Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
United States House of Representatives
View on Wikipedia
Key Information
| This article is part of a series on the |
| Politics of the United States |
|---|
The United States House of Representatives is a chamber of the bicameral United States Congress; it is the lower house, with the U.S. Senate being the upper house. Together, the House and Senate have the authority under Article One of the U.S. Constitution in enumerated matters to pass or defeat federal government legislation, known as bills.[1][2] Those that are also passed by the Senate are sent to the president for signature or veto. The House's exclusive powers include initiating all revenue bills, impeaching federal officers, and electing the president if no candidate receives a majority of votes in the Electoral College.[3][4]
Members of the House serve a fixed term of two years, with each seat up for election before the start of the next Congress. Special elections may also occur in the case of a vacancy. The House's composition was established by Article One of the United States Constitution. The House is composed of representatives who, pursuant to the Uniform Congressional District Act, sit in single member congressional districts allocated to each state on the basis of population as measured by the United States census, provided that each state gets at least one representative.[5] Since its inception in 1789, all representatives have been directly elected. Although suffrage was initially limited, it gradually widened, particularly after the ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment and the civil rights movement.
Since 1913, the number of voting representatives has been at 435 pursuant to the Apportionment Act of 1911.[6] The Reapportionment Act of 1929 capped the size of the House at 435. However, the number was temporarily increased from 1959 until 1963 to 437 following the admissions of Alaska and Hawaii to the Union.[7]
In addition, five non-voting delegates represent the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories of Guam, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and American Samoa. A non-voting resident commissioner, serving a four-year term, represents the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. As of the 2020 census, the largest delegation was California, with 52 representatives. Six states have only one representative apiece: Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming.[8]
The House meets in the south wing of the United States Capitol. The rules of the House generally address a two-party system, with a majority party in government, and a minority party in opposition. The presiding officer is the speaker of the House, who is elected by the members thereof. Other floor leaders are chosen by the Democratic Caucus or the Republican Conference, depending on whichever party has the most voting members.
History
[edit]18th century
[edit]

Under the Articles of Confederation, the Congress of the Confederation was a unicameral body with equal representation for each state, which meant that any state could veto most actions.
After eight years of a more limited confederal government under the Articles, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and other Founding Fathers initiated the Constitutional Convention, which convened in Philadelphia from May 25 to September 17, 1787, and received the Confederation Congress's sanction to "amend the Articles of Confederation". All states except Rhode Island agreed to send delegates.
Congress's structure was a contentious issue among the founders during the convention. Edmund Randolph's Virginia Plan called for bicameral legislature with proportional representation[d] in the House and equal state representation in the Senate.[10]
The House is commonly referred to as the lower house and the Senate the upper house, although the United States Constitution does not use that terminology. Both houses' approval is necessary for the passage of legislation. The Virginia Plan drew the support of delegates from several large states, including Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, and called for representation based on population. The smaller states, however, favored the New Jersey Plan, which called for a unicameral Congress with equal representation for the states.[10]
The Convention ultimately reached the Connecticut Compromise or Great Compromise, under which the House of Representatives would provide representation proportional to each state's population, and the Senate would provide equal representation amongst the states.[10] In 1788, the Constitution was ratified, and it was implemented on March 4, 1789.
Less than a month later, on April 1, 1789, the U.S. House convened for the first time in New York City, which was then the nation's capital. In 1790, the capital was moved back to Philadelphia, and the House met there from 1790 until 1800 when construction of the new national capitol in Washington, D.C. was completed.[11]
19th century
[edit]
During the first half of the 19th century, the House was frequently in conflict with the U.S. Senate over regionally divisive issues, including slavery. The North was much more populous than the South, and therefore dominated the House of Representatives. However, the North held no such advantage in the Senate, where the equal representation of states prevailed.
Regional conflict was most pronounced over the issue of slavery. One example of a provision repeatedly supported by the House but blocked by the Senate was the Wilmot Proviso, which sought to ban slavery in the land gained during the Mexican–American War. Conflict over slavery and other issues persisted until the Civil War (1861–1865), which began soon after several southern states attempted to secede from the Union. The Civil War culminated in the South's defeat and in the abolition of slavery. Since all southern senators except Andrew Johnson resigned their seats at the beginning of the war, the Senate did not hold the balance of power between North and South during the war.
During the Reconstruction that followed, the Republican Party held large majorities, which many Americans associated with the Union's victory in the Civil War and the ending of slavery. The Reconstruction period ended in about 1877; the ensuing era, known as the Gilded Age, was marked by sharp political divisions in the electorate. The Democratic Party and Republican Party each held majorities in the House at various times.[12]
The late 19th and early 20th centuries also saw a dramatic increase in the power of the speaker of the House. The rise of the speaker's influence began in the 1890s, during the tenure of Republican Thomas Brackett Reed. "Czar Reed", as he was nicknamed, attempted to put into effect his view that "The best system is to have one party govern and the other party watch." The leadership structure of the House also developed during approximately the same period, with the positions of majority leader and minority leader being created in 1899. While the minority leader was the head of the minority party, the majority leader remained subordinate to the speaker.
20th century
[edit]The speakership reached its zenith during the term of Republican Joseph Gurney Cannon, from 1903 to 1911. The speaker's powers included chairmanship of the influential Rules Committee and the ability to appoint members of other House committees. However, these powers were curtailed in the "Revolution of 1910" because of the efforts of Democrats and dissatisfied Republicans who opposed Cannon's heavy-handed tactics.
The Democratic Party dominated the House of Representatives during the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration between 1933 and 1945, often winning over two-thirds of the seats. Both Democrats and Republicans were in power at various times during the next decade. The Democratic Party maintained control of the House from 1955 until 1995. In the mid-1970s, members passed major reforms that strengthened the power of subcommittees at the expense of committee chairs and allowed party leaders to nominate committee chairs. These actions were taken to undermine the seniority system, and to reduce the ability of a small number of senior members to obstruct legislation they did not favor. There was also a shift from the 1990s to greater control of the legislative program by the majority party; the power of party leaders (especially the speaker) grew considerably.
According to historian Julian E. Zelizer, the majority Democrats minimized the number of staff positions available to the minority Republicans, kept them out of decision-making, and gerrymandered their home districts. Republican Newt Gingrich argued American democracy was being ruined by the Democrats' tactics and that the GOP had to destroy the system before it could be saved. Cooperation in governance, says Zelizer, would have to be put aside until they deposed Speaker Wright and regained power. Gingrich brought an ethics complaint which led to Wright's resignation in 1989. Gingrich gained support from the media and good government forces in his crusade to persuade Americans that the system was, in Gingrich's words, "morally, intellectually and spiritually corrupt". Gingrich followed Wright's successor, Democrat Tom Foley, as speaker after the Republican Revolution of 1994 gave his party control of the House.[13]
Gingrich attempted to pass a major legislative program, the Contract with America and made major reforms of the House, notably reducing the tenure of committee chairs to three two-year terms. Many elements of the Contract did not pass Congress, were vetoed by President Bill Clinton, or were substantially altered in negotiations with Clinton. After Republicans held control in the 1996 election, however, Clinton and the Gingrich-led House agreed on the first balanced federal budget in decades, along with a substantial tax cut.[14]
21st century
[edit]Republicans held on to the House until 2006, when the Democrats won control and Nancy Pelosi was subsequently elected by the House as the first female speaker.
Republicans retook the House in 2010 elections with the largest shift of political power between the parties since the 1938 elections.[15] Republicans held the House until Democrats retook it in the 2018 elections, which became the largest shift of power to the Democrats since the 1970s. In the 2022 elections, Republicans took back control of the House, winning a slim majority.
Following the election of transgender representative Sarah McBride in November 2024, House speaker Mike Johnson announced that restrooms in the House would be restricted based on "biological sex", i.e. sex assignment at birth. The announcement was criticized as transphobic bullying;[16] McBride announced she would comply with the rule but called it an "effort to distract from the real issues facing this country".[17]
Membership, qualifications, and apportionment
[edit]| This article is part of a series on the |
| United States House of Representatives |
|---|
| History of the House |
| Members |
|
|
| Congressional districts |
| Politics and procedure |
| Places |
|
|
Apportionments
[edit]Under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned among the states by population, as determined by the census conducted every ten years. Each state is entitled to at least one representative, however small its population.
The only constitutional rule relating to the size of the House states: "The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative."[18] Congress regularly increased the size of the House to account for population growth until it fixed the number of voting House members at 435 in 1911.[6] In 1959, upon the admission of Alaska and Hawaii, the number was temporarily increased to 437 (seating one representative from each of those states without changing existing apportionment), and returned to 435 four years later, after the reapportionment consequent to the 1960 census.
The Constitution does not provide for the representation of the District of Columbia or of territories. The District of Columbia and the territories of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are each represented by one non-voting delegate. Puerto Rico elects a resident commissioner, but other than having a four-year term, the resident commissioner's role is identical to the delegates from the other territories. The five delegates and resident commissioner may participate in debates; before 2011,[19] they were also allowed to vote in committees and the Committee of the Whole when their votes would not be decisive.[20]
Redistricting
[edit]States entitled to more than one representative are divided into single-member districts. This has been a federal statutory requirement since 1967 pursuant to the act titled An Act For the relief of Doctor Ricardo Vallejo Samala and to provide for congressional redistricting.[21] Before that law, general ticket representation was used by some states.
