legislative process essay

Chapter 11: Congress

The Legislative Process

Learning outcomes.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

Explain the steps in the classic bill-becomes-law diagram
Describe the modern legislative processes that alter the classic process in some way

A dry description of the function of congressional leadership and the many committees and subcommittees in Congress may suggest that the drafting and amending of legislation is a finely tuned process that has become ever more refined over the course of the last few centuries. In reality, however, committees are more likely to kill legislation than to pass it. And the last few decades have seen a dramatic transformation in the way Congress does business. Creative interpretations of rules and statues have turned small loopholes into the large gateways through which much congressional work now gets done. In this section, we will explore both the traditional legislative route by which a bill becomes a law and the modern incarnation of the process. We will also learn how and why the transformation occurred.

THE CLASSIC LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

The traditional process by which a bill becomes a law is called the classic legislative process . First, legislation must be drafted. Theoretically, anyone can do this. Much successful legislation has been initially drafted by someone who is not a member of Congress, such as a think tank or advocacy group, or the president. However, Congress is under no obligation to read or introduce this legislation, and only a bill introduced by a member of Congress can hope to become law. Even the president must rely on legislators to introduce his or her legislative agenda.

Technically, bills that raise revenue, like tax bills, must begin in the House. This exception is encoded within the Constitution in Article I, Section 7, which states, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.” Yet, despite the seemingly clear language of the Constitution, Congress has found ways to get around this rule.

Once legislation has been proposed, however, the majority leadership consults with the parliamentarian about which committee to send it to. Each chamber has a parliamentarian , an advisor, typically a trained lawyer, who has studied the long and complex rules of the chamber. While Congress typically follows the advice of its parliamentarians, it is not obligated to, and the parliamentarian has no power to enforce his or her interpretation of the rules. Once a committee has been selected, the committee chair is empowered to move the bill through the committee process as he or she sees fit. This occasionally means the chair will refer the bill to one of the committee’s subcommittees.

Whether at the full committee level or in one of the subcommittees, the next step is typically to hold a hearing on the bill. If the chair decides to not hold a hearing, this is tantamount to killing the bill in committee. The hearing provides an opportunity for the committee to hear and evaluate expert opinions on the bill or aspects of it. Experts typically include officials from the agency that would be responsible for executing the bill, the bill’s sponsors from Congress, and industry lobbyists, interest groups, and academic experts from a variety of relevant fields. Typically, the committee will also accept written statements from the public concerning the bill in question. For many bills, the hearing process can be very routine and straightforward.

Once hearings have been completed, the bill enters the markup stage. This is essentially an amending and voting process. In the end, with or without amendments, the committee or subcommittee will vote. If the committee decides not to advance the bill at that time, it is tabled. Tabling a bill typically means the bill is dead, but there is still an option to bring it back up for a vote again. If the committee decides to advance the bill, however, it is printed and goes to the chamber, either the House or the Senate. For the sake of example, we will assume that a bill goes first to the House (although the reverse could be true, and, in fact, bills can move simultaneously through both chambers). Before it reaches the House floor, it must first go through the House Committee on Rules. This committee establishes the rules of debate, such as time limits and limits on the number and type of amendments. After these rules have been established, the bill moves through the floor, where it is debated and amendments can be added. Once the limits of debate and amendments have been reached, the House holds a vote. If a simple majority, 50 percent plus 1, votes to advance the bill, it moves out of the House and into the Senate.

Once in the Senate, the bill is placed on the calendar so it can be debated. Or, more typically, the Senate will also consider the bill (or a companion version) in its own committees. Since the Senate is much smaller than the House, it can afford to be much more flexible in its rules for debate. Typically, senators allow each other to talk and debate as long as the speaker wants, though they can agree as a body to create time limits. But without these limits, debate continues until a motion to table has been offered and voted on.

In 1975, after the heightened partisanship of the civil rights era, the Senate further weakened the filibuster by reducing the number needed for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, or sixty votes, where it remains today (except for judicial nominations for which only fifty-five votes are needed to invoke cloture). Moreover, filibusters are not permitted on the annual budget reconciliation act (the Reconciliation Act of 2010 was the act under which the implementing legislation for Obamacare was passed).

The Noble History of the Filibuster?

When most people think of the Senate filibuster, they probably picture actor Jimmy Stewart standing exasperated at a podium and demanding the Senate come to its senses and do the right thing. Even for those not familiar with the classic Frank Capra film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington , the image of a heroic single senator sanding up to the power of the entire chamber while armed only with oratorical skill naturally tends to inspire. Unfortunately, the history of the filibuster is less heartwarming.

This is not to say that noble causes haven’t been championed by filibustering senators; they most certainly have. But they have largely been overshadowed by the outright ridiculous and sometimes racist filibusters of the twentieth century. In the first category, the fifteen-and-a-half-hour marathon of Senator Huey Long of Louisiana stands out: Hoping to retain the need for Senate confirmation of some jobs he wanted to keep from his political enemies, Long spent much of his filibuster analyzing the Constitution, talking about his favorite recipes, and telling amusing stories, as was his custom.

In a defining moment for the filibuster, Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina spoke for twenty-four hours and eighteen minutes against a weak civil rights bill in 1957. A vocal proponent of segregation and white supremacy, Thurmond had made no secret of his views and had earlier run for the presidency on a segregationist platform. Nor was Thurmond the first to use the filibuster to preserve segregation and prevent the expansion of civil rights for African Americans. Groups of dedicated southern senators used the filibuster to prevent the passage of anti-lynching legislation on multiple occasions during the first half of the twentieth century. Later, when faced with the 1964 Civil Rights Act, southern senators staged a fifty-seven-day filibuster to try and kill it. But the momentum of the nation was against them. The bill passed over their obstructionism and helped to reduce segregation.

Is the filibuster the tool of the noble minority attempting to hold back the tide of a powerful minority? Or does its history as a weapon supporting segregation expose it as merely a tactic of obstruction?

Because both the House and the Senate can and often do amend bills, the bills that pass out of each chamber frequently look different. This presents a problem, since the Constitution requires that both chambers pass identical bills. One simple solution is for the first chamber to simply accept the bill that ultimately makes it out of the second chamber. Another solution is for first chamber to further amend the second chamber’s bill and send it back to the second chamber. Congress typically takes one of these two options, but about one in every eight bills cannot be resolved in this way. These bills must be sent to a conference committee that negotiates a reconciliation both chambers can accept without amendment. Only then can the bill progress to the president’s desk for signature or veto. If the president does veto the bill, both chambers must muster a two-thirds vote to overcome the veto and make the bill law without presidential approval.

A chart that shows the steps a bill takes to become law. Each step is depicted in a separate box in a linear fashion. From left to right, the boxes read

LINK TO LEARNING

For one look at the classic legislative process, visit YouTube to view “I’m Just a Bill” from the ABC Schoolhouse Rock! series.

MODERN LEGISLATION IS DIFFERENT

For much of the nation’s history, the process described above was the standard method by which a bill became a law. Over the course of the last three and a half decades, however, changes in rules and procedure have created a number of alternate routes. Collectively, these different routes constitute what some political scientists have described as a new but unorthodox legislative process. According to political scientist Barbara Sinclair, the primary trigger for the shift away from the classic legislative route was the budget reforms of the 1970s. The 1974 Budget and Impoundment Control Act gave Congress a mechanism for making large, all-encompassing, budget decisions. In the years that followed, the budget process gradually became the vehicle for creating comprehensive policy changes. One large step in this transformation occurred in 1981 when President Ronald Reagan’s administration suggested using the budget to push through his economic reforms.

