To install click the Add extension button. That's it.
The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.
How to transfigure the Wikipedia
Would you like Wikipedia to always look as professional and up-to-date? We have created a browser extension. It will enhance any encyclopedic page you visit with the magic of the WIKI 2 technology.
Try it — you can delete it anytime.
Install in 5 seconds
Yep, but later
4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
The United States House Committee on Appropriations is a committee of the United States House of Representatives that is responsible for passing appropriation bills along with its Senate counterpart.[1] The bills passed by the Appropriations Committee regulate expenditures of money by the government of the United States. As such, it is one of the most powerful of the committees, and its members are seen as influential. They make the key decisions about the work of their committees—when their committees meet, which bills they will consider, and for how long.
YouTube Encyclopedic
1/1
Views:
998 386
Congressional Committees: Crash Course Government and Politics #7
Transcription
Hi, I'm Craig and this is Crash Course Government
and Politics and today we're going to get
down and dirty wallowing in the mud that is
Congress. Okay, maybe that's a little unfair,
but the workings of Congress are kind of arcane
or byzantine or maybe let's just say extremely
complex and confusing, like me, or Game of
Thrones without the nudity. Some of the nudity, maybe.
However, Congress is the most important branch,
so it would probably behoove most Americans
to know how it works. I'm going to try to
explain. Be prepared to be behooved.
Both the House of Representatives and the
Senate are divided up into committees in order
to make them more efficient. The committees
you hear about most are the standing committees,
which are relatively permanent and handle the
day-to-day business of Congress. The House has 19
standing committees and the Senate 16. Congressmen
and Senators serve on multiple committees.
Each committee has a chairperson, or chair,
who is the one who usually gets mentioned
in the press, which is why you would know
the name of the chair of the House Ways and
Means Committee. Tell us in the comments if
you do know, or tell us if you are on the
committee, or just say hi.
Congress creates special or select committees
to deal with particular issues that are beyond
the jurisdiction of standing committees. Some
of them are temporary and some, like the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence, are permanent.
Some of them have only an advisory function
which means they can't write laws. The Select
Committee on Energy Independence and Global
Warming has only advisory authority which
tells you pretty much all you need to know
about Congress and climate change.
There are joint committees made up of members
of both houses. Most of them are standing
committees and they don't do a lot although
the joint Committee on the Library oversees
the Library of Congress, without which we
would not be able to use a lot of these pictures.
Like that one, and that one, and ooh that
one's my favorite.
Other committees are conference committees,
which are created to reconcile a bill when
the House and Senate write different versions
of it, but I'll talk about those later when
we try to figure out how a bill becomes a
law.
So why does Congress have so many committees?
The main reason is that it's more efficient
to write legislation in a smaller group rather
than a larger one. Congressional committees
also allow Congressmen to develop expertise
on certain topics. So a Congressperson from
Iowa can get on an agriculture committee because
that is an issue he presumably knows something
about if he pays attention to his constituents.
Or a Congressperson from Oklahoma could be
on the Regulation of Wind Rolling Down the
Plain Committee.
Committees allow members of Congress to follows
their own interests, so someone passionate
about national defense can try to get on the
armed services committee. Probably more important,
serving on a committee is something that a
Congressperson can claim credit for and use
to build up his or her brand when it comes
time for reelection.
Congress also has committees for historical
reasons. Congress is pretty tradish, which
is what you say when you don't have time to
say traditional. Anyway, it doesn't see much
need to change a system that has worked, for
the most part, since 1825.
That doesn't mean that Congress hasn't tried
to tweak the system. Let's talk about how
committees actually work in the Thought Bubble.
Any member of Congress can propose a bill,
this is called proposal power, but it has
to go to a committee first. Then to get to
the rest of the House or Senate it has to
be reported out of committee.
The chair determines the agenda by choosing
which issues get considered. In the House
the Speaker refers bills to particular committees,
but the committee chair has some discretion
over whether or not to act on the bills. This
power to control what ideas do or do not become
bills is what political scientists call "Gatekeeping
Authority", and it's a remarkably important
power that we rarely ever think about, largely
because when a bill doesn't make it on to
the agenda, there's not much to write or talk
about.
The committee chairs also manage the actual
process of writing a bill, which is called
mark-up, and the vote on the bill in the committee
itself. If a bill doesn't receive a majority
of votes in the committee, it won't be reported
out to the full House or Senate. In this case
we say the bill "died in committee" and we
have a small funeral on the National Mall.
Nah we just put it in the shredder.
Anyway, committee voting is kind of an efficient
practice. If a bill can't command a majority
in a small committee it doesn't have much
chance in the floor of either house. Committees
can kill bills by just not voting on them,
but it is possible in the House to force them
to vote by filing a discharge petition - this
almost never happens.