States typically redraw district boundaries after each census, though they may do so at other times, such as the 2003 Texas redistricting. Each state determines its own district boundaries, either through legislation or through non-partisan panels. Malapportionment is unconstitutional and districts must be approximately equal in population (see Wesberry v. Sanders). Additionally, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits redistricting plans that are intended to, or have the effect of, discriminating against racial or language minority voters.[22] Aside from malapportionment and discrimination against racial or language minorities, federal courts have allowed state legislatures to engage in gerrymandering to benefit political parties or incumbents.[23][24] In a 1984 case, Davis v. Bandemer, the Supreme Court held that gerrymandered districts could be struck down based on the Equal Protection Clause, but the Court did not articulate a standard for when districts are impermissibly gerrymandered. However, the Court overruled Davis in 2004 in Vieth v. Jubelirer, and Court precedent holds gerrymandering to be a political question. According to calculations made by Burt Neuborne using criteria set forth by the American Political Science Association, only about 40 seats, less than 10% of the House membership, are chosen through a genuinely contested electoral process, given partisan gerrymandering.[25][26]
Qualifications
[edit]Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for representatives. Each representative must: (1) be at least twenty-five (25) years old; (2) have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years; and (3) be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state they represent. Members are not required to live in the districts they represent, but they traditionally do.[27] The age and citizenship qualifications for representatives are less than those for senators. The constitutional requirements of Article I, Section 2 for election to Congress are the maximum requirements that can be imposed on a candidate.[28] Therefore, Article I, Section 5, which permits each House to be the judge of the qualifications of its own members does not permit either House to establish additional qualifications. Likewise, a state could not establish additional qualifications. William C. C. Claiborne served in the House below the minimum age of 25.[29]
Disqualification: under the Fourteenth Amendment, a federal or state officer who takes the requisite oath to support the Constitution, but later engages in rebellion or aids the enemies of the United States, is disqualified from becoming a representative. This post–Civil War provision was intended to prevent those who sided with the Confederacy from serving. However, disqualified individuals may serve if they gain the consent of two-thirds of both houses of Congress.
Elections
[edit]

Elections for representatives are held in every even-numbered year, on Election Day the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. Pursuant to the Uniform Congressional District Act, representatives must be elected from single-member districts. After a census is taken (in a year ending in 0), the year ending in 2 is the first year in which elections for U.S. House districts are based on that census (with the Congress based on those districts starting its term on the following January 3). As there is no legislation at the federal level mandating one particular system for elections to the House, systems are set at the state level. As of 2022, first-past-the-post or plurality voting is used in 46 states, electing 412 representatives, ranked-choice or instant-runoff voting in two states (Alaska and Maine), electing 3 representatives, and two-round system in two states (Georgia and Louisiana), electing 20 representatives. Elected representatives serve a two-year term, with no term limit.
In most states, major party candidates for each district are nominated in partisan primary elections, typically held in spring to late summer. In some states, the Republican and Democratic parties choose their candidates for each district in their political conventions in spring or early summer, which often use unanimous voice votes to reflect either confidence in the incumbent or the result of bargaining in earlier private discussions. Exceptions can result in so-called floor fights—convention votes by delegates, with outcomes that can be hard to predict. Especially if a convention is closely divided, a losing candidate may contend further by meeting the conditions for a primary election. The courts generally do not consider ballot access rules for independent and third party candidates to be additional qualifications for holding office and no federal statutes regulate ballot access. As a result, the process to gain ballot access varies greatly from state to state, and in the case of a third party in the United States may be affected by results of previous years' elections.
In 1967, Congress passed the Uniform Congressional District Act, which requires all representatives to be elected from single-member-districts.[30][31] Following the Wesberry v. Sanders decision, Congress was motivated by fears that courts would impose at-large plurality districts on states that did not redistrict to comply with the new mandates for districts roughly equal in population, and Congress also sought to prevent attempts by southern states to use such voting systems to dilute the vote of racial minorities.[32] Several states have used multi-member districts in the past, although only two states (Hawaii and New Mexico) used multi-member districts in 1967.[31] Louisiana is unique in that it holds an all-party primary election on the general Election Day with a subsequent runoff election between the top two finishers (regardless of party) if no candidate received a majority in the primary. The states of Washington and California use a similar (though not identical) system to that used by Louisiana.
Seats vacated during a term are filled through special elections, unless the vacancy occurs closer to the next general election date than a pre-established deadline. The term of a member chosen in a special election usually begins the next day, or as soon as the results are certified.
Non-voting delegates
[edit]Historically, many territories have sent non-voting delegates to the House. While their role has fluctuated over the years, today they have many of the same privileges as voting members, have a voice in committees, and can introduce bills on the floor, but cannot vote on the ultimate passage of bills. Presently, the District of Columbia and the five inhabited U.S. territories each elect a delegate. A seventh delegate, representing the Cherokee Nation, has been formally proposed but has not yet been seated.[33] An eighth delegate, representing the Choctaw Nation is guaranteed by treaty but has not yet been proposed. Additionally, some territories may choose to also elect shadow representatives, though these are not official members of the House and are separate individuals from their official delegates.
Terms
[edit]Representatives and delegates serve for two-year terms, while a resident commissioner (a kind of delegate) serves for four years. A term starts on January 3 following the election in November. The U.S. Constitution requires that vacancies in the House be filled with a special election. The term of the replacement member expires on the date that the original member's would have expired.
The Constitution permits the House to expel a member with a two-thirds vote. In the history of the United States, only six members have been expelled from the House; in 1861, three were removed for supporting the Confederate states' secession: Democrats John Bullock Clark of Missouri, John William Reid of Missouri, and Henry Cornelius Burnett of Kentucky. Democrat Michael Myers of Pennsylvania was expelled after his criminal conviction for accepting bribes in 1980, Democrat James Traficant of Ohio was expelled in 2002 following his conviction for corruption, and Republican George Santos was expelled in 2023 after he was implicated in fraud by both a federal indictment and a House Ethics Committee investigation.[34][35][36]
The House also has the power to formally censure or reprimand its members; censure or reprimand of a member requires only a simple majority, and does not remove that member from office.
Comparison to the Senate
[edit]As a check on the regional, popular, and rapidly changing politics of the House, the Senate has several distinct powers. For example, the "advice and consent" powers (such as the power to approve treaties and confirm members of the Cabinet) are a sole Senate privilege.[37] The House, however, has the exclusive power to initiate bills for raising revenue, to impeach officials, and to choose the president if a presidential candidate fails to get a majority of the Electoral College votes.[38] Both House and Senate confirmation is now required to fill a vacancy if the vice presidency is vacant, according to the provisions of the Twenty-fifth Amendment.[39][40] The Senate and House are further differentiated by term lengths and the number of districts represented: the Senate has longer terms of six years, fewer members (currently one hundred, two for each state), and (in all but seven delegations) larger constituencies per member.
Salary and benefits
[edit]
Salaries
[edit]Since December 2014, the annual salary of each representative is $174,000,[41][42] the same as it is for each member of the Senate.[43] The speaker of the House and the majority and minority leaders earn more: $223,500 for the speaker and $193,400 for their party leaders (the same as Senate leaders).[42] A cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) increase takes effect annually unless Congress votes not to accept it. Congress sets members' salaries; however, the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a change in salary (but not COLA[44]) from taking effect until after the next election of the whole House. Representatives are eligible for retirement benefits after serving for five years.[45] Outside pay is limited to 15% of congressional pay, and certain types of income involving a fiduciary responsibility or personal endorsement are prohibited. Salaries are not for life, only during active term.[42]
Titles
[edit]Representatives use the prefix "The Honorable" before their names. A member of the House is referred to as a representative, congressman, or congresswoman.
Representatives are usually identified in the media and other sources by party and state, and sometimes by congressional district, or a major city or community within their district. For example, Democratic representative Nancy Pelosi, who represents California's 11th congressional district within San Francisco, may be identified as "D–California", "D–California–11" or "D–San Francisco".
"Member of congress" is occasionally abbreviated as either "MOC" or "MC" (similar to MP).[46][original research?] However, the abbreviation "Rep." for Representative is more common, as it avoids confusion as to whether they are a member of the House or the Senate.
Pension
[edit]All members of Congress are automatically enrolled in the Federal Employees Retirement System, a pension system also used for federal civil servants, except the formula for calculating Congress members' pension results in a 70% higher pension than other federal employees based on the first 20 years of service.[47] They become eligible to receive benefits after five years of service (two and one-half terms in the House). The FERS is composed of three elements:
- Social Security
- The FERS basic annuity, a monthly pension plan based on the number of years of service and the average of the three highest years of basic pay (70% higher pension than other federal employees based on the first 20 years of service)
- The Thrift Savings Plan, a 401(k)-like defined contribution plan for retirement account into which participants can deposit up to a maximum of $19,000 in 2019. Their employing agency matches employee contributions up to 5% of pay.