The benefit of attaching the reforms to the budget resolution was that Congress could force an up or down (yea or nay) vote on the whole package. Such a packaged bill is called an omnibus bill . [1] Creating and voting for an omnibus bill allows Congress to quickly accomplish policy changes that would have taken many votes and the expending of great political capital over a long period of time. This and successive similar uses of the budget process convinced many in Congress of the utility of this strategy. During the contentious and ideologically divided 1990s, the budget process became the common problem-solving mechanism in the legislature, thus laying the groundwork for the way legislation works today.

An important characteristic feature of modern legislating is the greatly expanded power and influence of the party leadership over the control of bills. One reason for this change was the heightened partisanship that stretches back to the 1980s and is still with us today. With such high political stakes, the party leadership is reluctant to simply allow the committees to work things out on their own. In the House, the leadership uses special rules to guide bills through the legislative process and toward a particular outcome. Uncommon just a few decades ago, these now widely used rules restrict debate and options, and are designed to focus the attention of members.

The practice of multiple referrals, with which entire bills or portions of those bills are referred to more than one committee, greatly weakened the different specialization monopolies committees held primarily in the House but also to an extent in the Senate. With less control over the bills, committees naturally reached out to the leadership for assistance. Indeed, as a testament to its increasing control, the leadership may sometimes avoid committees altogether, preferring to work things out on the floor. And even when bills move through the committees, the leadership often seeks to adjust the legislation before it reaches the floor.

Another feature of the modern legislative process, exclusively in the Senate, is the application of the modern filibuster. Unlike the traditional filibuster, in which a senator took the floor and held it for as long as possible, the modern filibuster is actually a perversion of the cloture rules adopted to control the filibuster. When partisanship is high, as it has been frequently, the senators can request cloture before any bill can get a vote. This has the effect of increasing the number of votes needed for a bill to advance from a simple majority of fifty-one to a super majority of sixty. The effect is to give the Senate minority great power to obstruct if it is inclined to do so.

The Library of Congress’s Thomas website has provided scholars, citizens, and media with a bounty of readily available data on members and bills for more than two decades.

CHAPTER REVIEW

See the Chapter 11.5 Review for a summary of this section, the key vocabulary , and some review questions to check your knowledge.

Glen S. Krutz. 2001. Hitching a Ride: Omnibus Legislating in the U.S. Congress. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press. ↵

the amending and voting process in a congressional committee

a parliamentary maneuver used in the Senate to extend debate on a piece of legislation as long as possible, typically with the intended purpose of obstructing or killing it

a parliamentary process to end a debate in the Senate, as a measure against the filibuster; invoked when three-fifths of senators vote for the motion

Share This Book

Home — Essay Samples — Law, Crime & Punishment — Amendment — How a Bill Becomes a Law: Demystifying the Legislative Process

How a Bill Becomes a Law: Demystifying The Legislative Process

Categories: Amendment American Constitution

About this sample

Words: 611 |

Published: Sep 16, 2023

Words: 611 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Introduction to the legislative process, 1. introduction of the bill, 2. committee review, 3. floor debate and voting, 4. conference committee (if necessary), 5. presidential action, 6. implementation and enforcement.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

Expert in: Law, Crime & Punishment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

3 pages / 1302 words

6 pages / 3292 words

2 pages / 1103 words

3 pages / 1488 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Amendment

Amendments to the United States Constitution have played a significant role in shaping the nation's laws and rights. The 28th Amendment, a proposed addition to the Constitution, has sparked debates and discussions among [...]

The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures. This fundamental right plays a [...]

Since the Government came up with the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments it have changed how everyone looks at each other and relationships between the Whites and African Americans. First, in the 13th amendment it states that [...]

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, has long been a subject of controversy and debate, particularly concerning its compatibility with the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution. This essay explores the [...]

Lydia Taft was a wealthy widow, allowed to vote first time in the town meeting in Uxbridge, Massachusetts, in 1756. In the colonial era, no other women are known to have voted. The New Jersey constitution of 1776 emancipated all [...]

When drafting the Constitution, the founders were aware of the many flaws already contained within it and foresaw the need to make additions in the future, prompting them to include the Bill of Rights as a first revision, and [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

11.5 The Legislative Process

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

Explain the steps in the classic bill-becomes-law diagram
Describe the modern legislative processes that alter the classic process in some way

A dry description of the function of congressional leadership and the many committees and subcommittees in Congress may suggest that the drafting and amending of legislation is a finely tuned process that has become ever more refined over the course of the last few centuries. In reality, however, committees are more likely to kill legislation than to pass it. And the last few decades have seen a dramatic transformation in the way Congress does business. Creative interpretations of rules and statutes have turned small loopholes into the large gateways through which much congressional work now gets done. In this section, we will explore both the traditional legislative route by which a bill becomes a law and the modern incarnation of the process. We will also learn how and why the transformation occurred.

THE CLASSIC LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

Technically, bills that raise revenue, like tax bills, must begin in the House. This exception is encoded within the Constitution in Article I , Section 7, which states, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments as on other Bills.” Yet, despite the seemingly clear language of the Constitution, Congress has found ways to get around this rule.

Once legislation has been proposed, however, the majority leadership consults with the parliamentarian about which committee to send it to. Each chamber has a parliamentarian , an advisor, typically a trained lawyer, who has studied the long and complex rules of the chamber. While Congress typically follows the advice of its parliamentarians, it is not obligated to, and the parliamentarian has no power to enforce their own interpretation of the rules. Once a committee has been selected, the committee chair is empowered to move the bill through the committee process as they see fit. This occasionally means the chair will refer the bill to one of the committee’s subcommittees.

This flexibility about speaking in the Senate gave rise to a unique tactic, the filibuster . The word “filibuster” comes from the Dutch word vrijbuiter , which means pirate. And the name is appropriate, since it was historically the practice that a senator who launches a filibuster virtually hijacks the floor of the chamber by speaking for long periods of time, thus preventing the Senate from closing debate and acting on a bill. The tactic was perfected in the 1850s as Congress wrestled with the complicated issue of slavery. After the Civil War, the use of the filibuster became even more common. Eventually, in 1917, the Senate passed Rule 22, which allowed the chamber to hold a cloture vote to end debate. To invoke cloture, the Senate had to get a two-thirds majority. This was difficult to do, but it generally did prevent anyone from hijacking the Senate floor, with the salient exception of Senator Strom Thurmond’s record twenty-four-hour filibuster of the Civil Rights Act . The classic approach still occasionally occurs, such as when Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) executed a filibuster in 2013 on legislation related to the Affordable Care Act, which included reading the Dr. Seuss children's classic, Green Eggs and Ham . 37 However, the vast majority of the time, the actual filibuster action is not needed since floor leaders rarely bring bills to the floor that don't meet the cloture threshold.

In 1975, after the heightened partisanship of the civil rights era, the Senate further weakened the filibuster by reducing the number needed for cloture from two-thirds to three-fifths, or sixty votes, where it remains today (except for judicial nominations for which only fifty-one votes are needed to invoke cloture). Moreover, filibusters are not permitted on the annual budget reconciliation act. In this way, the Reconciliation Act of 2010 was how the implementing legislation for Obamacare was passed. The budget reconciliation process was also used by Republicans to pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and by Democrats to pass the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which contained a massive COVID relief package.

The Noble History of the Filibuster?

In a defining moment for the filibuster, Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina spoke for twenty-four hours and eighteen minutes against a weak civil rights bill in 1957. A vocal proponent of segregation and White supremacy, Thurmond had made no secret of his views and had earlier run for the presidency on a segregationist platform. Nor was Thurmond the first to use the filibuster to preserve segregation and prevent the expansion of civil rights for African Americans. Groups of dedicated southern senators used the filibuster to prevent the passage of anti-lynching legislation on multiple occasions during the first half of the twentieth century. Later, when faced with the 1964 Civil Rights Act, southern senators staged a fifty-seven-day filibuster to try and kill it. But the momentum of the nation was against them. The bill passed over their obstructionism and helped to reduce segregation.