Gatekeeping Authority is Congress's most important
power, but it also has oversight power, which
is an after-the-fact authority to check up
on how law is being implemented.
Committees exercise oversight by assigning
staff to scrutinize a particular law or policy
and by holding hearings. Holding hearings
is an excellent way to take a position on
a particular issue.
Thanks Thought Bubble. So those are the basics
of how committees work, but I promised you
we'd go beyond the basics, so here we go into
the Realm of Congressional History.
Since Congress started using committees they
have made a number of changes, but the ones
that have bent the Congress into its current
shape occurred under the speakership of Newt
Gingrich in 1994.
Overall Gingrich increased the power of the
Speaker, who was already pretty powerful.
The number of subcommittees was reduced, and
seniority rules in appointing chairs were changed.
Before Gingrich or "BG" the chair of a committee
was usually the longest serving member of
the majority party, which for most of the
20th century was the Democrats. AG Congress,
or Anno Gingrichy Congress, holds votes to
choose the chairs. The Speaker has a lot of
influence over who gets chosen on these votes,
which happen more regularly because the Republicans
also impose term limits on the committee chairs.
Being able to offer chairmanships to loyal
party members gives the Speaker a lot more
influence over the committees themselves.
The Speaker also increased his, or her - this
is the first time we can say that, thanks
Nancy Pelosi - power to refer bills to committee
and act as gatekeeper.
Gingrich also made changes to congressional
staffing. But before we discuss the changes,
let's spend a minute or two looking at Congressional
staff in general.
There are two types of congressional staff,
the Staff Assistants that each Congressperson
or Senator has to help her or him with the
actual job of being a legislator, and the
Staff Agencies that work for Congress as a
whole.
The staff of a Congressperson is incredibly
important. Some staffers' job is to research
and write legislation while others do case
work, like responding to constituents' requests.
Some staffers perform personal functions,
like keeping track of a Congressperson's calendar,
or most importantly making coffee - can we
get a staffer in here?
As Congresspeople spend more and more time
raising money, more and more of the actual
legislative work is done by staff. In addition
to the individual staffers, Congress as a
whole has specialized staff agencies that
are supposed to be more independent. You may
have heard of these agencies, or at least
some of them.
The Congressional Research Service is supposed to
perform unbiased factual research for Congresspeople
and their staff to help them in the process
of writing the actual bills. The Government
Accountability Office is a branch of Congress
that can investigate the finances and administration
of any government administrative office. The
Congressional Budget Office assesses the likely
costs and impact of legislation. When the CBO looks at
the cost of a particular bill it's called "scoring the bill."
The Congressional reforms after 1994 generally
increased the number of individual staff and
reduced the staff of the staff agencies. This
means that more legislation comes out of the
offices of individual Congresspeople.
The last feature of Congress that I'm going
to mention, briefly because their actual function
and importance is nebulous, is the caucus system.
These are caucuses in Congress, so don't confuse
them with the caucuses that some states use to
choose candidates for office, like the ones in Iowa.
Caucuses are semi-formal groups of Congresspeople
organized around particular identities or
interests. Semi-formal in this case doesn't
mean that they wear suits and ties, it means
that they don't have official function in
the legislative process.
But you know what? Class it up a little - just
try to look nice.
The Congressional Black Caucus is made up
of the African American members of the legislature.
The Republican Study Group is the conservative
caucus that meets to discuss conservative
issues and develop legislative strategies.
Since 2010 there is also a Tea Party caucus
in Congress. There are also caucuses for very
specific interests like the Bike Caucus that
focuses on cycling.
There should also be a Beard Caucus, shouldn't
there? Is there a Beard Caucus Stan? No? What
about an eagle punching caucus?
The purpose of these caucuses is for like
minded people to gather and discuss ideas.
The caucuses can help members of Congress
coordinate their efforts and also provide
leadership opportunities for individual Congresspeople
outside of the more formal structures of committees.
There are a lot of terms and details to remember,
but here's the big thing to take away: caucuses,
congressional staff, and especially committees, all
exist to make the process of lawmaking more efficient.
In particular, committees and staff allow
individual legislators to develop expertise;
this is the theory anyway.
Yes it's a theory.
Committees also serve a political function
of helping Congresspeople build an identity
for voters that should help them get elected.
In some ways this is just as important in
the role in the process of making actual legislation.
When Congress doesn't pass many laws, committee
membership, or better yet, being a committee
chair is one of the only ways that a Congressperson
can distinguish him or herself. At least it
gives you something more to learn about incumbents
when you're making your voting choices.
Thanks for watching. I'll see you next week.
Crash Course is produced in association with
PBS Digital Studios. Support for Crash Course
US Government comes from Voqal. Voqal supports
nonprofits that use technology and media to
advance social equity. Learn more about their
mission and initiatives at voqal.org
Crash Course is made with all of these lovely
people. Thanks for watching.