Members of Congress may retire with full benefits at age 62 after five years of service, at age 50 after 20 years of service, and at any age after 25 years of service.[47] With an average age of 58, the US House of Representatives is older than comparable chambers in Russia and the other G7 nations.[48]
Tax deductions
[edit]Members of Congress are permitted to deduct up to $3,000 of living expenses per year incurred while living away from their district or home state.[49]
Health benefits
[edit]Before 2014, members of Congress and their staff had access to essentially the same health benefits as federal civil servants; they could voluntarily enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), an employer-sponsored health insurance program, and were eligible to participate in other programs, such as the Federal Flexible Spending Account Program (FSAFEDS).[50]
However, Section 1312(d)(3)(D) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided that the only health plans that the federal government can make available to members of Congress and certain congressional staff are those created under the ACA or offered through a health care exchange. The Office of Personnel Management promulgated a final rule to comply with Section 1312(d)(3)(D).[50] Under the rule, effective January 1, 2014, members and designated staff are no longer able to purchase FEHBP plans as active employees.[50] However, if members enroll in a health plan offered through a Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) exchange, they remain eligible for an employer contribution toward coverage, and members and designated staff eligible for retirement may enroll in a FEHBP plan upon retirement.[50]
The ACA and the final rule do not affect members' or staffers' eligibility for Medicare benefits.[50] The ACA and the final rule also do not affect members' and staffers' eligibility for other health benefits related to federal employment, so members and staff are eligible to participate in FSAFEDS (which has three options within the program), the Federal Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program, and the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program.[50]
The Office of the Attending Physician at the U.S. Capitol provides members with health care for an annual fee of $650.[50][51] The attending physician provides routine exams, consultations, and certain diagnostics, and may write prescriptions (although the office does not dispense them).[50] The office does not provide vision or dental care.[50]
Members (but not their dependents, and not former members) may also receive medical and emergency dental care at military treatment facilities.[50] There is no charge for outpatient care if it is provided in the National Capital Region, but members are billed at full reimbursement rates (set by the Department of Defense) for inpatient care.[50] (Outside the National Capital Region, charges are at full reimbursement rates for both inpatient and outpatient care).[50]
Personnel, mail and office expenses
[edit]House members are eligible for a Member's Representational Allowance (MRA) to support them in their official and representational duties to their district.[52] The MRA is calculated based on three components: one for personnel, one for official office expenses and one for official or franked mail. The personnel allowance is the same for all members; the office and mail allowances vary based on the members' district's distance from Washington, D.C., the cost of office space in the member's district, and the number of non-business addresses in their district. These three components are used to calculate a single MRA that can fund any expense—even though each component is calculated individually, the franking allowance can be used to pay for personnel expenses if the member so chooses. In 2011 this allowance averaged $1.4 million per member, and ranged from $1.35 to $1.67 million.[53]
The Personnel allowance was $944,671 per member in 2010. Each member may employ no more than 18 permanent employees. Members' employees' salary is capped at $168,411 as of 2009.[53]
Travel allowance
[edit]Before being sworn into office, each member-elect and one staffer can be paid for one round trip between their home in their congressional district and Washington, D.C., for organization caucuses.[53] Members are allowed "a sum for travel based on the following formula: 64 times the rate per mile ... multiplied by the mileage between Washington, DC, and the furthest point in a Member's district, plus 10%."[53] As of January 2012[update] the rate ranges from $0.41 to $1.32 per mile ($0.25 to $0.82/km) based on distance ranges between D.C. and the member's district.[53]
Officers
[edit]This section needs additional citations for verification. (May 2025) |
Member officials
[edit]The party with a majority of seats in the House is known as the majority party. The next-largest party is the minority party. The speaker, committee chairs, and some other officials are generally from the majority party; they have counterparts (for instance, the "ranking members" of committees) in the minority party.
The Constitution provides that the House may choose its own speaker.[54] Although not explicitly required by the Constitution, every speaker has been a member of the House. The Constitution does not specify the duties and powers of the speaker, which are instead regulated by the rules and customs of the House. Speakers have a role both as a leader of the House and the leader of their party (which need not be the majority party; theoretically, a member of the minority party could be elected as speaker with the support of a fraction of members of the majority party). Under the Presidential Succession Act (1947), the speaker is second in the line of presidential succession after the vice president.
The speaker is the presiding officer of the House but does not preside over every debate. Instead, they delegate the responsibility of presiding to other members in most cases. The presiding officer sits in a chair in the front of the House chamber. The powers of the presiding officer are extensive; one important power is that of controlling the order in which members of the House speak. No member may make a speech or a motion unless they have first been recognized by the presiding officer. Moreover, the presiding officer may rule on a "point of order" (a member's objection that a rule has been breached); the decision is subject to appeal to the whole House.
Speakers serve as chairs of their party's steering committee, which is responsible for assigning party members to other House committees. The speaker chooses the chairs of standing committees, appoints most of the members of the Rules Committee, appoints all members of conference committees, and determines which committees consider bills.
Each party elects a floor leader, who is known as the majority leader or minority leader. The minority leader heads their party in the House, and the majority leader is their party's second-highest-ranking official, behind the speaker. Party leaders decide what legislation members of their party should either support or oppose.
Each party also elects a Whip, who works to ensure that the party's members vote as the party leadership desires. The majority whip in the House of Representatives is Tom Emmer, who is a member of the Republican Party. The minority whip is Katherine Clark, who is a member of the Democratic Party. The whip is supported by chief deputy whips
After the whips, the next ranking official in the House party's leadership is the party conference chair (styled as the Republican conference chair and Democratic caucus chair).
After the conference chair, there are differences between each party's subsequent leadership ranks. After the Democratic caucus chair is the campaign committee chair (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee), then the co-chairs of the Steering Committee. For the Republicans it is the chair of the House Republican Policy Committee, followed by the campaign committee chairman (styled as the National Republican Congressional Committee).
The chairs of House committees, particularly influential standing committees such as Appropriations, Ways and Means, and Rules, are powerful but not officially part of the House leadership hierarchy. Until the post of majority leader was created, the chair of Ways and Means was the de facto majority leader.
Leadership and partisanship
[edit]When the presidency and Senate are controlled by a different party from the one controlling the House, the speaker can become the de facto "leader of the opposition". Some notable examples include Tip O'Neill in the 1980s, Newt Gingrich in the 1990s, John Boehner in the early 2010s, and Nancy Pelosi in the late 2000s and again in the late 2010s and early 2020s. Since the speaker is a partisan officer with substantial power to control the business of the House, the position is often used for partisan advantage.
In the instance when the presidency and both Houses of Congress are controlled by one party, the speaker normally takes a low profile and defers to the president. For that situation the House minority leader can play the role of a de facto "leader of the opposition", often more so than the Senate minority leader, due to the more partisan nature of the House and the greater role of leadership.
Non-member officials
[edit]The House is also served by several officials who are not members. The House's chief such officer is the clerk, who maintains public records, prepares documents, and oversees junior officials, including pages until the discontinuation of House pages in 2011. The clerk also presides over the House at the beginning of each new Congress pending the election of a speaker. Another officer is the chief administrative officer, responsible for the day-to-day administrative support to the House of Representatives. This includes everything from payroll to foodservice.
The position of chief administrative officer (CAO) was created by the 104th Congress following the 1994 mid-term elections, replacing the positions of doorkeeper and director of non-legislative and financial services (created by the previous congress to administer the non-partisan functions of the House). The CAO also assumed some of the responsibilities of the House Information Services, which previously had been controlled directly by the Committee on House Administration, then headed by Representative Charlie Rose of North Carolina, along with the House "Folding Room".
The chaplain leads the House in prayer at the opening of the day. The sergeant at arms is the House's chief law enforcement officer and maintains order and security on House premises. Finally, routine police work is handled by the United States Capitol Police, which is supervised by the Capitol Police Board, a body to which the sergeant at arms belongs, and chairs in even-numbered years.
Procedure
[edit]Daily procedures
[edit]Like the Senate, the House of Representatives meets in the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C. At one end of the chamber of the House is a rostrum from which the speaker, Speaker pro tempore, or (when in Committee of the Whole House) the chair presides.[55] The lower tiers of the rostrum are used by clerks and other officials. A table in front of the rostrum is used by the official reporters. Members' seats are arranged in the chamber in a semicircular pattern facing the rostrum and are divided by a wide central aisle.[56] By tradition, Democrats sit on the left of the center aisle, while Republicans sit on the right, facing the presiding officer's chair.[57] Sittings are normally held on weekdays; meetings on Saturdays and Sundays are rare. Sittings of the House are generally open to the public; visitors must obtain a House Gallery pass from a congressional office.[58] Sittings are broadcast live on television and have been streamed live on C-SPAN since March 19, 1979,[59] and on HouseLive, the official streaming service operated by the Clerk, since the early 2010s.