Link to Learning

For one look at the classic legislative process, visit YouTube to view “I’m Just a Bill” from the ABC Schoolhouse Rock! series.

MODERN LEGISLATION IS DIFFERENT

The benefit of attaching the reforms to the budget resolution was that Congress could force an up or down (yea or nay) vote on the whole package. Such a packaged bill is called an omnibus bill . 38 Creating and voting for an omnibus bill allows Congress to quickly accomplish policy changes that would have taken many votes and the expending of great political capital over a long period of time. This and successive similar uses of the budget process convinced many in Congress of the utility of this strategy. During the contentious and ideologically divided 1990s, the budget process became the common problem-solving mechanism in the legislature, thus laying the groundwork for the way legislation works today.

The Library of Congress’s Congress.gov website has provided scholars, citizens, and media with a bounty of readily available data on members and bills for more than two decades.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/1-introduction

Authors: Glen Krutz, Sylvie Waskiewicz, PhD
Publisher/website: OpenStax
Book title: American Government 3e
Publication date: Jul 28, 2021
Location: Houston, Texas
Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/1-introduction
Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/11-5-the-legislative-process

© Jan 5, 2024 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

Explore the Constitution

The Constitution
Read the Full Text

Dive Deeper

Constitution 101 course.

The Drafting Table
Supreme Court Cases Library
Founders' Library
Constitutional Rights: Origins & Travels

Start your constitutional learning journey

News & Debate Overview
Constitution Daily Blog
America's Town Hall Programs
Special Projects

Media Library

America’s Town Hall

Watch videos of recent programs.

Education Overview

Constitution 101 Curriculum

Classroom Resources by Topic
Classroom Resources Library
Live Online Events
Professional Learning Opportunities
Constitution Day Resources

Explore our new 15-unit high school curriculum.

Explore the Museum
Plan Your Visit
Exhibits & Programs
Field Trips & Group Visits
Host Your Event
Buy Tickets

First Amendment Exhibit Historic Graphic

New exhibit

The first amendment, module 7: the legislative branch: how congress works.

The Constitution grants Congress—our nation’s legislative branch—the power to make laws. The legislative branch is outlined in Article I of the Constitution. The Constitution divides Congress into two houses—the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. The House of Representatives is composed of representatives proportionate to each state’s population. At the same time, the Senate is organized under the principle of equal state representation—with each state, regardless of its population, receiving two Senators.

In this module, students will examine primary and secondary sources to learn about the legislative branch’s structure, functions, and powers as granted by the Constitution and defined by the courts over time. Students will also explore the legislative process and the role that civil dialogue and political compromise play in crafting national laws.

Download all materials for this module as a PDF

Learning Objectives

Explain the Founders’ vision for Congress and explore the key debates and compromises at the Constitutional Convention.
Describe the role that Congress plays in the national government.
Identify the powers that the Constitution grants to Congress.
Discuss how the Supreme Court has interpreted the powers of Congress over time.
Compare the Founders’ vision for Congress with how Congress works in practice.

7.1 Activity: How does Congress Work?

Student Instructions
Teacher Notes

Purpose In this activity, you will explore how Congress works and learn about how the founders expected it to work. You will discuss the value of using a slow and deliberative process to make national laws. However, you will also debate the tradeoffs of this system.

Process What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear the word Congress? Next, review the Visual Info Brief: Political Cartoon image and explain what the political cartoonist is trying to say about Congress. Finally, list three words or terms that you hear people say about Congress outside of this class. Think about the ways that the news portrays Congress.

After reviewing the image, answer the following questions:

What is the cartoonist trying to say about Congress?
List three action words that explain what you hear people saying about Congress.

Now, review the following quotes about Congress’s lawmaking process by a leading scholar of the founding era and of the constitutional thought of James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 70

“Madison’s overall aim was not to stymie the will of the majority, but rather to place obstacles in the path of factions, including majority faction. At the same time, he sought to facilitate the development of a just majority, or in other words, the reason of the public. . . . Too swift and facile political communication allows the mere will of the majority, or sheer power, to rule in the regime. The slow, measured process of the communication of ideas, however, refines and modifies the will of the society, subjecting power to the test of right reason.” - Colleen Sheehan Professor, School of Civic and Economic Thought and Leadership, Arizona State University

“The differences of opinion, and the jarrings of parties in [Congress], though they may sometimes obstruct salutary plans, yet often promote deliberation and circumspection, and serve to check excesses in the majority.” Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 70

Reflect on the quotes and record your answers to the following questions:

What is the scholar trying to say about Congress and the value of a demanding political process?
List three ideas that explain how Congress is supposed to work.

Launch Ask the students the first thing that comes to mind when they hear the word “Congress.” Write ideas on the board and note any patterns.

Give students time to analyze the political cartoon and as a group answer the guiding questions. What is the cartoonist trying to say about Congress? The goal of this analysis is to address the impressions that students may already have—that Congress is dysfunctional, with a lot of partisan fights. The system can be nasty. It can be slow. Often, Congress struggles to get anything done—even when it seems to many Americans like there are serious problems worth addressing.

Then, you can pivot to the founders’ vision and the benefits of the system. Give students time to analyze the scholarly quotes about the value of a demanding political process and as a group answer the guiding questions.

The Colleen Sheehan quote is from the following article: A Madisonian Constitution for All . Activity Synthesis Now, share the following big idea: What if I told you that the founders wanted to slow down the political process in Congress? Discuss the idea of deliberation and the benefits and drawbacks of a slow process for making national laws. The goal is to get the students to see (and/or debate) the benefits of a slow, demanding process. When the process works, it is designed to promote deliberation, debate, compromise, and (ideally) better laws. However, the founders hoped that this demanding process would also ease public passions, curb bad laws, guard against government abuses, protect minority rights, and avoid government by faction (or, in today’s terms, parties).

What are the benefits of a slow, deliberative process? Why do you think that the Founding generation designed it this way?
What are the drawbacks of such a system?
How can such a process benefit a growing (and diverse) society with different needs and viewpoints?
What are some of the challenges of such a system in this context?

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of the debate, ask the following question:

What are examples of the advantages and disadvantages of a slow lawmaking process?

7.1 Visual Info Brief: Political Cartoon

7.2 activity: structure, powers and limits of congress.

Purpose Article I establishes the national government’s legislative branch—Congress.

Article I is the longest part of the Constitution. That’s because the Founding generation expected Congress to be the most powerful—and most dangerous—branch of government. Article I also sets out the powers of Congress and lists certain limits to those powers.

In this activity, you will explore the structure, powers, and limits of Congress.

Process As a group, read and review the Article I, Section 8 text , on the Powers of Congress from the Interactive Constitution . Then read the Common Interpretation essay Article I, Sec. 8: Federalism and the Scope of National Power by Randy Barnett and Heather Gerken and answer the questions in the Activity Guide: Powers and Structure of Congress worksheet.

Next, your group will then be assigned an additional Interactive Constitution Common Interpretation essay on Congress. Read the assigned essay and complete the final section of the Activity Guide: Powers and Structure of Congress worksheet for your group.

As a class, read the following article:

Article I, Section 8, Text, IC Essay on Federalism and the Scope of National Power

Then read the following sections:

Text of the Constitution
Common Interpretation

When finished, work with your groups to create a class poster that shows how Congress works.

Define the structure, powers, or limits on a Post-it note and add it to the correct circle.
Add elements to the poster to support main ideas and contribute details, for example, drawings, videos, or QR codes.
Add combination jobs to the center of the diagram.

Launch Review the overall summary of how Congress works and the flow/process of its lawmaking functions.

Role of Congress: Students define the role of Congress in the national government.
Parts of Congress: Students define the different parts of Congress and their roles and authority.
Defined Powers: Students list the powers of Congress and tag it as a role of the House, the Senate, or both. Include how Congress checks the other branches.
Defined Limits: Students list the limits of Congress’s power. Also define the other branches that set those limits.