Staffer! Coffee! Please. Thank you.
The constitutional basis for the Appropriations Committee comes from Article one, Section nine, Clause seven of the U.S. Constitution, which says
No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
This clearly delegated the power of appropriating money to Congress, but was vague beyond that. Originally, the power of appropriating was taken by the Committee on Ways and Means, but the United States Civil War placed a large burden on the Congress, and at the end of that conflict, a reorganization occurred.
Early years
The Committee on Appropriations was created on December 11, 1865, when the U.S. House of Representatives separated the tasks of the Committee on Ways and Means into three parts.[2] The passage of legislation affecting taxes remained with Ways and Means. The power to regulate banking was transferred to the Committee on Banking and Commerce. The power to appropriate money—to control the federal pursestrings—was given to the newly created Appropriations Committee.
The root of the Appropriations Committee's power is its ability to disburse funds, and thus as the United States federal budget has risen, so has the power of the Appropriations Committee. The first federal budget of the United States, in 1789, was for $639,000—a hefty sum for the time, but a much smaller amount relative to the economy than the federal budget would later become. By the time the Appropriations committee was founded, the Civil War and inflation had raised expenditures to roughly $1.3 billion, increasing the clout of Appropriations. Expenditures continued to follow this pattern—rising sharply during wars before settling down—for over 100 years.
Another important development for Appropriations occurred in the presidency of Warren G. Harding. Harding was the first President of the United States to deliver a budget proposal to Congress.
Recent times
Logo of the United States House Committee on Appropriations
In May 1945, when U.S. Representative Albert J. Engel queried extra funds for the Manhattan Project, the administration approved a visit to CEW (and HEW if desired) by selected legislators, including Engel, Mahon, Snyder, John Taber and Clarence Cannon (the committee chairman). About a month earlier Taber and Cannon had nearly come to blows over expenditure. But after visiting the Clinton Engineer Works at Oak Ridge Taber asked General Groves and Colonel Nichols "Are you sure you’re asking for enough money? Cannon commented "Well, I never expected to hear that from you, John."[3]
In the early 1970s, the Appropriations Committee faced a crisis. President Richard Nixon began "impounding" funds, not allowing them to be spent, even when Congress had specifically appropriated money for a cause. This was essentially a line-item veto. Numerous court cases were filed by outraged interest groups and members of Congress. Eventually, the sense that Congress needed to regain control of the budget process led to the adoption of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which finalized the budget process in its current form.
Role
The Appropriations committee is widely recognized by political scientists as one of the "power committees,"[citation needed] since it holds the power of the purse. Openings on the Appropriations committee are often hotly demanded, and are doled out as rewards. It is one of the exclusive committees of the House, meaning its members typically sit on no other committee. Under House Rules, an exception to this is that five Members of the Appropriations Committee must serve on the House Budget Committee—three for the Majority and two for the Minority. Much of the power of the committee comes from the inherent utility of controlling spending. Its subcommittee chairmen are often called "Cardinals" because of the power they wield over the budget.
Since Congress is elected from single-member districts, how well the member secures rewards for his or her district is one of the best indicators as to whether or not he or she will be reelected. One way to achieve popularity in one's district is to bring it federal spending, thus creating jobs and raising economic performance. This type of spending is often derided by critics as pork barrel spending, while those who engage in it generally defend it as necessary and appropriate expenditure of government funds. The members of the Appropriations committee can do this better than most, and as such the appointment is regarded as a plus. This help can also be directed towards other members, increasing the stature of committee members in the House and helping them gain support for leadership positions or other honors.
The committee tends to be less partisan than other committees or the House overall. While the minority party will offer amendments during committee consideration, appropriations bills often get significant bipartisan support, both in committee and on the House floor. This atmosphere can be attributed to the fact that all committee members have a compelling interest in ensuring legislation will contain money for their own districts. Conversely, because members of this committee can easily steer money to their home districts, it is considered very difficult to unseat a member of this committee at an election—especially if he or she is a "Cardinal".
In addition, the ability to appropriate money is useful to lobbyists and interest groups; as such, being on Appropriations makes it easier to collect campaign contributions (see campaign finance).
In 2007, the number of subcommittees was increased to 12 at the start of the 110th Congress. This reorganization, developed by Chairman David Obey and his Senate counterpart, Robert Byrd, for the first time provided for common subcommittee structures between both houses, a move that both chairmen hoped will allow Congress to "complete action on each of the government funding on time for the first time since 1994".[8]
The new structure added the Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, and transferred jurisdiction over Legislative Branch appropriations from the full committee to a newly reinstated Legislative Branch Subcommittee, which had not existed since the 108th Congress.
This page was last edited on 18 December 2020, at 13:44