The procedure of the House depends not only on the rules, but also on a variety of customs, precedents, and traditions. In many cases, the House waives some of its stricter rules (including time limits on debates) by unanimous consent.[60] A member may block a unanimous consent agreement, but objections are rare. The presiding officer, the speaker of the House enforces the rules of the House, and may warn members who deviate from them. The speaker uses a gavel to maintain order.[61] Legislation to be considered by the House is placed in a box called the hopper.[62]
In one of its first resolutions, the U.S. House of Representatives established the Office of the Sergeant at Arms. In an American tradition adopted from English custom in 1789 by the first speaker of the House, Frederick Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania, the Mace of the United States House of Representatives is used to open all sessions of the House. It is also used during the inaugural ceremonies for all presidents of the United States. For daily sessions of the House, the sergeant at arms carries the mace ahead of the speaker in procession to the rostrum. It is placed on a green marble pedestal to the speaker's right. When the House is in committee, the mace is moved to a pedestal next to the desk of the Sergeant at Arms.[63]
The Constitution provides that a majority of the House constitutes a quorum to do business.[64] Under the rules and customs of the House, a quorum is always assumed present unless a quorum call explicitly demonstrates otherwise. House rules prevent a member from making a point of order that a quorum is not present unless a question is being voted on. The presiding officer does not accept a point of order of no quorum during general debate, or when a question is not before the House.[65]
During debates, a member may speak only if called upon by the presiding officer. The presiding officer decides which members to recognize, and can therefore control the course of debate.[66] All speeches must be addressed to the presiding officer, using the words "Mr. Speaker" or "Madam Speaker". Only the presiding officer may be directly addressed in speeches; other members must be referred to in the third person. In most cases, members do not refer to each other only by name, but also by state, using forms such as "the gentleman from Virginia", "the distinguished gentlewoman from California", or "my distinguished friend from Alabama".
There are 448 permanent seats on the House Floor and four tables, two on each side. These tables are occupied by members of the committee that have brought a bill to the floor for consideration and by the party leadership. Members address the House from microphones at any table or "the well", the area immediately in front of the rostrum.[67]
Passage of legislation
[edit]Under the U.S. Constitution, the House of Representatives determines the rules according to which it passes legislation. Any of the rules can be changed with each new Congress, but in practice each new session amends a standing set of rules built up over the history of the body in an early resolution published for public inspection.[68] Before legislation reaches the floor of the House, the Rules Committee normally passes a rule to govern debate on that measure (which then must be passed by the full House before it becomes effective). For instance, the committee determines if amendments to the bill are permitted. An "open rule" permits all germane amendments, but a "closed rule" restricts or even prohibits amendment. Debate on a bill is generally restricted to one hour, equally divided between the majority and minority parties. Each side is led during the debate by a "floor manager", who allocates debate time to members who wish to speak. On contentious matters, many members may wish to speak; thus, a member may receive as little as one minute, or even thirty seconds, to make their point.[69]
When debate concludes, the motion is put to a vote.[70] In many cases, the House votes by voice vote; the presiding officer puts the question, and members respond either "yea!" or "aye!" (in favor of the motion) or "nay!" or "no!" (against the motion). The presiding officer then announces the result of the voice vote. A member may, however, challenge the presiding officer's assessment and "request the yeas and nays" or "request a recorded vote". The request may be granted only if it is seconded by one-fifth of the members present. Traditionally, however, members of Congress second requests for recorded votes as a matter of courtesy. Some votes are always recorded, such as those on the annual budget.[71]
A recorded vote may be taken in one of three different ways. One is electronically. Members use a personal identification card to record their votes at 46 voting stations in the chamber. Votes are usually held in this way. A second mode of recorded vote is by teller. Members hand in colored cards to indicate their votes: green for "yea", red for "nay", and orange for "present" (i.e., to abstain). Teller votes are normally held only when electronic voting breaks down. Finally, the House may conduct a roll call vote. The Clerk reads the list of members of the House, each of whom announces their vote when their name is called. This procedure is only used rarely (and usually for ceremonial occasions, such as for the election of a speaker) because of the time consumed by calling over four hundred names.[71]
Voting traditionally lasts for, at most, fifteen minutes, but it may be extended if the leadership needs to "whip" more members into alignment.[71] The 2003 vote on the prescription drug benefit was open for three hours, from 3:00 to 6:00 a.m., to receive four additional votes, three of which were necessary to pass the legislation.[72] The 2005 vote on the Central American Free Trade Agreement was open for one hour, from 11:00 p.m. to midnight.[73] An October 2005 vote on facilitating refinery construction was kept open for forty minutes.[74]
Presiding officers may vote like other members. They may not, however, vote twice in the event of a tie; rather, a tie vote defeats the motion.[75]
Committees and caucuses
[edit]
The House uses committees and their subcommittees for a variety of purposes, including the review of bills and the oversight of the executive branch. The appointment of committee members is formally made by the whole House, but the choice of members is actually made by the political parties. Generally, each party honors the preferences of individual members, giving priority on the basis of seniority. Historically, membership on committees has been in rough proportion to the party's strength in the House, with two exceptions: on the Rules Committee, the majority party fills nine of the thirteen seats;[76] and on the Ethics Committee, each party has an equal number of seats.[77] However, when party control in the House is closely divided, extra seats on committees are sometimes allocated to the majority party. In the 109th Congress, for example, the Republicans controlled about 53% of the House, but had 54% of the Appropriations Committee members, 55% of the members on the Energy and Commerce Committee, and 58% of the members on the Judiciary Committee.
The largest committee of the House is the Committee of the Whole, which, as its name suggests, consists of all members of the House. The Committee meets in the House chamber; it may consider and amend bills, but may not grant them final passage. Generally, the debate procedures of the Committee of the Whole are more flexible than those of the House itself. One advantage of the Committee of the Whole is its ability to include otherwise non-voting members of Congress.
Most committee work is performed by twenty standing committees, each of which has jurisdiction over a specific set of issues, such as Agriculture or Foreign Affairs. Each standing committee considers, amends, and reports bills that fall under its jurisdiction. Committees have extensive powers with regard to bills; they may block legislation from reaching the floor of the House. Standing committees also oversee the departments and agencies of the executive branch. In discharging their duties, standing committees have the power to hold hearings and to subpoena witnesses and evidence.
The House also has one permanent committee that is not a standing committee, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and occasionally may establish temporary or advisory committees, such as the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. This latter committee, created in the 110th Congress and reauthorized for the 111th, has no jurisdiction over legislation and must be chartered anew at the start of every Congress. The House also appoints members to serve on joint committees, which include members of the Senate and House. Some joint committees oversee independent government bodies; for instance, the Joint Committee on the Library oversees the Library of Congress. Other joint committees serve to make advisory reports; for example, there exists a Joint Committee on Taxation. Bills and nominees are not referred to joint committees. Hence, the power of joint committees is considerably lower than those of standing committees.
Each House committee and subcommittee is led by a chairman (always a member of the majority party). From 1910 to the 1970s, committee chairs were powerful. Woodrow Wilson in his classic study,[78] suggested:
Power is nowhere concentrated; it is rather deliberately and of set policy scattered amongst many small chiefs. It is divided up, as it were, into forty-seven seigniories, in each of which a Standing Committee is the court-baron and its chairman lord-proprietor. These petty barons, some of them not a little powerful, but none of them within the reach of the full powers of rule, may at will exercise almost despotic sway within their own shires, and may sometimes threaten to convulse even the realm itself.
From 1910 to 1975 committee and subcommittee chairmanship was determined purely by seniority; members of Congress sometimes had to wait 30 years to get one, but their chairship was independent of party leadership. The rules were changed in 1975 to permit party caucuses to elect chairs, shifting power upward to the party leaders. In 1995, Republicans under Newt Gingrich set a limit of three two-year terms for committee chairs. The chair's powers are extensive; they control the committee/subcommittee agenda, and may prevent the committee from dealing with a bill. The senior member of the minority party is known as the Ranking Member. In some committees like Appropriations, partisan disputes are few.
Legislative functions
[edit]Most bills may be introduced in either House of Congress. However, the Constitution states, "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives." Because of the Origination Clause, the Senate cannot initiate bills imposing taxes. This provision barring the Senate from introducing revenue bills is based on the practice of the British Parliament, in which only the House of Commons may originate such measures. Furthermore, congressional tradition holds that the House of Representatives originates appropriation bills.
Although it cannot originate revenue bills, the Senate retains the power to amend or reject them. Woodrow Wilson wrote the following about appropriations bills:[79]
[T]he constitutional prerogative of the House has been held to apply to all the general appropriations bills, and the Senate's right to amend these has been allowed the widest possible scope. The upper house may add to them what it pleases; may go altogether outside of their original provisions and tack to them entirely new features of legislation, altering not only the amounts but even the objects of expenditure, and making out of the materials sent them by the popular chamber measures of an almost totally new character.
The approval of the Senate and the House of Representatives is required for a bill to become law. Both Houses must pass the same version of the bill; if there are differences, they may be resolved by a conference committee, which includes members of both bodies. For the stages through which bills pass in the Senate, see Act of Congress.
The president may veto a bill passed by the House and Senate. If they do, the bill does not become law unless each House, by a two-thirds vote, votes to override the veto.
Checks and balances
[edit]The Constitution provides that the Senate's "advice and consent" is necessary for the president to make appointments and to ratify treaties.[80] Thus, with its potential to frustrate presidential appointments, the Senate is more powerful than the House.
The Constitution empowers the House of Representatives to impeach federal officials for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" and empowers the Senate to try such impeachments.[81] The House may approve "articles of impeachment" by a simple majority vote; however, a two-thirds vote is required for conviction in the Senate.[82] A convicted official is automatically removed from office and may be disqualified from holding future office under the United States.[83] No further punishment is permitted during the impeachment proceedings; however, the party may face criminal penalties in a normal court of law.