Split the class into groups and assign part(s) of Article I. Then, ask students to complete the Activity Guide: Powers and Structure of Congress worksheet for your assigned group.

Each group will contribute to a full class poster that shows how Congress works. The poster will be a large Venn diagram that will list structure, powers, and limits, and students will define the structure, power, or limit on a Post-it note and add it to the correct circle. Combination jobs will be added to the center.

Activity Synthesis Have students explain their contribution to the poster and summarize how Congress works.

7.2 Activity Guide: Powers and Structure of Congress

7.3 video activity: powers of congress.

Purpose In this activity, you will explore how Article I of the Constitution sets out the powers of Congress and also establishes limits on those powers. You will also explore how Supreme Court cases have interpreted those powers over time.

Process Watch the following video about the powers of Congress.

Then, complete the Video Reflection: Powers of Congress worksheet.

Identify any areas that are unclear to you or where you would like further explanation. Be prepared to discuss your answers in a group and to ask your teacher any remaining questions.

Launch Give students time to watch the video and complete the worksheet.

Hand out the Video Reflection: Powers of Congress worksheet and ask students to organize the decisions by the Supreme Court and the effects on congressional power over time.

Activity Synthesis Have students share their responses with one or two students and then review as a class.

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of the powers of Congress, ask students to find a current news article about Congress.

7.3 Video Reflection: Powers of Congress

7.4 activity: tests of congressional power.

Purpose In this activity, you will explore how various Supreme Court cases have interpreted the scope of congressional power in the Supreme Court’s own words. Examine these three cases to understand how the Court’s rulings shaped these powers over time.

Process Work in your group to review one of the following cases:

Primary Source: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Primary Source: Wickard v. Filburn (1942)
Primary Source: United States v. Lopez (1995)

After you review the case brief, complete the Case Brief: Tests of Congressional Power worksheet.

After you have completed the worksheet, create a podcast (3-5 minutes) with your group covering the following topics:

What is the main topic of the case?
What is the constitutional question in the case?
Tell us what happened and who are the people in the case.
How did it affect the powers of Congress back then and today?

Launch Divide class into three groups and assign a case to each group to review and answer the questions in the worksheet. Then, the group will create a podcast about their case.

Looking for some support on how to do a podcast in class? Check out this list of helpful websites to support this fun and educational learning experience for your students.

Hello Teacher Lady
New York Times: Project Audio
Reading Rockets: Creating Podcasts with Your Students

Activity Synthesis Have students share their podcast recordings with the rest of the class.

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of current court cases, ask the following question:

The Supreme Court has trimmed back a bit on the powers of Congress. Do you think that is a good thing or bad thing?

7.4 Primary Source: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

7.4 primary source: wickard v. filburn (1942), 7.4 primary source: united states v. lopez (1995), 7.4 case brief: tests of congressional power, 7.5 activity: how a bill becomes a law.

Purpose The role of a member of Congress is to craft laws that are consistent with the Constitution and that promote the common good. However, the Constitution itself lays out a demanding process—one that slows politics down, promotes deliberation and debate, and (often) requires compromise. In this activity, you will explore what the Constitution says about how Congress works and get to experience how a bill becomes a law and more importantly how to build consensus.

Process You are a U.S. senator. Work with your team to complete the Activity Guide: Building Consensus worksheet.

After you write your law, you can begin to work with other teams to persuade, re-write, and compromise to make a law that is consistent with the Constitution and works for the entire country.

Launch Break students into groups that represent regions of the United States. Each team will represent a different region (NE, SE, NW, SW, etc.) and their interests, but all groups will be given the same topic to address in a new law. Provide details on how each step of the process works from the Activity Guide. Depending on how much time you have in class, have students brainstorm national issues and pick from the list they develop. Some issues for students to consider are education, taxes, the economy, national security, health care, immigration, the environment, guns, and crime.

A key to productive consensus building is building norms and civil dialogue practices in your classroom. For more information on these classroom tools check out the Civil Dialogue Toolkit .

Activity Synthesis Have students share their thoughts on engaging in the process of writing a new law. Which parts were the most frustrating? Which parts were most satisfying? How does the system compare to the founders’ vision?

Activity Extension (optional) Now that students have a better understanding of how to create a new law, have them read the article, Political Polarization Killed the Filibuster and answer the following questions:

What are the benefits of having a filibuster? What are the drawbacks?
What would be the implications of removing the filibuster?

7.5 Activity Guide: Building Consensus

7.6 test your knowledge.

Congratulations for completing the activities in this module! Now it’s time to apply what you have learned about the basic ideas and concepts covered.

Complete the questions in the following quiz to test your knowledge.

This activity will help students determine their overall understanding of module concepts. It is recommended that questions are completed electronically so immediate feedback is provided, but a downloadable copy of the questions (with answer key) is also available.

7.6 Interactive Knowledge Check: The Legislative Branch: How Congress Works

7.6 printable knowledge check: the legislative branch: how congress works, previous module, module 6: separation of powers and federalism, next module, module 8: the presidency and executive power.

Article II of the Constitution establishes the executive branch of the national government, headed by a single President. Article II outlines the method for electing the President, the scope of the President’s powers and duties, and the process of removing one from office. The President’s primary responsibility is to carry out the executive branch’s core function—namely, enforcing the nation’s laws. From the debates over how to structure the Presidency at the Constitutional Convention to modern debates over executive orders, this module will explore the im...

Go to the Next Module

More from the National Constitution Center

Constitution 101

Explore our new 15-unit core curriculum with educational videos, primary texts, and more.

Search and browse videos, podcasts, and blog posts on constitutional topics.

Founders’ Library

Discover primary texts and historical documents that span American history and have shaped the American constitutional tradition.

Modal title

Modal body text goes here.

Share with Students

Handout A: Background Essay – All Legislative Powers Herein Granted – The Legislative Process 1789-1860

All Legislative Powers Herein Granted, The Legislative Process 1789-1860

Directions: Read the essay and answer the critical thinking questions at the end.

In the early republic, Congress was a colorful, exciting, unpredictable, and contentious branch of the United States government. The members constantly quarreled but often deliberated and compromised through persuasive oratory and rational conversation. Congress was divided by party and sectionalism, but was guided through these difficulties by legislative statesmen. The Congress continued to function as the undisputed law making body of the people of the United States. Even during some of its most tumultuous years, from 1789 until the outbreak of the Civil War in 1860, the Congress effectively governed the nation.

The first Congresses navigated the fierce debates of the early republic. One of its first acts was to create the parliamentary rules of order governing how legislation was brought to the floor, debated, and voted upon. This Congress also passed the first ten amendments to the Constitution, now collectively known as the Bill of Rights. Further, it began to tackle the pressing matters that loomed over the nation, such as the Revolutionary War debt that threatened to overwhelm the young financial system. After contentious debates, Congress passed the financial plans of Alexander Hamilton including assuming the debts of the states and creating a National Bank. Hamilton’s influence in Congress illustrated the importance of having a leader who sets the legislative agenda. Without such a leader within the Congress, in the 1790s that leadership came from the executive branch. Similarly, President Thomas Jefferson often sent bills over to Congress to be enacted, assuming leadership in the absence of strong initiative from within Congress. When Quakers introduced anti-slavery petitions, the issue of slavery further divided the members of Congress.

As Congress grappled with divisive issues, delegates began to join forces with those of similar interest and soon formed into coalitions. These coalitions rapidly formed into established political parties. These first two major parties were the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans.

The Federalists tended to favor northern business interests and a strong executive. Led primarily by Alexander Hamilton, they worked to establish the First National Bank, and preferred strong relations with England over France. The Democratic-Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson, represented the agrarian interests of the nation, opposed the centralization of power in the federal government, and preferred close ties with France to those with England.

