the representative’s number was too small and that it would come from the wealthy class or those with the history of leadership. More so, the number would be easily be influenced by the executive and would become corrupt. It would also weaken the power separation making a small group of people more powerful. The notion of the federalist has recently come to be true because it has been used by the presidents whereby, few people are becoming more powerful. Congress is still consistent with what the founders created because it is believed that the first Congress created the government. It also laid a plan with a set of ideas that of how the government was supposed to function. It laid a strong foundation for the government that is currently ruling. Congress created departments of the executives like treasury, defense, and State that exists today. It also included the federal courts and the Supreme. The government’s financial structure in the United States is based on Capitalism, a principle that was stated in the first Congress. The federalist and the antifederalist would not advocate for the modern Congress because it is giving a lot of power to the national government over the expense of the state government. Moreover, there is no bill of rights as there was in the Congress of 1789. The Congress and the executive branch is holding too much power that was against the federalist. Much of the power that is given to the political leaders are being misused and does not serve its purpose as it was to be
The incumbent candidates have a higher advantage of winning an election than the challenger. The incumbent is more conversant with the office than the challenger, which makes them know the possible ways to win an election. Holding office is an added advantage to them. It provides resources to incumbents, which aids in their electoral process. Many of the strongest candidates are elected officials who usually have such offices as they had before they engage in elections. Current officeholders have a higher chance of running for higher offices. They have to give out their current office. They handle over the office as they await the election, and their odds of succeeding are very high. For instance, any candidate in the House of the Attorney General who would like to run for a governor would have a higher chance of success than the normal candidate.
Education is also a quality characteristic to be considered among personal candidates. Education has received a good turnout on the effect of voters’ education attainment. Compulsory school laws study in many regions in the US shows that higher educational attainment among candidates is related to several measures of political involvement and interest. Individuals with higher education levels can understand issues affecting the office, and they can easily monitor elected politicians. It also helps the elected member running the office to select more able politicians to improve the office’s working status. Many democracies are more stable because educated leaders run the states.
The age of the candidate may also be a quality characteristic among the candidates. Many older candidates may be believed to make more informed and sound decisions than young candidates. The citizens may also consider electing candidates who may have a long record of running a particular office. It is believed that they have enough knowledge to run the State accordingly. Therefore, they have an excellent chance to run for a seat.
Senators are not reelected at the same rate as the house representatives due to the issue of incumbency. Most candidates in the House of Representatives enjoy the advantage of being Incumbents. It means that since they are already in the high offices holding high positions, they would influence people to reelect them. Moreover, they enjoy the power of holding high positions in the offices. It means that they would use their positions to get favor with voters, which is done by offering them quality services. Besides, they tend to increase funds for constituents’ services that help capture the home state and the district. Moreover, senators were originally appointed and not elected. People would also like the most capable of the job leaders to continue being their representatives. Senators are hard to be even reelected because of believing that the more they remain in power, the more they become separated from the will of those they are representing. On the other hand, the main mechanism that can be used to curb the issue of incumbency is to come up with rigid electoral laws and regulations and follow them strictly. The electoral institutions should ensure that election is in reality, a competition among the competing candidates. It would ensure that the Senate is independent, stable, and free from bias from political parties.
- The issue of minority-majority requires great attention in America. Up to today, racial minorities are still suppressed. The districts that were put in place during the first Congress disempowered the minority group because it gave few wealthy people power. The districts were divided according to the social status of the citizens. It means that so many districts contained the majority of the minority groups. However, the redistricting process started after the census that was conducted in 1990. The main aim of redistricting was to include more African-American and also Hispanic members in the representative in Congress. Even though these groups were included in the Congress, the votes of those who were described as racial minorities were being minimized in the districts that surrounded them. African-Americans and the Hispanic people were not allowed to participate in democratic elections. They were highly discriminated against, and the voters’ votes were not used during elections. It was meant to reduce their influence in the surrounding districts. As a result, more Republicans were elected to the House of Representatives, who was the most powerful in the surrounding districts.