In U.S. history, the House of Representatives has impeached seventeen officials, seven who were convicted. Another, Richard Nixon, resigned after the House Judiciary Committee passed articles of impeachment but before a formal impeachment vote by the full House. Only three U.S. presidents have ever been impeached: Andrew Johnson in 1868, Bill Clinton in 1998, and Donald Trump in 2019 and in 2021.[84] The trials of Johnson, Clinton, and Trump all ended in acquittal; in Johnson's case, the Senate fell one vote short of the two-thirds majority required for conviction.
Under the Twelfth Amendment, the House has the power to elect the president if no presidential candidate receives a majority of votes in the Electoral College. The Twelfth Amendment requires the House to choose from the three candidates with the highest numbers of electoral votes. The Constitution provides that "the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote".[85] It is rare for no presidential candidate to receive a majority of electoral votes. In U.S. history, the House has only had to choose a president twice. In the 1800 election, which was held before adoption of the Twelfth Amendment, it elected Thomas Jefferson over Aaron Burr. In the 1824 election, it elected John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson and William H. Crawford. If no vice presidential candidate receives a majority of the electoral votes, the Senate elects the vice president from the two candidates with the highest numbers of electoral votes.
Historical composition
[edit]This chart shows the historical composition of the United States House of Representatives, from the 1st Congress to the present day.
United States House of Representatives, 1789 to present
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Latest election results and party standings
[edit]Balance of power as of September 10, 2025[update]
| ↓ | ||||||
| Two-party | 219 | 213 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Counting vacancies | 219 | 213 | ||||
| ↑ | ||||||
| Republican | Democratic | |||||
| Affiliation | Members | Delegates/resident commissioner (non-voting) |
State majorities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Republican | 219 | 3 | 25 | |
| Democratic | 213 | 3 | 22 | |
| Vacant | 3 | |||
| Total | 435 | 6 | 50 | |
| Majority[g] | 2 | |||
Notes
[edit]- ^ Adelita Grijalva is a representative-elect, not yet a full member of the House.
- ^ Alaska (for its primary elections only), California, and Washington additionally utilize a nonpartisan blanket primary, and Mississippi uses the two-round system, for their respective primary elections.
- ^ Louisiana uses a Louisiana primary.
- ^ Not to be confused with proportional representation, an electoral system that typically elects multiple members of a party to a legislature based on that party's percentage of a popular vote.
- ^ a b The Republican Study Committee no longer publishes a detailed member roster and the actual count may therefore be higher.
- ^ a b The Freedom caucus does not publish its member roster and the actual count may therefore be higher.
- ^ The number of the majority party's voting representatives in the House in excess of the minimum number required to have an absolute majority of voting representatives.
See also
[edit]- 2024 United States House of Representatives elections – House elections for the 119th U.S. Congress
- List of current United States representatives
- List of portraits in the United States House of Representatives collection (A–J)
- Party divisions of United States Congresses
- Seniority in the United States House of Representatives
- Third-party members of the United States House of Representatives
- U.S. representative bibliography (congressional memoirs)
- Women in the United States House of Representatives
References
[edit]Footnotes
[edit]Citations
[edit]- ^ "The House Explained". house.gov. Archived from the original on December 3, 2023. Retrieved December 3, 2023.
- ^ "House of Representatives | Definition, History, & Facts". Britannica. December 2, 2023. Retrieved December 3, 2023.
- ^ Article 1, Section 7 of the Constitution
- ^ Article 1, Section 2, and in the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution
- ^ "About Congressional Apportionment". Census.gov. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved December 3, 2023.
- ^ a b See Public Law 62-5 of 1911, though Congress has the authority to change that number.
- ^ "Explainer: Why Does The U.S. House Have 435 Members?". NPR. April 20, 2021. Archived from the original on March 29, 2022. Retrieved April 1, 2022.
- ^ United States House of Representatives Archived June 24, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, Ballotpedia. Accessed November 23, 2016. "There are six states with only one representative: Alaska, Delaware, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming."
- ^ "Party In Power – Congress and Presidency – A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress, 1945–2008". Uspolitics.about.com. Archived from the original on November 1, 2012. Retrieved September 17, 2012.
- ^ a b c "Delegates of the Continental Congress Who Signed the United States Constitution" Archived January 14, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, United States House of Representatives. Accessed February 19, 2017. "While some believed the Articles should be 'corrected and enlarged as to accomplish the objects proposed by their institution,' the Virginia Plan called for completely replacing it with a strong central government based on popular consent and proportional representation.... The Virginia Plan received support from states with large populations such as Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and South Carolina. A number of smaller states, however, proposed the 'New Jersey Plan,' drafted by William Paterson, which retained the essential features of the original Articles: a unicameral legislature where all states had equal representation, the appointment of a plural executive, and a supreme court of limited jurisdiction.... The committee's report, dubbed the Great Compromise, ironed out many contentious points. It resolved the delegates' sharpest disagreement by prescribing a bicameral legislature with proportional representation in the House and equal state representation in the Senate. After two more months of intense debates and revisions, the delegates produced the document we now know as the Constitution, which expanded the power of the central government while protecting the prerogatives of the states."
- ^ "First Meetings" at U.S. House of Representatives website]
- ^ "Political Party Timeline: 1836-1864 | American Experience". www.pbs.org. Retrieved December 3, 2023.
- ^ Julian E. Zelizer, Burning Down the House: Newt Gingrich, the Fall of a Speaker, and the Rise of the New Republican Party (2020).
- ^ Balanced Budget: HR 2015, FY 1998 Budget Reconciliation / Spending; Tax Cut: HR 2014, FY 1998 Budget Reconciliation – Revenue
- ^ Neuman, Scott (November 3, 2010). "Obama, GOP Grapple With power shift". NPR. Archived from the original on June 10, 2020. Retrieved July 2, 2011.
- ^ "Republican House Speaker says Capitol bathrooms restricted by 'biological sex'". Reuters. November 24, 2024. Retrieved November 24, 2024.
- ^ @SarahEMcBride (November 20, 2024). "I'm not here to fight about bathrooms. I'm here to fight for Delawareans and to bring down costs facing families" (Tweet) – via Twitter.
- ^ Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution
- ^ "New House Majority Introduces Rules Changes". NPR. January 5, 2011. Archived from the original on February 6, 2011. Retrieved July 2, 2011.
- ^ See H.Res. 78, passed January 24, 2007. On April 19, 2007, the House of Representatives passed the DC House Voting Rights Act of 2007, a bill "to provide for the treatment of the District of Columbia as a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and for other purposes" by a vote of 241–177. That bill proposes to increase the House membership by two, making 437 members, by converting the District of Columbia delegate into a member, and (until the 2010 census) grant one membership to Utah, which is the state next in line to receive an additional district based on its population after the 2000 Census. The bill was under consideration in the U.S. Senate during the 2007 session.
- ^ 2 U.S.C. § 2c "no district to elect more than one Representative"
- ^ "Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act". Civil Rights Division Voting FAQ. US Dept. of Justice. Archived from the original on April 15, 2014. Retrieved April 27, 2014.
- ^ Bazelon, Emily (November 9, 2012). "The Supreme Court may gut the Voting Rights Act and make gerrymandering much worse". Slate. Archived from the original on September 26, 2013. Retrieved September 29, 2013.
- ^ Eaton, Whitney M. (May 2006). "Where Do We Draw the Line? Partisan Gerrymandering and the State of Texas". University of Richmond Law Review. Archived from the original on October 9, 2013.
- ^ Burt Neuborne Madison's Music: On Reading the First Amendment, Archived December 14, 2019, at the Wayback Machine The New Press 2015
- ^ David Cole, 'Free Speech, Big Money, Bad Elections,' Archived March 14, 2016, at the Wayback Machine in New York Review of Books, November 5, 2015, pp.24–25 p.24.
- ^ "Qualifications of Members of Congress". Onecle Inc. Archived from the original on January 23, 2013. Retrieved January 26, 2013.
- ^ See Powell v. McCormack, a U.S. Supreme Court case from 1969
- ^ "The Youngest Representative in House History, William Charles Cole Claiborne | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives". history.house.gov. Archived from the original on October 3, 2020. Retrieved October 6, 2020.
- ^ 2 U.S.C. § 2c
- ^ a b Schaller, Thomas (March 21, 2013). "Multi-Member Districts: Just a Thing of the Past?". University of Virginia Center for Politics. Archived from the original on October 8, 2015. Retrieved November 2, 2015.
- ^ "The 1967 Single-Member District Mandate". fairvote.org. Archived from the original on November 11, 2012. Retrieved September 1, 2012.
- ^ Krehbiel-Burton, Lenzy (August 23, 2019). "Citing treaties, Cherokees call on Congress to seat delegate from tribe". Tulsa World. Tulsa, Oklahoma. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved August 24, 2019.
- ^ "Expulsion, Censure, Reprimand, and Fine: Legislative Discipline in the House of Representatives" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 7, 2010. Retrieved August 23, 2010.
- ^ McDaniel, Eric (December 1, 2023). "New York Republican George Santos expelled from Congress". NPR. Archived from the original on December 1, 2023. Retrieved December 1, 2023.
- ^ Gamio, Lazaro; Williams, Josh; Wu, Ashley; Cook Escobar, Molly (December 1, 2023). "How Every Member Voted On The Expulsion of George Santos From Congress". The New York Times. Retrieved December 1, 2023.