These two parties would dominate political proceedings into the early nineteenth century. In 1800, the House of Representatives was called upon to settle its first disputed presidential election and constitutionally selected Thomas Jefferson over Aaron Burr when they were tied in the Electoral College vote. Congress outlawed the importation of slaves in 1808 and regulated commerce between Americans and Native Americans through the Indian intercourse acts. In 1812, it first exercised its power to declare war, initiating the War of 1812 with Great Britain. This divisive issue nearly split the nation along geographic lines, with New England, long a center of Federalist power, flirting with the idea of seceding, or leaving the country. The Federalist Party declined as a result of its association with the idea of secession.

In the early 1800s, three new members were elected to Congress whose voices would significantly influence the history of Congress and the United States. They were Henry Clay of Kentucky, Daniel Webster of New Hampshire and Massachusetts, and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. Each would come to represent his region on the grand stage, and their debates and compromises characterized the antebellum period.

Henry Clay, elected in 1811, was immediately named Speaker of the House. Until this point, the Speaker of the House had primarily kept proceedings orderly as debate ensued on the floor. Clay, however, expanded his influence and used the chair as political tool, appointing political allies to head important committees. This enabled the Speaker to ensure loyalty to the priorities of the majority party in Congress. Since the Speaker is elected by the other members of the House, he acts as an agent of the national interest, offsetting the local attachments of each member. This politicization of the Speaker position continues to the present day.

The addition of new states to the Union caused sectional divisions between North and South. Through his political maneuverings, Clay was able to maintain the balance of power in the Senate with the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Missouri entered the Union as a slave state and Maine as a free state. At the same time, Congress attempted to head off future disputes by declaring slavery would not expand north of latitude line 36-30. While it would turn out to be a vain hope that Congress could continue to regulate the sectional differences over slavery, the agreement demonstrated that Congress could—for a time, at least—deliberate and compromise over the pressing issues of the day, as long as there were strong leaders who could use their influence to promote such compromises.

The Second Party System began after the election of 1824, which pitted John Quincy Adams against Andrew Jackson. As in 1800, the election was decided in the House of Representatives when no candidate received an absolute majority of electoral votes. Clay used his political influence as Speaker to sway votes toward John Quincy Adams, who became president.

The two new parties to arise were the Democratic Party and the Whigs. The parties divided on issues such as the Second National Bank, protective tariffs, internal improvements, and the expansion of slavery in the territories. This period also saw the rise of disparate beliefs within the government on the nature of the Union and the animating principles of government in the Constitution. These divisions over political philosophy revealed deep rifts associated with sectionalism and ultimately led to war.

Congress reflected the nation’s sectionalism and political divides. One controversial issue was the tariff of 1828, which became known as the “Tariff of Abominations.” Westerners and Southerners charged that this tariff gave the industrial northeast an advantage at their expense. In response to the tariff, John C. Calhoun called for the nullification of the tariff by the states. Calhoun drew this theory of nullification, which posited that a state could nullify a federal law that it considered unconstitutional, from Virginia and Kentucky resolutions drafted by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in 1798 and 1799, though James Madison later came out explicitly against nullification. Robert Y. Hayne, Senator from South Carolina, later used this theory and the sectionalism that underpinned it to argue against protectionist tariffs in 1830. Senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts, rose in opposition. The exchange, collectively known as the Webster-Hayne debate, has become one of the most famous debates in the history of the Senate. The final speech, given by Webster, is still regarded as a rhetorical masterpiece. His concluding line of, “Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable” was a ringing endorsement of nationalism over sectionalism. These great exchanges in the Senate illustrated that the Congress was a place where deliberation occurred, and people turned out to witness the great speeches made on the floor, which would guide their own thinking on important questions of the day.

Tensions over tariffs continued and in 1832, South Carolina threatened to nullify a tariff it believed was both unconstitutional and in direct conflict with their interests. In response, President Jackson called upon Congress to pass the Force Bill, authorizing the federal government to use force against any state failing to comply with the laws of the national government. Simultaneously, Henry Clay worked to pass a compromise bill that would decrease the tariff gradually, giving South Carolina relief from the tariff. Jackson signed both laws, avoiding a possible violent conflict and demonstrating once again that Congress could compromise for the good of the country.

In keeping with the Framers’ concept of separation of powers, Congress jealously guarded its constitutional role. In 1842, Whigs in the House of Representatives believed President John Tyler was abusing his power to veto legislation. Previous presidents had only used the veto power when they believed a bill to be unconstitutional. Tyler began to veto bills with which he disagreed for political reasons. The House reacted by threatening to move forward with impeachment proceedings. Though Congress did not ultimately impeach the president, it did, for the first time in history, succeed in overriding one of Tyler’s vetoes.

By the 1850’s, slavery and sectionalism continued to dominate debates in Congress. Southern states constantly resisted the admission of new territories as free states, since that would have upset the balance in Congress of free and slave interests. The Wilmot Proviso, introduced in 1846 by Congressman David Wilmot of Pennsylvania, had attempted to ban slavery from the territories. Though the proposal failed, it made Southern leaders feel as though the North was conspiring against them. In 1850, when Congress had to deal with the territories it had acquired during the Mexican-American war, it was again able to achieve a major compromise to preserve the balance between slave and free states. Its strengthening of the Fugitive Slave Act, however, caused much consternation in the north.

In 1852, the Whig Party, unable to come to a consensus on the issue of slavery, dissolved. This ushered in the Third Party System. The most successful party to emerge from the ashes was the Republican Party. Much of its strength came from its staunch opposition to slavery.

Congress again fiercely debated the issue of slavery in 1854, resulting in the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This law effectively repealed the compromise of 1820 by allowing Kansas and Nebraska, both north of the 36-30 compromise line, to decide by popular sovereignty whether they would be slave or free. Immediately, settlers on both sides of the slavery controversy rushed into Kansas. Violent clashes quickly followed and represented a preview of the coming war. In the lead-up to the 1860 presidential race, Southern states threatened to secede from the Union if the Republican, Abraham Lincoln, was elected. Lincoln won the election and in December of 1860, South Carolina passed an ordinance of secession. In the next six months, ten more states declared their secession, the South was in rebellion, and the Civil War soon began.

Only 71 years had passed from the first congress to the thirty-sixth. The country had experienced great change, but the Congress effectively ruled over a nation divided by sectional and partisan differences. Congress’s strong debates and successful compromises, steered by skilled statesmen, had proven that deliberative republican government under the Constitution was possible.

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

What is the role of Congress in the government of the United States?
What do you think were the greatest challenges facing legislators in the early republic before the Civil War?
Why do you think political parties arose in the United States?
Do you think the heated debates that played out in the Congress of the early republic were beneficial or problematic for the nation?
Have you ever had to make a consensus decision amongst a group of people? What are some reasons coming to this conclusion can be difficult?

Legislative Process: Law in California Essay

For a bill to become law in California, it undergoes several steps reflected in two ways. In the state’s legislative process, bills can originate either from Senate or the Assembly (“The Essential Guide” 3). The process starts when an Assembly member or a Senator authors a bill, and Assembly Desk or Senate assigns a number to a correct bill form (“The Essential Guide” 4). After the bill is read for the first time, it is sent to the Office of State Publishing to be printed and is then transmitted to a committee to be reviewed (“The Essential Guide” 4-5). The bill undergoes several readings, and once it is approved by its house of origin and the second house, it is sent to the Governor (“The Essential Guide” 6). If the Governor authorizes it, the bill is transmitted to the Secretary of State and is turned into law (“The Essential Guide” 6). Overall, before a bill becomes law, it has to go through multiple important steps.

