As the Senate prepares to take up the first major gun control debate since last December's shooting massacre in Connecticut, a Sunlight Foundation analysis of the political pressures on 26 key senators paints a pessimistic picture for passage. Absent a major pressure campaign to push senators to support gun control legislation, the political calculus points against the Senate passing any reform.
The infographic below details the various pressures senators face on a gun control vote. We've collapsed the factors into a single Gun Reform Index, where 10 is most likely to support gun reform and 0 is least likely. The index ranks each senator relative to other key senators within their own party. More details and explanation follow the graphic.
(graphic by Amy Cesal and Alexander Furnas)
Senate Rules Changes: Sunlight’s Proposals for the 113th Congress
The United States Senate is a creature of its rules. Through its standing rules, laws and resolutions, precedents, and the consent of its members, the upper chamber carefully controls how legislation can be promulgated and debate can take place. Unlike the House of Representatives, which must vote on its rules every Congress, the Senate rarely reconsiders its standing rules in their entirety. An opportunity may arise, however, with the current debate over changing how the filibuster works. Here are Sunlight's major recommendations for updating the Senate's rules.
Continue readingHow Congress Cut its Policy Expertise
In the past 20 years, Congress has effectively allowed its legislative support branches to wither and stripped away its ability to process information. It has cut back its ability to review, contextualize, and evaluate information in a way that creates informed policy. Lorelei Kelly, leader of the Smart Congress pilot project at the New America Foundation, looks into this trend in a new paper: "Congress' Wicked Problem." It explores topics we have discussed in a series of posts on the House and Senate. She explains how much of the cutting to the policymaking infrastructure of Congress came in the mid-1990s. That was also the era of cutting the shared staff who had historically built knowledge and expertise around certain topics. Some members of Congress used these shared staff to their advantage, giving relatives and friends plum positions with little real work, but for the most part shared staff were a valuable asset. A rule change in 1995 cut pooled funding for staff and essentially eviscerated the caucus system. Kelly does a fantastic job of explaining in detail what impacts that cut had, showing how the knowledge gap was filled with a new top-down system of information handed out by party leaders. The paper makes an important distinction between information and knowledge in Congress. While lawmakers might receive plenty of information from lobbyists and interest groups, they have a weakened ability to seek other views and context for the flood of spin coming from K Street. Another key change Kelly notes is the elimination of the Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) in 1995. Congress created the nonpartisan agency in 1972 to look at the impacts of technology policy decisions. After OTA was cut, there were calls for lobbyists to fill the gap. Sunlight and others called for restoring funding to OTA or some other nonpartisan source of expertise. We are glad to see someone exposing how Congress has weakened its ability to understand complex policy decisions, and we hope it will spark more discussion of what can be done to stop the cutting of knowledge.
Continue readingWhen It Comes to Pay, All Feds Aren’t Created Equal
By Daniel Schuman and Alisha Green
It comes as little surprise to hill watchers that House staff are underpaid compared to their Senate equivalents, let alone executive branch and private sector staff, but we decided to dig a bit deeper. Just in time for the holidays (and those non-existent public sector bonuses) here's a comparison of key positions in the House, Senate, and executive branch. We admit that the data is a bit old, like the Ghost of the War on Christmas Past, but it's the best we can do with what’s available.
The shaded areas in the bars for the executive branch staff show a range of potential pay.
Snap Decision: DeMint leaves Senate for Heritage
How sudden was Sen. Jim DeMint's surprise announcement Thursday that he'll be leaving his post to head the conservative Heritage Foundation? The Senate Office of Public Records confirms receiving a disclosure form that lawmakers and top staffers have to make when they are negotiating with a potential employer from the South Carolina Republican on the same day DeMint's new job was announced. Ethics rules require the forms to be filed when salary discussions are underway.
Update Dec. 6, 2012, 5:15 p.m.: "I just found out yesterday," said Wesley Denton, press secetary for DeMint. "I know ...
Continue readingKeeping Congress Competent: The Senate’s Brain Drain
By Daniel Schuman and Alisha Green One of the foundations of democracy is a legislature that functions well. The ability to assess whether a legislature is functioning properly depends on the public's ability to see what it is doing. Observing what the U.S. Senate is doing, unfortunately, is a difficult task, and one that is unnecessarily hard. Have special interests become increasingly powerful in the Senate because the upper chamber has diminished its capacity to legislate? To evaluate this question, we gathered data about congressional staff numbers, pay, and retention from a number of difficult-to-access (and often non-public) sources. While the U.S. Senate is often seen as the wiser and more seasoned counterpart to the House, we believe it is suffering from the same affliction that has robbed the lower chamber of some of its ability to engage in reasoned decision making, placing it at the mercy of special interests. Over the past thirty years, the Senate weakened its institutional knowledge base and diminished its capacity to understand current events through a dramatic reduction of one of its most valuable resources: experienced staff.
Continue readingSenate scorecard: Who won, and whom they owe
 |
 |
As with the presidential race, conservative outside groups who dropped the most money on heated Senate contests didn't get a great return on their investments. But that doesn't mean the new or returning senators that emerged victorious weren't also backed by big money. These groups, dominated by labor, will be asking for something in return for their support.
Virginia: Sen.-elect Tim Kaine
This race drew the attention of the biggest players in the outside spending game, who dropped more than $50 million in ...
Continue readingOutside Money in the Senate: One map, four graphs and seven takeaways
Outside money continues to pour in at a record pace this election cycle, and beyond the presidential race, the biggest general election spending totals are all in Senate races: $29.7 million in Virginia; $24.6 million in Ohio; $22.2 million in Wisconsin; $18.5 million in Nevada; $16.3 million in Montana. And counting. All told, outside groups have dropped $189.4 million into Senate races as of October 23.
And no wonder: the Senate remains very much up for grabs, and the parties are very close in their levels of outside spending – unlike both the presidential and House races, where Republicans have the outside spending edge. In the Senate outside money chase, Republicans have a very narrow lead, $97.3 million to $92.1 million.
Of particular interest is that Republicans are relying much more on non-party organizations – primarily Crossroads GPS and the Chamber of Commerce – that don’t have to disclose their donors and only have to report their spending within 60 days of an election. Among these types of groups, Republicans lead Democrats $56.2 million to $24.6 million. And significantly, while party committees are limited in the amount of money they can raise from any one individual ($30,800 per cycle), groups like Crossroads GPS and the Chamber can receive unlimited contributions. By contrast, Democrats are still relying much more on the traditional party structure.
First, an overview of the outside spending, by state:
The Evolving State of Funding in Competitive Senate and House Races: Interactive Visualizations
How are House and Senate candidates’ war-chests faring this election cycle? The animations below show who has been pulling further... View Article
Continue readingMoney in the Senate elections, in 8 charts
With just over a month until Election Day, most forecasts have Democrats in a strong position to hold their majority in the Senate and have strengthened their position in the last few weeks, moving ahead in close seat polling. But when it comes to the money, the Senate remains very competitive. In this analysis, we look at the money in 19 close races that the Cook Political Report has deemed “Toss-up”, “Lean”, or “Likely” races within the last month. (We’ve excluded the three-way race in Maine for analytical purposes.) The quick summary is that, by our count, the Democrats have the lead in 11 of the 19 races. If money is determinative, this is not a great position for Democrats, since of the 19 seats we analyze, 15 are seats currently held by Democrats.
Continue reading
59063