- ^ Senate Legislative Process Archived April 4, 2020, at the Wayback Machine, U.S. Senate . Retrieved February 3, 2010.
- ^ The Legislative Branch Archived January 20, 2013, at the Wayback Machine, The White House. Retrieved February 3, 2010.
- ^ Section 2 reads: "Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress."
- ^ Feerick, John. "Essays on Amendment XXV: Presidential Succession". The Heritage Guide to the Constitution. The Heritage Foundatio. Archived from the original on August 22, 2020.
- ^ "Salaries and Benefits of U.S. Congress Members". Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved December 24, 2014.
- ^ a b c Brudnick, Ida A. (January 4, 2012). "Congressional Salaries and Allowances" (PDF). CRS Report for Congress. United States House of Representatives. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 12, 2019. Retrieved December 2, 2012.
- ^ "Senate Salaries since 1789". United States Senate. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved December 14, 2020.
- ^ Schaffer v. Clinton
- ^ Brudnick, Ida A. (June 28, 2011). "Congressional Salaries and Allowances". Archived from the original on August 1, 2016. Retrieved November 22, 2011.
- ^ Bowen, Daniel C.; Clark, Christopher J. (2014). "Revisiting Descriptive Representation in Congress: Assessing the Effect of Race on the Constituent–Legislator Relationship". Political Research Quarterly. 67 (3): 695–707. doi:10.1177/1065912914531658. ISSN 1065-9129. JSTOR 24371902. S2CID 154400883.
- ^ a b Congressional Research Service (August 8, 2019). "Retirement Benefits for Members of Congress". CRS Report for Congress. United States Senate.
- ^ Xiao, Eva (2023). "Battle of the ages: how America's gerontocracy is a challenge for democracy". Financial Times.
- ^ Congressional Research Service. "Congressional Salaries and Allowances" (PDF). CRS Report for Congress. United States House of Representatives. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 12, 2019. Retrieved September 21, 2012.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l Annie L. Mach & Ada S. Cornell, Health Benefits for Members of Congress and Certain Congressional Staff Archived January 14, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, Congressional Research Service, February 18, 2014.
- ^ Boguslaw, Daniel (February 12, 2025). "Aging Members of Congress Refuse to Disclose Details of Their Top Secret Hospital". The American Prospect.
- ^ Brudnick, Ida A. (September 27, 2017). Members' Representational Allowance: History and Usage (PDF). Washington D.C.: Congressional Research Service. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved October 24, 2017.
- ^ a b c d e Brudnick, Ida. "Congressional Salaries and Allowances" (PDF). Congressional Research Service Report for Congress. United States House of Representatives. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 10, 2020. Retrieved September 21, 2012.
- ^ Article I Archived January 28, 2010, at the Wayback Machine, Legal Information Institute, Cornell University Law School . Retrieved February 3, 2010.
- ^ "The Rostrum". U.S. House of Representatives. Office of the Historian. Archived from the original on January 13, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ "Explore Capitol Hill: House Chamber". Architect of the Capitol. Archived from the original on January 14, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ Ritchie, Donald A. (2006). The Congress of the United States: A Student Companion (3 ed.). New York, New York: Oxford University Press. p. 195. ISBN 978-0-19-530924-9. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 10, 2015.
Lowenthal, Alan. "Congress U". U.S. House of Representatives. Archived from the original on January 13, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
"What's in the House Chamber". Archived from the original on October 30, 2013. Retrieved November 21, 2013. - ^ "Access to Congress". Digital Media Law Project. Berkman Center for Internet and Society. Archived from the original on January 13, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
"U.S. House of Representatives". The District. Archived from the original on January 13, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015. - ^ Davis, Susan (March 19, 2014). "Not everyone is a fan of C-SPAN cameras in Congress". USA Today. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ "Basic Training: Roadblocks at the Final Legislative Stages". House of Representatives. Republican Committee on Rules. Archived from the original on April 1, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ Larchuk, Travis (January 5, 2011). "Passing One Of Many, Many Gavels". NPR. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ "Bill Hopper". U.S. House of Representatives. Office of the Historian. Archived from the original on December 8, 2014. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
"Legislative FAQ: 7. How do Representatives introduce bills?". U.S. House of Representatives. Office of the Clerk. Archived from the original on January 10, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015. - ^ Bedini, Silvio (1997). The Mace and the Gavel: Symbols of Government in America, Volume 87, Part 4. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. pp. 23–26. ISBN 978-0-87169-874-2. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 10, 2015.
- ^ "CRS Annotated Constitution". Cornell University Law School. Legal Information Institute. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ "House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House, Chapter 43: Quorums" (PDF). U.S. Government Printing Office. p. 743. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved July 15, 2019.
- ^ "Legislative FAQ: 6. How do Representatives obtain permission to speak?". U.S. House of Representatives. Office of the Clerk. Archived from the original on January 10, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ "The House Floor". Office of the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives. Archived from the original on July 2, 2011. Retrieved August 23, 2010.
- ^ "The House Explained". House.gov. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved July 2, 2011.
- ^ Sessions, Pete. "About the Committee on Rules—History and Processes". U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on Rules. Archived from the original on January 16, 2011. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ Hudiburg, Jane A. (July 23, 2018). House Voting Procedures: Forms and Requirements (PDF). Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved July 25, 2018.
- ^ a b c House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House, Chapter 58. Voting. U.S. Government Printing Office. Archived from the original on September 26, 2015. Retrieved January 10, 2015.
"The Legislative Process: House Floor". Library of Congress. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2015. - ^ Singer, Michelle (March 29, 2007). "Under the Influence". CBS News. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ Henry, Ed; Barrett, Ted (July 28, 2005). "House narrowly approves CAFTA". CNN. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ "Refinery Bill Passes Amid Partisan Split". Fox News. Associated Press. October 8, 2005. Archived from the original on February 28, 2015. Retrieved January 12, 2015.
- ^ Sidlow, Edward; Henschen, Beth (2009). America at Odds, Alternate Edition (6 ed.). Belmont, California: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. p. 246. ISBN 978-0-495-50370-5. Archived from the original on January 14, 2021. Retrieved January 10, 2015.
- ^ "Committee on Rules – A History". Archived from the original on July 30, 2008.
- ^ "Rules – Committee on Standards of Official Conduct" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on July 7, 2010. Retrieved August 23, 2010.
- ^ Congressional Government: A Study in American Politics (1885, Boston: Houghton, Mifflin)
- ^ Wilson, Woodrow. Congressional Government: A Study in American Politics Archived February 12, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, pp. 155–156 (Transaction Publishers 2002) (quotation marks omitted).
- ^ "Historical Background on Treaty-Making Power". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS FOR PRESIDENTIAL IMPEACHMENT". www.govinfo.gov. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "Impeachment: An Overview of Constitutional Provisions, Procedure, and Practice". www.everycrsreport.com. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "Judgment - Removal and Disqualification". Justia Law. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ Silverstein, Jason (February 15, 2021). "Impeached presidents: What have presidents been impeached for? The articles for Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon and Andrew Johnson". CBS News. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
- ^ "Constitution of the United States; Twelfth Amendment". Constitution Annotated. Archived from the original on April 16, 2020. Retrieved October 27, 2024.
Sources and further reading
[edit]- Abramowitz, Alan I.; Saunders, Kyle L. (1998). Ideological Realignment in the US Electorate. Vol. 60. Journal of Politics. pp. 634–652.
- Adler, E. Scott (2002). Why Congressional Reforms Fail: Reelection and the House Committee System. . Univ. of Chicago Press.
- Albert, Carl; Goble, Danney (1990). Little Giant: The Life and Times of Speaker Carl Albert. Univ. of Oklahoma Press., Speaker in the 1970s
- Barone, Michael; Ujifusa, Grant (2005). The Almanac of American Politics 2006: The Senators, the Representatives and the Governors: Their Records and Election Results, Their States and Districts., Published every two years since 1975; enormous detail on every state and district and member.
- Barry, John M. (1989). The Ambition and the Power: The Fall of Jim Wright. A True Story of Washington. Viking. ISBN 978-0-670-81924-9., Speaker in the 1980s
- Berard, Stanley P. (2001). Southern Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Univ. of Oklahoma Press.
- Berman, Daniel M. (1964). In Congress Assembled: The Legislative Process in the National Government. London: The Macmillan Company.,
- Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774–2005. Washington: Government Printing Office. 2005., Prepared by the Office of the Clerk, Office of History and Preservation, United States House of Representatives. Contains biographical entries for every Member of Congress. Also online at Biographical Directory Archived November 10, 2009, at the Wayback Machine.
- Brady, David W. (1973). Congressional Voting in a Partisan Era: A Study of the McKinley Houses and a Comparison to the Modern House of Representatives. Univ. Press of Kansas.
- Brady, David W.; McCubbins, Mathew D. (2002). Party, Process, and Political Change in Congress: New Perspectives on the History of Congress.
- Congressional Quarterly, massive, highly detailed summary of Congressional activity, and major executive and judicial decisions; based on Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report and the annual CQ almanac.