Furthermore, it is important to consider initiatives and referendums in the legislative process. When it comes to the initiative, one of the problems revolves around the proponents’ inability to make amendments during the initiative process (Romero and Puza 8). However, in California, citizens can propose and enact laws and not have to go through the legislature (Romero and Puza 5). With that being said, referendum affects the law-making process by allowing people to rescind laws that have already been passed by the legislature (Romero and Puza 2). Both referendum and the initiative were first introduced in California by Proposition 7, enacting the initiative process to the state’s citizens (Romero and Puza 3). The initiative and referendum are integral components of the law and can affect the legislative process.

Term limits can cause active debates in public, discussing positive and negative aspects. On the one hand, term limits are crucial for the protection of democracy, as it is questionable whether the same person should hold power for a long period (Ginsburg 6). On the other hand, research suggests that the relationship between democracy and term limits is more positive since it prevents a person from having too much power (Ginsburg 12). Personally, I do not fully support term limits because I believe that diversity is important in any area. However, I also think that each person and situation are unique, but the authorities should remain in power as long as they benefit the nation.

The comparison between US Congress and California’s legislature can be done by comparing the roles of the US President and California Governor in the legislative process. First, they can propose, sign, and veto legislation and budgets, as well as make appointments to administrative agencies and departments (Micheli). However, the Governor has more power to address specific policy issues (Micheli). Second, as the two have different legislative bodies, they participate in the operations of separate departments. For instance, in the legislature’s review of the budget, the Governor addresses the Department of Finance, and the President engages with the Office of Management and Budget (Micheli). The President and the Governor’s duties reflect the similarities and differences between Congress and California’s structures.

As the initiative process can affect legislature, it has both positive and negative characteristics. At first, the initiative process was meant to promote direct democracy by giving citizens the chance to promote and enact laws without going through the legislature (Romero and Puza 2). However, in California, recently, people suggested reformation of the process due to lack of transparency, poor legislative involvement, and public disclosure (Romero and Puza 4). Despite that, since the establishment of the initiative process in California only, citizens have been able to make significant changes, including resolving various social issues like discrimination and concerns about taxes (Romero and Puza 3). While the initiative process has some constraints, it can also provide people with opportunities to make life better.

Works Cited

Ginsburg, Tom. “The Machinery of International Law and Democratic Backsliding: The Problem of Term Limits.” The Law & Ethics of Human Rights , vol. 14, no. 1, 2020, pp. 1-18.

Micheli, Chris. “Comparing California’s Governor and the US President.” Capimpact , Web.

Romero, Mindy, and Jennifer Puza. “The Ballot Initiative Transparency Act: Examining its Impact on Legislative Compromise in California.” California Journal of Politics and Policy , vol. 10, no. 1, 2018, 1-11.

The Essential Guide to California Legislation . Web.

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, February 18). Legislative Process: Law in California. https://ivypanda.com/essays/legislative-process-law-in-california/

"Legislative Process: Law in California." IvyPanda , 18 Feb. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/legislative-process-law-in-california/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Legislative Process: Law in California'. 18 February.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Legislative Process: Law in California." February 18, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/legislative-process-law-in-california/.

1. IvyPanda . "Legislative Process: Law in California." February 18, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/legislative-process-law-in-california/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Legislative Process: Law in California." February 18, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/legislative-process-law-in-california/.

Southern Sudan Referendum
History of the Australian Referendum During the 1967
California Cash Bail Ballot Proposition
Are Propositions, Recalls, and Referendums Democratic?
The Constitution of the French Fifth Republic
Direct Democracy in Switzerland and Slovak Republic
Legislative Process in Changing a Bill
Proposition 19 in California
Bullying on the Rise: Should Federal Government Enact Federal-Bullying Laws?
Constitutional Model for Australia as a Republic
Prison Reform in the US: Background Information
ShotSpotter: New Technology Adoption in Policing
Inequality in Law Enforcement and the Need for Diversity
Patterson vs. McLean Credit Union Case Study
Alonzo vs. Chase Manhattan Bank, NA Case Study

Legislative Process Essays

The legislative process in england and wales, popular essay topics.

American Dream
Artificial Intelligence
Black Lives Matter
Bullying Essay
Career Goals Essay
Causes of the Civil War
Child Abusing
Civil Rights Movement
Community Service
Cultural Identity
Cyber Bullying
Death Penalty
Depression Essay
Domestic Violence
Freedom of Speech
Global Warming
Gun Control
Human Trafficking
I Believe Essay
Immigration
Importance of Education
Israel and Palestine Conflict
Leadership Essay
Legalizing Marijuanas
Mental Health
National Honor Society
Police Brutality
Pollution Essay
Racism Essay
Romeo and Juliet
Same Sex Marriages
Social Media
The Great Gatsby
The Yellow Wallpaper
Time Management
To Kill a Mockingbird
Violent Video Games
What Makes You Unique
Why I Want to Be a Nurse
Send us an e-mail

The Legislative Process

Before a law becomes a law, it is known as a bill. When passed by Parliament into law, it is known as an Act.

The process of a bill becoming an Act of Parliament is as follows:

Initial stage: ‘Draft Bills’ are issued for consultation before being formally introduced to Parliament. This allows proposed changes and amendments to be made before the Bill’s formal introduction. Almost all of these are created by the Government. Most Draft Bills are examined either by select committees in the Commons or Lords or by a joint committee of both Houses. The consultation process on Draft Bills may involve the government issuing a paper for public consideration, for example White Papers (ideas for a specific policy) and Green Papers (more general ideas for a future policy).

First reading: the bill is introduced (read out) to Parliament, with no debate or voting.

Second reading: a full debate takes place considering the details of the bill, which can be defeated at this stage.

Committee stage: the bill in considered in detail by a public bill committee (around 18 MPs). Some bills may be considered by the whole chamber (Committee of the Whole House). Amendments can be made at this stage. If the bill only impacts England, the committee will be made up of English-based MPs.

Report stage: the committee reports its findings, and any amendments, to the Commons, which can amend or reverse any changes.

Third reading: this is another full debate of the bill, but no amendments can be made. Usually bills will be passed at this stage.

The second chamber: once passed by the Commons, the same process takes place in the House of Lords. Sometimes bills may start in the Lords before going through the Commons.

Royal Assent: once passed by both chambers, the bill is given to the monarch to grant Royal Assent. Once this happens, the bill becomes law.

The majority of bills are proposed by the government and are known as ‘Public Bills’ and are usually successful at being passed into law. Another type of bill is a Private Members’ Bill. These are introduced by MPs or Lords who are not government ministers. A minority of Private Members’ Bills become law but, by creating publicity around an issue, they may affect legislation indirectly. Like other Public Bills, Private Members’ Bills can be introduced in either House and must go through the same set stages. However, as less time is allocated to these Bills, it is less likely that they will proceed through all the stages.

How the Commons and Lords interact during the passing of laws: Lords are able to propose amendments for consideration by the Commons. The Commons can adapt these amendments, or reject them (as in the Article 50 bill example). The Lords can then argue against the rejection- this may result in a process known as ‘ping-pong’, where a bill goes back and forth between the two chambers. The Lords will generally accept the bill eventually but can delay it by up to a year. If there is a division between the two, the Commons takes priority, as it is democratically legitimate. Exceptions are bills outlined in a government’s manifesto (the Salisbury convention) and money bills, which will not generally be delayed by the Lords. An exception to this was when the Lords voted to delay proposed government cuts to tax credits in 2015 , which Chancellor George Osborne suggested ‘raised constitutional issues’. If there is a coalition, the Salisbury convention may be weakened, as manifesto commitments may be amended or abandoned during the formation of a coalition.

Benefits You Get from Our Essay Writer Service.

Typically, our authors write essays, but they can do much more than essays. We also offer admissions help. If you are preparing to apply for college, you can get an admission essay, application letter, cover letter, CV, resume, or personal statement from us. Since we know what the admissions committee wants to see in all these papers, we are able to provide you with a flawless paper for your admission.