According to the Demographics of the 116th Congress, Congress did an excellent job of including women representatives. According to the records, there were a good number of women who were about 24.2% of the Congress members. The number increased with 22 more women, unlike in the earlier Congress. One thousand nine hundred six women were serving in the House while 25 were serving in the Senate. There were 91 Democrats women, including two delegates while the other 15 were Republicans and 1 delegate. The number of women serving in both the Senate and the House in increasing since the Congress was formed. There were six more African American members added in the 116th Congress as opposed to the previous Congress. The number made an approximate of 10.7% of the members in the Congress. The members elected included 0ne representative and a senator who were both African-American. An Asian ancestry was also included in the number. Besides, there were two more African-American representative and Hispanic ancestry. Among the fifty-four of the members in the House, two were delegates, and the rest were democrats and Republicans. Twenty-four African American women included two delegates who were serving in the House, and the other served in the Senate. It did not matter whether Congress looks like America because it included foreign births. It means that five senators and the twenty-four representatives were not born in America but from foreign countries such as Germany, India, Japan, Canada, and Cuba. However, some of these members were taken off the Americans who were working outside the country. The American Indians were also included in the Congress. Since there were so many foreign members in Congress, it did not matter if it favored Americans. Moreover, Congress included even the Americans of the law class. Other people from different nationalities who came to America through historical events intermarried with the Americans. As a result, children born out of these marriages grew knowing that they are Americans; Citizens hence have the right to exercise their democratic rights as citizens of American nationality.
The House or the Senate is first approved by the suitable Committee, which is the burial ground for legislation. It means that the Committee selects one of the important measures that are brought in each Congress to be debated. However, some of the bills that clear the Committee are endorsed into law. The size and ratio of the Committee is an important feature. The committee size and ratio are determined by the results of the elections made by the biennial Congress. It means that the committees are responsible for determining the number of the minority and the majority. New resolutions are adopted during the opening of a new congress. Each chamber assumes discrete resolutions commonly offered by Republicans and Democrats who elect members of the party to the Committee that sets its size. It also set aside the amount of money that will be received in those committees and then it regulates the spending. The appropriators usually recommend the committees to spend a low amount of money. The Senate leaders also have powers to change the party ratios by ever-changing seats between the parties and not calculating seats to panels. For example, in November 2018, Senate gained more seats for the Republicans on Committee but had fewer slots for Democrats, which means that it can easily lose seats for its juniors in 2020. In this case, it means that the two parties have to come together. The two parties also went ahead to negotiate on the size and the ratio of the Committee. They agreed that six of the fifteen Standing Committee would have a two-seat margin and nine of one-seat advantage. The Committee also included one Latino on the panel, whereby the Republicans increase the size of the committees to add a seat for their side. At times, The House Committee is downsized to increase their productivity as they cut their costs. The decision of the Committee on either to reduce or to expand its margin is determined by the results of the Biennial elections conducted in both the House and Senate.
In Congress, there is a standing committee that is a permanent entity that is created by the rules in the Senate or House. The Committee does not stop at a particular stage but continues from one Congress to another. However, in some cases, the Committee can be eliminated, and new ones are created. For example, the Standing Committee in both the House and Senate of the 116th Congress had different purposes. The Committee in the House deals with the Agriculture sector only while in the Senate it incorporates Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. In other times, both the House and the Senate handle similar sectors, such as appropriations. And also in the armed services. The Standing Committee in the House deals with budgeting while the Senate works on Banking, Housing, and urban affairs. When the education and labor sectors were handled by the Standing Committee in the House, the Senate controlled the budget. In the end, the Standing committee in the House was handling Energy and Commerce when the Senate was taking care of science and transportation. It revealed that the Standing Committee of the Senate had more mandates than the House.