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1945–1964 (1965)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1965–1968 (1969)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1969–1972 (1973)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1973–1976 (1977)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1977–1980 (1981)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1981–1984 (1985)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1985–1988 (1989)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1989–1992 (1993)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1993–1996 (1998)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 1997–2001 (2002)
- Congressional Quarterly, Congress and the Nation: 2001–2004: A Review of Government and Politics: 107th and 108th Congresses (2005)
- Congressional Quarterly's Guide to Congress (5th ed.). Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly Press. 2000.,
- Cooper, Joseph (1970). The Origins of the Standing Committees and the Development of the Modern House. Rice Univ. Press.
- Cox, Gary W.; McCubbins, Mathew D. (1993). Legislative Leviathan: Party Government in the House. Univ. of California Press.
- DeGregorio, Christine A. (1997). Networks of Champions: Leadership, Access, and Advocacy in the U.S. House of Representatives. Univ. of Michigan Press.
- Dierenfield, Bruce J. (1987). Keeper of the Rules: Congressman Howard W. Smith of Virginia. Univ. Press of Virginia. ISBN 978-0-8139-1068-0., leader of Conservative coalition 1940–66
- Farrell, John A. (2001). Tip O'Neill and the Democratic Century. Little, Brown. ISBN 978-0-316-26049-7., Democratic Speaker in the 1980s
- Gertzog, Irwin J. (1984). Congressional Women: Their Recruitment, Treatment, and Behavior. Praeger.
- Hardeman, D. B.; Bacon, Donald C. (1987). Rayburn: A Biography. Texas Monthly Press.
- Hatzenbuehler, Ronald L. (1972). "Party Unity and the Decision for War in the House of Representatives in 1812". William and Mary Quarterly. 29 (3): 367–90. doi:10.2307/1923870. ISSN 0043-5597. JSTOR 1923870.
- Hechler, Ken (1980). Toward the Endless Frontier: History of the Committee on Science and Technology, 1959–79. Washington: Government Printing Office.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - Henig, Gerald S. (1973). Henry Winter Davis: Antebellum and Civil War Congressman from Maryland., Radical leader in Civil War era
- Hibbing, John R. (1991). Congressional Careers: Contours of Life in the U.S. House of Representatives. Univ. of North Carolina Press.
- Jacobs, John (1995). A Rage for Justice: The Passion and Politics of Phillip Burton. Univ. of California Press., leader of liberal Democrats in the 1970s
- Jacobson, Gary C. (1990). The Electoral Origins of Divided Government: Competition in U.S. House Elections, 1946–1988. Westview.
- Kiewiet, D. Roderick; McCubbins, Mathew D. (1991). The Logic of Delegation: Congressional Parties and the Appropriations Process. Univ. of Chicago Press.
- Klingman, Peter D. (1976). Josiah Walls: Florida's Black Congressman of Reconstruction. Univ. Press of Florida.
- Grant de Pauw, Linda; Bickford, Charlene Bangs; Bowling, Kenneth R., eds. (1992–2006). Documentary History of the First Federal Congress of the United States of America, March 4, 1789 – March 3, 1791., 14 volumes of primary documents
- Lowitt, Richard (1963). George W. Norris: The Making of a Progressive, 1861–1912. Vol. 1. Syracuse Univ. Press., leader of Republican insurgents in 1910
- Margulies, Herbert F. (1996). Reconciliation and Revival: James R. Mann and the House Republicans in the Wilson Era. . Greenwood.
- Merriner, James L. (1999). Mr. Chairman: Power in Dan Rostenkowski's America. Southern Illinois Univ. Press.
- Patterson, James (1967). Congressional Conservatism and the New Deal: The Growth of the Conservative Coalition in Congress, 1933–39.
- Price, David E. (1992). The Congressional Experience: A View from the Hill. Westview., Political scientist who served in House.
- Remini, Robert V. (1992). Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union.. Speaker for most of 1811–1825
- Rohde, David W. (1991). Parties and Leaders in the Postreform House. Univ. of Chicago Press.
- Rohde, David W.; Shepsle, Kenneth A. (1987). "Leaders and Followers in the House of Representatives: Reflections on Woodrow Wilson's Congressional Government". Congress & the Presidency. 14 (2): 111–133. doi:10.1080/07343468709507958.
- Schickler, Eric (2001). Disjointed Pluralism: Institutional Innovation and the Development of the U.S. Congress.
- Schooley, C. Herschel (1977). Missouri's Cannon in the House. Marceline, Missouri: Walsworth., Chaired Appropriations in the 1960s
- Shelley II, Mack C. (1983). The Permanent Majority: The Conservative Coalition in the United States Congress.
- Sinclair, Barbara (1982). Congressional Realignment, 1925–1978. Univ. of Texas Press.
- Sinclair, Barbara (1995). Legislators, Leaders, and Lawmaking: The U.S. House of Representatives in the Postreform Era. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-4955-8.
- Steinberg, Alfred (1975). Sam Rayburn: A Biography. Hawthorn. ISBN 978-0-8015-5210-6., popular biography
- Stewart, Charles H. III (1989). Budget Reform Politics: The Design of the Appropriations Process in the House of Representatives, 1865–1921. Cambridge Univ. Press.
- Story, Joseph (1891). Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (2 vol.). Boston: Brown & Little.
- Strahan, Randall; Moscardelli, Vincent G. (2000). "The Clay Speakership Revisited". Polity. 32 (4): 561–593. doi:10.2307/3235293. JSTOR 3235293. S2CID 155152645., uses roll call analysis
- Strahan, Randall (1990). New Ways and Means: Reform and Change in a Congressional Committee. Univ. of North Carolina Press.
- Trefousse, Hans L. (1997). Thaddeus Stevens: Nineteenth-Century Egalitarian., majority leader in the 1860s
- Valelly, Richard M. (October 2009). "The Reed Rules and Republican Party Building: A New Look". Studies in American Political Development. 23 (October 2009) (2): 115–142. doi:10.1017/S0898588X09990022.
- VanBeek, Stephen D. (1995). Post-Passage Politics: Bicameral Resolution in Congress. Univ. of Pittsburgh Press.
- Waller, Robert A. (1977). Rainey of Illinois: A Political Biography, 1903–34. Univ. of Illinois Press., Democratic Speaker 1932–1934
- Wilson, Woodrow (1885). Congressional Government. New York: Houghton Mifflin.,
- Zelizer, Julian E. (2006). On Capitol Hill: The Struggle to Reform Congress and its Consequences, 1948–2000.
Surveys
[edit]- Currie, James T. The United States House of Representatives. Krieger, 1988.
- MacNeil, Neil (1963). Forge of Democracy: The House of Representatives. New York: D. McKay.
- Peters, Ronald M. Jr (1997). The American Speakership: The Office in Historical Perspective (2nd ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-5758-4.
- Polsby, Nelson W. (2004). How Congress Evolves: Social Bases of Institutional Change. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-516195-3.
- Poole, Keith T.; Rosenthal, Howard (1997). Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-514242-6.
- Remini, Robert V. (2006). The House: The History of the House of Representatives. New York: HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0-06-088434-5.
- Sinclair, Barbara (1983). Majority Leadership in the U.S. House. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-2933-8.
- Julian E. Zelizer, ed. (2004). The American Congress: The Building of Democracy. New York: Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-0-618-17906-0.
- Zelizer, Julian E. Burning Down the House: Newt Gingrich, the Fall of a Speaker, and the Rise of the New Republican Party (Penguin, 2020), focus on Jim Wright and Newt Gingrich in 1990s.