You can also get help with business writing from our essay writer online. Turn to us if you need a business plan, business proposal, presentation, press release, sales letter, or any other kind of writing piece for your business, and we will tailor such a paper to your requirements.

If you say, "Do not write an essay for me, just proofread and edit it," we can help, as well. Just provide us with your piece of writing and indicate what exactly you need. We will check your paper and bring it to perfection.

Our writers always follow the customers' requirements very carefully

Our process

Share full article

Supported by

Guest Essay

Let People Sell Their Kidneys. It Will Save Lives.

An illustration of a shirtless man dangling his feet in a kidney-shaped pool.

By Dylan Walsh

Mr. Walsh is a freelance journalist who focuses on science and the criminal justice system.

I owe the past 25 years of my life to my father, who dozed under general anesthesia as a surgeon cut eight inches from stomach to spine, removed one of his kidneys, placed it on ice and sent it to a nearby operating room, where it was fitted into my abdomen. My brother had a kidney transplant the same week, six days before I did. His new kidney came from a man we never knew who had died in a car accident in the mountains.

We were teenagers, afflicted with a congenital kidney disease. But we were lucky.

There are 100,000 people in the United States waiting for a kidney. More than half a million are on dialysis, which from my experience I know to be more of a means of survival than a form of living. About 4,000 people die each year while waiting for a kidney. Another 4,000 become too sick to undergo surgery — a gentler way of saying that they, too, die. The National Kidney Foundation estimates that without more investment in preventing diabetes and other ailments, more than one million people will be suffering from kidney failure by 2030, up from over 800,000 now .

These numbers illuminate a story of largely preventable suffering. Hundreds of millions of healthy people walk the streets quietly carrying two kidneys. They need only one. The head-scratcher is how to get kidneys from the people who have one to spare into the people who need one. Getting them from genetically modified pigs , as was recently found possible, won’t be a widespread solution for a very long time.

There’s a simpler and long overdue answer: Pay people for their kidneys.

Creating a market for kidneys is not a new concept, but it’s historically been met with disgust: Sell what? To be fair, some of the ways to structure such a market would be irresponsible, coercive and deserving of that disgust.

But others are more thoughtful and prudent. One approach is to make the federal government the sole purchaser of kidneys. Donor and recipient would never meet. Compensation would be fixed, haggling impossible. After the kidney is acquired, the transplant process would unfold in the typical manner.

This idea fits nicely within today’s health economics. Through a quirk of a 50-year-old law , Medicare is the primary insurer for anyone of any age in need of dialysis or a transplant. This has extended the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. It has also been costly, with end-stage renal disease patients accounting for about 7 percent of Medicare’s spending, despite constituting 1 percent of its users. Because transplants are ultimately cheaper than dialysis, if Medicare started paying people to donate kidneys, fewer people would need to survive on dialysis, and Medicare would need less taxpayer money to cover it.

Federal law presents the first and most significant hurdle to a market for kidneys. The 1984 National Organ Transplant Act, NOTA for short, makes it unlawful “to knowingly acquire, receive or otherwise transfer any human organ for valuable consideration for use in human transplantation.” Though markets exist for human tissue, bone, amniotic stem cells and blood plasma and for the use of a woman’s womb and her eggs, organs cannot legally be bought and sold.

For several decades, efforts to persuade people to become kidney donors haven’t increased the number of volunteers. There were roughly 6,000 living kidney donors in 2000; there were roughly 6,000 in 2023. The only way to get more donors is to change the law.

One organization, the Coalition to Modify NOTA, hopes to legalize compensation and then pass a federal law it has titled the End Kidney Deaths Act . As it’s written, it would award living donors $50,000 over five years — $10,000 per year — through refundable tax credits. The coalition says it has held meetings with nearly 100 legislators from both parties and has been encouraged by the level of support for its idea (though the bill still has not been brought to the floor of Congress).

Other proposals meant to solve kidney donation shortages abound. Several bills have recently been introduced to Congress, including one that would prohibit life and disability insurance companies from denying coverage to or increasing premiums for donors, and another that would reimburse donors for expenses they incur during donation. Two Colorado state representatives, one Democratic and one Republican, have drafted their own proposal for a statewide tax credit of up to $40,000 for organ donors; a representative in New Hampshire is trying to create an open market for organs in his state.

Some people who are opposed to the idea of selling organs argue that we should instead improve the process of capturing organs from people who have died. But even a flawlessly functioning system that recovered and transplanted 100 percent of available organs would not meet demand. And deceased-donor kidneys don’t last as long as those from living donors.

One of the most consistent and vociferous objections to a kidney market centers on the fear of coercion or exploitation: If you pay people to do something, particularly if you pay them a lot, then you will drive those who are most desperate and socially precarious to take steps they later will regret.

Ned Brooks, a co-founder of the Coalition to Modify NOTA, told me there are ways to mitigate “the concern that someone is going to donate a kidney because they have a gambling debt or they are losing their house to foreclosure or you name it.” His organization’s proposal, for example, would split the $50,000 payment into installments arriving only around tax season to weaken donation as a get-rich-quick scheme. Even now, donation requires a weeks- to monthslong process of physical and psychological evaluation .

Compensating donors could also go a long way to reducing current inequities. Black patients are more than three times as likely to develop kidney failure as white patients. And under today’s system, white patients are about four times as likely as Black patients (and approximately two times as likely as Asian and Hispanic patients) to receive a living kidney donation within two years of needing one . While there are many reasons for this imbalance, one critical factor is that white people generally possess social networks saturated with volunteers who are able to make the kinds of accommodations needed for major surgery. Compensation would broaden the pool of available kidneys for those who lack these social networks.

Alongside the flurry of political activity surrounding organ donation, a shift in attitudes among the public seems to be underway, making this moment particularly ripe for legislative change. A 2019 study found that roughly 60 percent of Americans would favor compensation through a public agency — and this number, depending on the form of compensation, would increase to 70 percent to 80 percent if such a system eliminated kidney shortages. This is a rare nonpartisan idea at a highly polarized moment and could save the dozen people who die every day waiting for a kidney.

My kidney has been ticking along since August 1998, far longer than the average transplantation. It will give out sometime, maybe before my children graduate from high school. It will almost certainly fail before any children they may have are born. Still, I’ve lived 25 years I would not have had otherwise. I hope for a world in which others — many others — are given such an exquisite gift.

Dylan Walsh is a freelance journalist in Chicago who focuses on science and the criminal justice system.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

IMAGES

How the Legislative Process Works
Process essay how bills become a law
PPT
PPT
Effectiveness of Current Legislative Process Essay-2
Legislative Procedure In Parliament

VIDEO

Level 3- Process Essay
10 Lines on The Parliament of india/ Essay on The Parliament of India in english/ Parliament House
Structure of Parliament Part II : LOK SABHA
LAMP Fellowship 2024-25
Legislative Practices and Procedures || BA Hons political science 4th semester (part-1)
Understanding the Legislative Process (with captions)

