Congress and the people 377Section 8, of the Constitution in the appendix). In contrast, the president was given
few explicit powers and played a much less prominent role early in our history.
Furthermore, much of Congress’s authority came from its implicit powers, which
were rooted in the elastic clause of Article I of the Constitution, which gives Congress
the power “to make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into
Execution the foregoing Powers.”
As noted in Chapter 2, the compromises that gave rise to Congress’s initial structure
reflected an attempt to reconcile the competing interests of the day (large versus
small states, northern versus southern interests, and proponents of strong national
power versus state power). These compromises included establishing a system of
bicameralism, that is, a bicameral (two-chambered) institution made up of a popularly
elected House and a Senate chosen by state legislatures; allowing each slave to count as
three-fifths of a person for purposes of apportionment for the House; and setting longer
terms for senators (six years) than for House members (two years).
But these compromises also laid the foundation for the split loyalties that members
of Congress have: they must respond to both their local constituencies and the nation’s
interests. Although the Founders hoped that Congress would pass legislation that
emphasized the national good over local interests, they also recognized the importance
of local constituencies. Thus, the relatively short two-year House term was intended to
tie legislators to public sentiment.
At the same time, the Federalist Papers made it clear that the new government
was by no means a direct democracy that would put all policy questions to the public.
In Federalist 57, Madison asserted that “the aim of every political constitution is, or
ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and
most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society.” This common good may
often conflict with local concerns, such that members are expected to both “refine
and enlarge the debate” to encompass the common good and represent their local
constituents.
In general, the Founders viewed the Senate as the more likely institution to enlarge
the debate and speak for the national interests; it was intended to check the more
responsive and passionate House. Because senators were indirectly elected and served
longer terms than House members, the Senate was more insulated from the people. A
famous (although perhaps fictional) story of an argument between George Washington
and Thomas Jefferson points out the differences between the House and Senate.
Jefferson did not think the Senate was necessary, while Washington supported having
two chambers. During the argument, Jefferson poured some coffee he was drinking
into his saucer. Washington asked him why he had done so. “To cool it,” replied
Jefferson. “Even so,” said Washington, “we pour legislation into the senatorial saucer
to cool it.” This idea of a more responsible Senate survived well into the twentieth
century, even after the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913 allowed the direct, popular
election of senators.
Today the Senate is still more insulated than the House. Because of the six-year
terms of senators, only one-third of the 100 Senate seats are contested in each election,
while all 435 House members are elected every two years. However, differences
between the representational roles of the House and the Senate have become muted
as senators seem to campaign for reelection 365 days a year, every year, just like House
members.^3 This “permanent campaign” means that senators are now less insulated
from electoral forces than they were in the past.
The relationship between the president and Congress has also evolved significantly.
In the nineteenth century, Congress’s roots in geographic constituencies made it
well suited for the politics of the time. Although several great presidents left their
mark on national politics early in U.S. history (George Washington, Andrew Jackson,bicameralism
The system of having two chambers
within one legislative body, like
the House and Senate in the U.S.
Congress.The Founders viewed the House as
more passionate than the Senate,
or as the “hot coffee” that needed
to be cooled in the “saucer” of the
Senate. This perception probably
did not include coming to blows over
differences in policy as congressmen
Albert G. Brown and John A. Wilcox
did in 1851 about whether Mississippi
should secede from the Union.Full_12_APT_64431_ch11_374-417.indd 377 16/11/18 10:29 AM