15.4 Proposals for structural and procedural reforms
6 min read•july 30, 2024
Congress faces numerous challenges, prompting calls for reform. Proposals range from restructuring committees to changing leadership selection. These ideas aim to enhance efficiency, accountability, and responsiveness in the legislative branch.
Procedural reforms like filibuster changes and campaign finance overhauls are hotly debated. While some argue these would improve Congress's functionality, others worry about unintended consequences. The feasibility of reforms depends on political will, public support, and constitutional constraints.
Congressional Reform Proposals
Reforming the Committee System
Top images from around the web for Reforming the Committee System
Committee Reports - Federal Legislative History - Research Guides at Florida State University ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Congress: How is the legislative branch structured? | United States Government View original
Committee Reports - Federal Legislative History - Research Guides at Florida State University ... View original
Is this image relevant?
Congress: How is the legislative branch structured? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Proposals for reforming the committee system often focus on reducing the number of committees and subcommittees to streamline the legislative process and reduce jurisdictional overlap
Some reformers advocate for changing the seniority system for selecting committee chairs, arguing that it rewards longevity over merit and can lead to entrenched power structures
Critics argue that reforming the committee system could disrupt established expertise and relationships, making Congress less effective
Supporters contend that reforms are necessary to make Congress more responsive to the public and to address issues of corruption and stagnation
Leadership Structure Reforms
Proposals for leadership reform include for party leaders (Speaker of the House, Senate Majority Leader), rotating leadership positions, and more democratic processes for selecting leaders
Term limits could prevent the concentration of power and encourage new perspectives in leadership roles
Rotating leadership positions among members could promote fairness and diversity in decision-making
More democratic processes, such as secret ballot elections, could make leaders more accountable to their caucuses
Critics argue that leadership reforms could undermine the stability and effectiveness of party organizations in Congress
Supporters believe that leadership reforms are necessary to combat gridlock, partisan polarization, and the outsized influence of special interests
Arguments for and Against Procedural Changes
Filibuster Reform
The filibuster allows a minority of Senators to block legislation by extending debate indefinitely, requiring a 60-vote supermajority to invoke and end debate
Proponents argue that the filibuster protects minority rights and encourages bipartisan compromise
Critics contend that the filibuster has become a tool for obstruction and gridlock, making it difficult for Congress to address pressing issues (climate change, immigration reform)
Proposals to reform the filibuster include:
Lowering the cloture threshold from 60 votes to a simple majority (51 votes)
Requiring filibustering senators to hold the floor and speak continuously (talking filibuster)
Limiting the use of the filibuster to certain types of legislation (appropriations bills, executive nominations)
Reconciliation Process
Reconciliation is a process that allows certain budget-related legislation to pass with a simple majority vote, bypassing the filibuster
Supporters argue that reconciliation is necessary to enact important fiscal policies and to prevent a minority from blocking the will of the majority
Opponents claim that reconciliation is being abused to pass controversial non-budgetary policies (healthcare reform, tax cuts) and that it undermines the deliberative nature of the Senate
Proposals to reform reconciliation include:
Narrowing the scope of reconciliation to apply only to deficit reduction measures
Requiring a supermajority vote (60 votes) to pass reconciliation bills
Allowing reconciliation to be used for both revenue and spending measures
Other Procedural Reforms
Changing quorum requirements to ensure that a majority of members are present for important votes
Limiting the use of unanimous consent agreements to prevent individual senators from blocking progress
Streamlining the amendment process to reduce the use of "poison pill" amendments that derail legislation
Enhancing by requiring more public hearings, disclosing lobbyist contacts, and improving access to legislative information
Structural Changes to Congress
Term Limits
Term limit proposals aim to restrict the number of terms that members of Congress can serve, typically to two or three terms in the Senate and six to twelve years in the House
Advocates argue that term limits would reduce the influence of special interests, encourage new ideas and perspectives, and prevent the entrenchment of power
Opponents contend that term limits would deprive Congress of experienced legislators, shift power to unelected staff and lobbyists, and limit voter choice
Term limits have been proposed at both the federal and state levels, with mixed results
Several states have enacted term limits for their legislatures, with some evidence of increased turnover and diversity
Attempts to impose term limits on Congress through constitutional amendment have failed to gain sufficient support
Campaign Finance Reform
Campaign finance reform proposals seek to reduce the influence of money in politics by limiting contributions, requiring disclosure, or providing public financing for campaigns
Supporters argue that campaign finance reform is necessary to prevent corruption, level the playing field for candidates, and restore public trust in government
Critics claim that campaign finance regulations infringe on free speech rights, benefit incumbents, and fail to address the underlying causes of political inequality
Key elements of campaign finance reform include:
Limiting the amount that individuals and groups can contribute to campaigns (contribution limits)
Requiring disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures to promote transparency
Providing public financing for campaigns to reduce the reliance on private donations (matching funds, vouchers)
Regulating the activities of independent expenditure groups (Super PACs) and dark money organizations
Other Structural Reforms
Changing the size of Congress to improve representation or efficiency
Increasing the number of House members to reduce the ratio of constituents to representatives
Reducing the size of the Senate to streamline decision-making and reduce the influence of small states
Altering the electoral system to promote competition and accountability
Implementing ranked-choice voting or proportional representation to encourage more diverse political participation
Establishing independent commissions to prevent partisan
Modifying the balance of power between the branches to enhance
Strengthening congressional oversight powers over the executive branch
Limiting the president's ability to unilaterally initiate military action or declare national emergencies
Feasibility of Congressional Reform
Factors Affecting Feasibility
The feasibility of reform proposals depends on factors such as public support, political will, constitutional constraints, and unintended consequences
Reforms that require constitutional amendments, such as term limits, face higher hurdles than those that can be enacted through legislation or rule changes
Proposals that challenge entrenched interests or disrupt existing power structures may face strong opposition from those who benefit from the status quo (incumbent politicians, lobbyists, donors)
Public opinion and grassroots activism can play a significant role in generating momentum for reform
Scandals, crises, and perceptions of congressional dysfunction can create windows of opportunity for change
Sustained public pressure and mobilization can overcome institutional resistance and force action on reform proposals
Evaluating Reform Proposals
The potential impact of reforms on congressional effectiveness and responsiveness is difficult to predict and may vary depending on the specific proposal and context
Some reforms, such as streamlining the committee system or improving transparency, could enhance Congress's ability to address issues and communicate with the public
Other reforms, such as term limits or campaign finance restrictions, could have unintended consequences that reduce institutional knowledge, empower outside groups, or limit democratic choice
Evaluating reform proposals requires careful consideration of trade-offs, empirical evidence, and potential alternatives for improving congressional performance and accountability
Incremental reforms, pilot programs, and sunset provisions can help test and refine proposals before full implementation
A combination of structural, procedural, and cultural reforms may be necessary to address the complex challenges facing Congress in the 21st century
Successful congressional reform requires building broad coalitions, compromising on details, and adapting to changing circumstances
Bipartisan support and leadership buy-in can increase the chances of enacting and sustaining reforms
Engaging diverse stakeholders, including members of Congress, experts, advocacy groups, and the public, can help build legitimacy and support for reform efforts