COMMENTS

Legislative Process Essays (Examples)
Legislative Process. Federal mandates are orders from a central government that require compliance by state and local governments and individuals. Many times, mandates are signed into law "without the federal funds to support their execution" (Zaretsky 5). Additionally, mandates can be divided into different categories and require compliance by ...
The Legislative Process
Figure 1. The process by which a bill becomes law is long and complicated, but it is designed to ensure that in the end all parties are satisfied with the bill's provisions. LINK TO LEARNING. For one look at the classic legislative process, visit YouTube to view "I'm Just a Bill" from the ABC Schoolhouse Rock! series.
How a Bill Becomes a Law: Demystifying the Legislative Process: [Essay
In this essay, we will explore the step-by-step journey of a bill as it navigates through the complex legislative landscape, aiming to shed light on the intricacies of the lawmaking process. ... The legislative process, encompassing multiple stages and the collective efforts of lawmakers, committees, experts, and citizens, is a vital component ...
The Legislative Process in America
Mikva, Abner J. Legislative Process. Boston: Little, Brown, 1995. This essay, "The Legislative Process in America" is published exclusively on IvyPanda's free essay examples database. You can use it for research and reference purposes to write your own paper. However, you must cite it accordingly .
Stages in the Legislative Process
The Legislative Process, which will be focused on throughout this essay is a set of steps that all primary legislature will need to got through before it can be signed by parliament and passed into law. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is an example of a piece of legislation which will have passed through this process.
11.5 The Legislative Process
Describe the modern legislative processes that alter the classic process in some way A dry description of the function of congressional leadership and the many committees and subcommittees in Congress may suggest that the drafting and amending of legislation is a finely tuned process that has become ever more refined over the course of the last ...
Module 7: The Legislative Branch: How Congress Works
Process As a group, read and review the Article I, Section 8 text, on the Powers of Congress from the Interactive Constitution. Then read the Common Interpretation essay Article I, Sec. 8: Federalism and the Scope of National Power by Randy Barnett and Heather Gerken and answer the questions in the Activity Guide: Powers and Structure of ...
Legislative Process Essay
1. An idea must first come from the public. Ideas are …show more content…. 9. Debate: When a bill reaches the floor of the chamber, there are rules and procedures governing the debate on legislation. Amendments may be added to the bill at this time. Debates could last hours or weeks, but usually not in the house due to the rules set in ...
How Our Laws Are Made
How Our Laws Are Made. This is a web-friendly presentation of the PDF "How Our Laws Are Made" (House Document 110-49); revised and updated by John V. Sullivan, Parliamentarian, United States House of Representatives, July 2007.. I. INTRODUCTION. This online resource provides a basic outline of the numerous steps of our federal law-making process from the source of an idea for a legislative ...
Learn About the Legislative Process
The Federalist Papers - Full Text of The Federalist, commonly referred to as the Federalist Papers, a series of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison between October 1787 and May 1788. How Our Laws Are Made - Essay to aid understanding of the legislative process. (67 pages, web-friendly and PDF versions)
Legislative Process in Changing a Bill
Bill is the draft of a proposed legislation submitted to Congress for consideration and approval ("bill definition - legal" par. 1). In the United States with a federal form of government, there is a federal (national) government and state (local) government. Both the federal government and the local governments have a legislature or ...
United States Constitution: The Legislative Process
The legislative process is divided into three clauses which continue with the separation of powers of the three branches. They explain the lawmaking process as, mainly, starting at the House of Representatives moving to the Senate and lastly, ending at the President's desk for final say. ... Get inspiration for your writing task, explore ...
Handout A: Background Essay
All Legislative Powers Herein Granted, The Legislative Process 1789-1860. Directions: Read the essay and answer the critical thinking questions at the end. In the early republic, Congress was a colorful, exciting, unpredictable, and contentious branch of the United States government.
Federal Legislation Process Essay
Texas Legislative Process Essay 556 Words | 3 Pages. If a bill is denied at any point in the process it is then throw away and forgotten. The process begins with the introduction of the bill to either the house or the senate. To introduce a bill in the House of Representatives, a state representative must first submit the required number of
Legislative Process: Law in California
Legislative Process: Law in California Essay. For a bill to become law in California, it undergoes several steps reflected in two ways. In the state's legislative process, bills can originate either from Senate or the Assembly ("The Essential Guide" 3). The process starts when an Assembly member or a Senator authors a bill, and Assembly ...
PDF AP United States Government and Politics
"There is a debate over the use of the Senate filibuster in the legislative process." ... form of an argumentative essay, demonstrating each of the skills mentioned above. Sample: 4A Score: 6 Claim/Thesis: 1 Evidence: 3 Reasoning: 1 Alternative Perspectives: 1 : A. The response earned 1 point for a thesis in part A by stating, "The ...
Legislative Veto
Jump to essay-7 Id. Jump to essay-8 Id. at 955-56. Jump to essay-9 Shortly after deciding Chadha, the Court removed any doubts on this score with summary affirmance of an appeals court's invalidation of a two-House veto in Consumers Union v. FTC, 691 F.2d 575 (D.C. Cir. 1982), aff'd sub nom. Process Gas Consumers
Legislative Process Essay Examples
The Legislative Process in England and Wales. Introduction The legislative process is frequently criticized in England and Wales for being sluggish, antiquated, and undemocratic. This essay aims to analyze and evaluate this statement by examining the key processes and procedures involved in lawmaking, using pertinent statutes and case law as ...
The Legislative Process
The Legislative Process. Before a law becomes a law, it is known as a bill. When passed by Parliament into law, it is known as an Act. The process of a bill becoming an Act of Parliament is as follows: Initial stage: 'Draft Bills' are issued for consultation before being formally introduced to Parliament.
Efficient Public Participation in The Local Law-making Process
This essay formulated an effective mechanism of public participation by juxtaposing steps in the local legislative process with the criteria of efficiency. This discussion is trying to encompass ...
Legislative Procedure of Acts of Parliament
This fact is a mere formality in the process because although the queen is the head of legislative process in the United Kingdom, she does not create laws. Her role is confined to the approval whatever bills the Parliament has created in order to become a Parliament Act. It should be noted the importance of the Parliaments Acts of 1911 and 1949.
The Issue Of The Legislative Process
992 Words 4 Pages. Legislative Process. The legislative process is a series of steps taken to help change bills into laws that govern our society. The process is in place so that society can have a say in which laws are passed. This is a look at the way this process works and can be used to develop laws that support the health care system.
Example Process Essay
Legislative Process Essay. Anyone may draft a bill, which means an ordinary citizen can actually write a bill. Only members of Congress, however, can introduce legislation, and any of the congresspersons become sponsors. A bill can have anywhere from one sponsor to an entire party support. There are four general types of legislation; bills ...
Legislative Process Essay
At Essayswriting, it all depends on the timeline you put in it. Professional authors can write an essay in 3 hours, if there is a certain volume, but it must be borne in mind that with such a service the price will be the highest. The cheapest estimate is the work that needs to be done in 14 days. Then 275 words will cost you $ 10, while 3 ...
Opinion
One approach is to make the federal government the sole purchaser of kidneys. Donor and recipient would never meet. Compensation would be fixed, haggling impossible. After the kidney is acquired ...

The Legislative Process

THE CLASSIC LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

LINK TO LEARNING

MODERN LEGISLATION IS DIFFERENT

CHAPTER REVIEW

Share This Book

How a Bill Becomes a Law: Demystifying The Legislative Process

Table of contents

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Amendment

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

11.5 The Legislative Process

THE CLASSIC LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

The Noble History of the Filibuster?

Link to Learning

MODERN LEGISLATION IS DIFFERENT

Explore the Constitution

Dive Deeper

Start your constitutional learning journey

Media Library

America’s Town Hall

Constitution 101 Curriculum

Explore our new 15-unit high school curriculum.

New exhibit

Learning Objectives

7.1 Activity: How does Congress Work?

7.1 Visual Info Brief: Political Cartoon

7.2 Activity Guide: Powers and Structure of Congress

7.3 Video Reflection: Powers of Congress

7.4 Primary Source: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

7.5 Activity Guide: Building Consensus

7.6 Interactive Knowledge Check: The Legislative Branch: How Congress Works

More from the National Constitution Center

Constitution 101

Founders’ Library

Modal title

Share with Students

Handout A: Background Essay – All Legislative Powers Herein Granted – The Legislative Process 1789-1860

All Legislative Powers Herein Granted, The Legislative Process 1789-1860

CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

Legislative Process: Law in California Essay

Works Cited

Legislative Process Essays

The Legislative Process

Benefits You Get from Our Essay Writer Service.

Let People Sell Their Kidneys. It Will Save Lives.

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS