The structure of Congress 403Conference committees are formed as needed to resolve specific differences
between House and Senate versions of legislation that are passed in each chamber.
These committees mostly comprise standing committee members from each chamber
who worked on the bill in question.
The committee system creates a division of labor that helps members get reelected by
facilitating specialization and credit claiming. For example, a chair of the Agriculture
Committee or of a key agricultural subcommittee may reasonably take credit for passing
an important bill for the farmers back home, such as the Cottonseed Payment Program
that provides assistance to cottonseed farmers who lost crops due to hurricanes.^36
The number of members who could make these credible claims expanded
dramatically in the 1970s with the proliferation of subcommittees (there are 100 in
the House and 67 in the Senate). Speaking about the House, one observer said, with
some exaggeration, that if you ever forget a member’s name you can simply refer to
him or her as “Mr. or Ms. Chairman” and you will be right about half the time. This
view of congressional committees is based on the distributive theory, which is rooted
in the norm of reciprocity and representatives’ incentives to provide benefits for their
districts. The theory holds that members will seek committee assignments to best
serve their district’s interests, the leadership will accommodate those requests, and
the floor will respect the views of the committees in a big institution-level logroll—
that is, committee members will support one another’s legislation. This means that
members tend to have an interest in and to support the policies produced by the
committees they serve on. For example, members from farm states would want to serve
on the Agriculture Committee and members with a lot of military bases or defense
contractors in their districts would want to be on the Armed Services Committee.
Nonetheless, the committee system does not exist simply to further members’
electoral goals. According to informational theory, it also provides collective benefits
to the rest of the members through committee members’ expertise on policy, which
helps reduce uncertainty about policy outcomes.^37 By deferring to expert committees,
members are able to achieve beneficial outcomes while using their time more
efficiently. This informational theory is also consistent with the argument made by
Richard Fenno 45 years ago that members will serve on committees for reasons other
than simply trying to achieve reelection (which is implied by the distributive theory).
Fenno argued that members also were interested in achieving power within the
institution and in making good policy.^38 Others argue that goals vary from bill to bill
and all members pursue reelection advantage, institutional power, and effective policy
in different circumstances.^39 Thus, the committee system does not exist only to further
members’ electoral goals, but it often serves that purpose.
Committees also serve the policy needs of the majority party, largely because the
party in power controls a majority of seats on every committee. The party ratios on each
committee generally reflect the partisan distribution in the overall chamber, but the
majority party gives itself somewhat larger majorities on the important committees
such as Ways and Means (which controls tax policy), Appropriations, and Rules. This is
especially true for the Rules Committee (in which the majority party controls 9 of the
13 seats). The Rules Committee is important to the majority party because it structures
the nature of debate in the House: it sets the length of debate and the type and number
of amendments to a bill that will be allowed. These decisions are called rules and must
be approved by a majority of the House members. The Rules Committee has become
an arm of the majority-party leadership, and in many instances it provides rules that
support the party’s policy agenda or that protect its members from having to take
controversial positions. For example, the Rules Committee prevented amendments
on the 2017 tax bill; if the amendments had come to a vote, they would have divided the
Republican Party.^40 Majority members are expected to support their party on votes on
rules, even if they end up voting against the related legislation.conference committees
Temporary committees created to
negotiate differences between the
House and Senate versions of a piece
of legislation that has passed through
both chambers.distributive theory
The idea that members of Congress
will join committees that best serve
the interests of their district and that
committee members will support one
another’s legislation.informational theory
The idea that having committees
in Congress made up of experts on
specific policy areas helps ensure
well-informed policy decisions.Full_12_APT_64431_ch11_374-417.indd 403 16/11/18 10:30 AM