Introduction
The Congress of the United States represents the legislative branch of the country’s government. It is bicameral and consists of the House of Representatives, the lower body, and Senate, the upper one. Both bodies are involved in the process of law-making – in order to become law, a bill accepted by a committee needs to be passed by both of them to be finally signed by the president. At the same time, regardless of houses’ similar responsibilities, there are considerable differences in some of the functions and procedures. In this paper, these differences are examined on the basis of House and Senate written by Ross K. Baker and the current situation reflected in congressmen’s interviews and reliable literature.
Differences Between the House and Senate by Ross K. Baker
As the Congress of the United States represents the legislative branch of the country’s government, it is obvious that both of its bodies are involved in the process of law-making. According to Baker, “in terms of the legislative process that begins with the introduction of bills and culminates in their enactment, the roles of House and Senate committees are identical” (57). In other words, both Senate and House are responsible for writing legislation on the basis of their members’ expertise in particular fields and areas, holding hearings, advocating bills’ passage, and overseeing the operations of those bills that become laws.
Nevertheless, while the single legislature is divided into two parts, it is obvious that they cannot be absolutely similar even if the purposes of their existence align with each other. On the basis of congressmen’s interviews, Baker tries to identify the main source of two bodies’ differences, and according to the majority of senators who previously served as representatives, this source is houses’ sizes (47). John C. Culver, the former senator and representative, states, “size really explains so much else about those institutions in terms of their organization, in terms of their rules, in terms of accessibility and participation of the members, the committees, the workloads and so forth” (Baker 50). Thus, in the case of Congress’s houses, their sizes determine the differences in ruling, members’ degree of specialization, and relationships between them.
The House of Representatives is the lower body of Congress that consists of 435 members being the largest parliamentary body across the globe. According to Hugh D. Scott, the former senator and representative who spent sixteen and seventeen years in the House and Senate, respectively, “The House is a massive creature. A huge overgrown elephant, but rarely turning into a rogue elephant. It’s more lethargic, maybe more like a hippopotamus – a sort of hulking, sulking creature, barely showing its snout and only then when required for reasons of sustenance or curiosity” (Baker 50). Being directly elected by citizens, the members of the House aim to represent their interests, however, every representative pays closer attention to a small segment of a state’s population by whom he was elected showing no mercy to others (Baker 29). That is why unanimity related to the passage of bills is highly essential in the House to ensure the agreement of the majority of members concerning innovations. Nevertheless, due to a large number of people with autonomous interests, substantial changes are challenging, and the House may be regarded as a conservative body.
In addition, the size of the House impacts its rules, members’ specialization, and inner relationships as well. Thus, a considerable number of former representatives admit that they did not even know all colleagues (Baker 56). In addition, in contrast with Senate, due to the number of members, the time of debates in the House is substantially limited. In general, it is possible to say that on the one hand, the individualities of representatives are less valuable. On the other hand, they develop expertise in particular areas becoming considerable specialists in their committees.
In turn, Senate is an upper body of Congress, and its size impacts not only its characteristics but functions and opportunities as well. First of all, according to Hugh D. Scott, Senate may be linked to “a group of people of various species like antelope or deer who leap with some grace from subject to subject, issue to issue” (Baker 50). There are only 100 senators who are responsible for the representation of a broader population’s interests – thus, Senate may be regarded as more liberal in comparison with the House. In addition, the size of Senate promotes close collaboration of its members embracing the individuality of every of them. Thus, according to John Culver, the former House member, “if you just want to be unpleasant and have a temper tantrum and if you just want to be excessively self-obsessed, you can have a field day in the Senate” (Baker 66). In other words, regardless of senators’ mood and individual characteristics, their opinions, experience, and contribution to legislation are respected.
One more significant difference between the House and Senate within the framework of their sizes is based on the inclusion of their members in committees. For representatives who traditionally have one major committee assignment, their work implies an opportunity to demonstrate their competence impacting the process of decision-making (Baker 30). In turn, for senators, committees are less important, however, due to the size of Senate, every senator is required to serve in several committees. At the same time, they are included not only in committees that legally authorize agencies and programs but also in committees that provide money for operations. In this case, senators are more influential in decisions concerning the functioning of agencies and the amount of money they can receive.
Contemporary Differences Between the House and Senate
In the present day, the majority of differences between the House and Senate reflected in Baker’s book remain unchanged. There are 435 representatives in the House, and for every state, the number of representatives is determined by total population (Povey par. 5). There are 100 senators, and there are always two senators from every state. The size of the House makes its functioning more controlled and formal – thus, legislation should be initially considered by committee before the House, and debates time are limited. Having no time for every representative, the House elects a Speaker responsible for the introduction of bills and scheduling of debates (Povey par. 11). In turn, Senate has more liberal rules, extended time for debates, and the cooperation of both minority and majority leaders for the solution of essential problems and the organization of working processes.
In addition, in the present day, congressmen admit differences derived from bodies’ sizes that determine the distribution of power, as well. While both bodies have constitutional authority to establish their own rules of functioning, “House rules and practices allow a numerical majority to process legislation relatively quickly” while Senate favors deliberation, issues’ thorough examinations, and members’ procedural leverage (Overview of the Legislative Process par. 3). Thus, according to the senator Tim Scott, the House may be compared with a football match in which the coach, the captain, and the quarterback are going to make most of the decisions while in Senate, everyone is running in individual races (Tgrane). At the same time, regardless of the involvement in the same procedure of law-making, both bodies have unique functions. Thus, Senate has unique power in comparison with the House – it approves presidential nominations and treaties with other countries (Povey par. 14). In turn, the House is responsible for spending and taxes being more influential in relation to the national purse.
Conclusion
The House of Representatives and Senate are the essential bodies of Congress responsible for law-making. At the same time, they have particular differences in functions and procedures mainly determined by their sizes. Thus, due to a large number of members, the House is more structural and conservative. At the same time, Senate is more liberal and its performance is based on relationships between its members rather than their unanimity. In addition, while House members may be characterized by expertise in particular fields and active involvement in the work of committees, senators are more influential simply by the representation in more committees in comparison with representatives. From a personal perspective, the House aims to represent people’s interests, however, the number and autonomy of its members create barriers for the expression of opinions. In addition, every state is represented differently in accordance with its population. At the same time, Senate represents national interests and value logical approach and in-depth investigation of issues. At the same time, Senate’s decision may be based on personal relationships between each other rather that genuine problems that require efficient response.
Works Cited
Baker, Ross K. House and Senate. W.W. Norton, 1989.
“Overview of the Legislative Process.” Congress. Web.
Povey, Oliver. “What’s the Difference Between the Senate and the House of Representatives?” As. Web.
Tgrane. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC) on the Differences Between the House and the Senate. C-Span, 2018.