External links
[edit]- Official website
- Legislative information and archives for US House and Senate, via Congress.gov
- Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774 to Present
- A New Nation Votes: American Election Returns 1787–1825 Archived July 25, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
- Complete Downloadable List of U.S. Representative Contact Information, via AggData LLC
- Information about U.S. Congressional Bills and Resolutions
United States House of Representatives
View on GrokipediaConstitutional Foundation
Establishment and Article I Provisions
The United States House of Representatives was established through Article I of the Constitution, drafted at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia from May 25 to September 17, 1787, to remedy the central government's weaknesses under the Articles of Confederation.[9] [10] Delegates, including James Madison and Gouverneur Morris, proposed a bicameral legislature where the House would reflect population-based representation, resolving disputes between large and small states via the Great Compromise of July 16, 1787, which apportioned House seats by population while granting states equal Senate representation.[11] The document was signed by 39 of 55 delegates on September 17, 1787, and submitted to the Confederation Congress.[10] Ratification required approval by nine state conventions, beginning with Delaware on December 7, 1787; New Hampshire's vote on June 21, 1788, met the threshold, activating the Constitution on March 4, 1789, when the First Congress convened, including the first House with 65 members elected in 1788–1789 under provisional rules.[12] [13] Early sessions addressed organization, with Frederick Muhlenberg elected Speaker on April 1, 1789.[13] Article I, Section 1 vests "all legislative Powers herein granted" in a Congress comprising the Senate and House of Representatives, establishing the House as the lower chamber directly accountable to the populace.[14] Section 2, Clause 1 mandates House members be "chosen every second Year by the People of the several States," with voter qualifications mirroring those for the most numerous state legislative branch, ensuring broad but state-defined suffrage initially limited to propertied white males.[3] Clause 3 sets apportionment among states by population "in such Manner as they [Congress] shall by Law direct," counting free persons fully, indentured servants similarly, and "three fifths of all other Persons" (enslaved individuals) until superseded by the 14th Amendment in 1868; each state receives at least one representative, with an initial cap of one per 30,000 inhabitants later removed.[3] Qualifications require representatives to be at least 25 years old, U.S. citizens for seven years, and inhabitants of their state, though not necessarily district, promoting accessibility over elite Senate criteria.[3] The House holds "the sole Power of Impeachment" per Section 2, Clause 5, initiating proceedings against federal officers, including presidents, as a check on executive overreach.[3] Section 4 empowers states to prescribe election times, places, and manners, subject to congressional override, balancing federal uniformity with state autonomy. Section 5 grants the House authority to judge member qualifications and election returns, determine quorum (majority unless otherwise provided), compel attendance, and adopt rules, journals, and adjournments, fostering self-governance amid potential deadlocks. Members receive compensation from the U.S. Treasury (Section 6), enjoy arrest privileges except for treason or felonies, and immunity for legislative speech or debate (Speech or Debate Clause), shielding deliberations from external interference. Section 7 requires "All Bills for raising Revenue" to originate in the House, reflecting its popular origins and control over taxation, though the Senate may amend; this "power of the purse" underscores the framers' intent for fiscal accountability to frequent elections.[13] [15] Section 8 enumerates shared congressional powers like taxation, borrowing, commerce regulation, and declaring war, but House initiation on money bills reinforces its role in funding government operations.[16] These provisions, rooted in Enlightenment ideas of representation and separation of powers, aimed to prevent monarchical abuses by tying legislative primacy to demographic realities, though implementation revealed tensions, such as slavery's influence on apportionment until post-Civil War reforms.[10]Intended Design and First Principles
The framers of the U.S. Constitution designed the House of Representatives as the chamber most directly accountable to the populace, vesting it with biennial elections to ensure frequent renewal of public confidence and to mitigate the risks of entrenched power. Article I, Section 2 specifies that the House shall consist of members "chosen every second Year by the People of the several States," with representation apportioned among states according to their respective populations, as determined by a census every ten years.[3] This structure aimed to embody popular sovereignty while filtering direct democratic impulses through elected intermediaries, as James Madison argued in Federalist No. 52 that biennial elections strike a balance between "too much stability" from longer terms and excessive "vicissitudes" from annual ones, fostering dependence on constituents without undermining legislative continuity.[17] At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, delegates resolved protracted debates over representation through the Great Compromise, establishing proportional allocation in the House to favor larger states and reflect demographic weight, in contrast to the Senate's equal state suffrage.[18] This design principle derived from a causal understanding that population-based districts would compel representatives to prioritize local interests, countering the aristocratic tendencies observed in state legislatures under the Articles of Confederation, where remote or elite-dominated bodies had failed to address public grievances effectively. Madison, in Federalist No. 10, contended that extending the republic's scale via a populous House would dilute factional excesses by diversifying interests, rendering pure majoritarian tyranny less feasible than in small democracies. The framers capped representation at no more than one member per 30,000 inhabitants initially—later adjusted—to maintain manageability while ensuring granularity in voicing public sentiment.[3] Qualifications for House membership were set modestly to broaden accessibility: candidates must be at least 25 years old, U.S. citizens for seven years, and inhabitants of their state, intentionally less stringent than the Senate's to invite younger, more dynamic figures attuned to contemporary popular concerns.[19] This reflected a first-principles commitment to republicanism over aristocracy, as delegates like Madison viewed the House as a bulwark against monarchical or oligarchic drift, with its origination of revenue bills (Article I, Section 7) embedding fiscal restraint through direct exposure to taxpayer-derived funds.[15] Empirical precedents from state constitutions informed this, where shorter legislative terms had demonstrably heightened responsiveness but required federal safeguards against instability, such as the House's quorum rules and expulsion powers to preserve functionality amid electoral churn.[20] Overall, the House's architecture prioritized causal linkages between voter preferences and policy outputs, subordinating deliberation to immediacy to guard against the detachment that had plagued confederated governance.[21]Enumerated Powers and Limitations
The legislative powers of the United States House of Representatives derive from Article I of the Constitution, which vests all legislative authority in a bicameral Congress consisting of the House and Senate.[1] Section 8 enumerates specific powers granted to Congress, including the authority to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare; to borrow money on the credit of the United States; to regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the states, and with Indian tribes; to establish uniform naturalization and bankruptcy laws; to coin money, regulate its value, and fix standards of weights and measures; to provide for the punishment of counterfeiting; to establish post offices and post roads; to promote science and useful arts by securing copyrights and patents; to constitute inferior courts; to define and punish piracies, felonies on high seas, and offenses against the law of nations; to declare war and issue letters of marque and reprisal; to raise and support armies, with appropriations not exceeding two years; to provide and maintain a navy; to make rules for government and regulation of land and naval forces; to provide for calling forth the militia to execute laws, suppress insurrections, and repel invasions; to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, with states reserving appointment of officers and training authority; to exercise exclusive legislation over the seat of government (not exceeding ten miles square) and federal properties purchased with state consent; and to make all laws necessary and proper for executing these powers and other constitutional powers.[16] Certain powers are exclusive to the House. Under Section 2, Clause 5, the House holds the sole power of impeachment, initiating proceedings against federal officers, including the President, Vice President, and civil officers for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors," with the Senate conducting trials.[22] Section 7, Clause 1 mandates that all bills for raising revenue originate in the House, reflecting its design as the chamber more directly representative of the populace, though the Senate may propose amendments.[13] Additionally, in the event of an Electoral College tie for President, the House elects the President from the top three candidates by ballot, with each state delegation casting a single vote, requiring a majority of states for victory; this process, outlined in the 12th Amendment, has occurred twice, in 1800 and 1824. The Constitution imposes explicit limitations on congressional power, including that of the House, to prevent overreach and protect individual and state rights. Section 9 prohibits Congress from suspending the writ of habeas corpus except in cases of rebellion or invasion when public safety requires it; passing bills of attainder or ex post facto laws; laying capitation or other direct taxes unless apportioned by state population (modified by the 16th Amendment for income taxes); granting commercial preferences to ports or vessels; drawing money from the Treasury without appropriations made by law; or granting titles of nobility.[23] Prior to 1808, Congress could not prohibit the migration or importation of persons (referring to the slave trade), after which it gained authority to regulate or ban it. Broader constraints arise from the 10th Amendment, reserving to the states or people powers not delegated to the federal government nor prohibited to the states, reinforcing that House authority remains confined to enumerated domains. Subsequent amendments, such as the First through Tenth (Bill of Rights), further limit congressional actions by protecting freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, and press; rights to bear arms, due process, and against unreasonable searches; and state jury trials, among others. These provisions embody the framers' intent for a limited federal legislature, checked by enumeration and explicit prohibitions to preserve liberty and federalism.Structure and Qualifications
Membership Qualifications and Apportionment
The qualifications for election to the United States House of Representatives are enumerated in Article I, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution, requiring that no person shall be a Representative unless they have attained the age of 25 years, been a citizen of the United States for seven years, and, at the time of election, be an inhabitant of the state in which they are chosen.[3] These criteria establish minimum thresholds intended to ensure maturity, loyalty to the nation, and local ties, without specifying district residency, which the Supreme Court has interpreted as not constitutionally mandated.[24] States are prohibited from imposing additional qualifications beyond these, as affirmed in cases such as U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995), while Congress possesses authority to judge the qualifications of its members under Article I, Section 5, Clause 1, though it cannot alter the constitutional baseline.[25] [26] Apportionment allocates the 435 voting seats in the House among the 50 states based on each state's population as ascertained by the decennial census, with the process governed by the Reapportionment Act of 1929, which capped the total at 435 to address rapid population growth and prevent excessive expansion.[27] [28] Each state is guaranteed at least one representative regardless of population size, a provision rooted in Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution and reinforced by the principle of equal state representation in the allocation formula.[29] The Huntington-Hill method, also termed the method of equal proportions, is employed to distribute seats beyond the initial minimum, prioritizing the state that would have the smallest relative increase in representation per additional seat, calculated via geometric means to minimize disparities in population per representative across states.[28] This method was adopted following debates over earlier approaches like the Hamilton method, which could produce paradoxes such as a state losing a seat despite population growth, and has been used since the 1941 apportionment based on the 1940 census.[28] The census data exclude non-resident populations like overseas military but include all residents within states, per the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 2, which bases apportionment on total population excluding untaxed Native Americans—a clause rendered obsolete by subsequent statutes and universal inclusion practices.[30] Following the 2020 census, apportionment results released on April 26, 2021, adjusted seats such that states like Texas gained two while New York lost one, maintaining the 435 total for elections starting in 2022 and continuing into the 119th Congress (2025–2027).[29] [31] In addition to the 435 voting representatives, the House includes six non-voting delegates from the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and U.S. territories, who lack apportionment under the constitutional formula but participate in committees and floor debate.[31]Congressional Districts and Redistricting Processes
The United States House of Representatives consists of 435 voting districts, each electing one representative, apportioned among the 50 states according to relative population as determined by the decennial census.[32] Apportionment uses the method of equal proportions, established by Congress in 1941, which assigns seats sequentially based on priority values calculated from each state's apportionment population divided by the geometric mean of its current and next hypothetical seats.[33] Following the 2020 Census, apportionment results were certified on April 26, 2021, resulting in Texas gaining two seats, while Florida, Colorado, Montana, North Carolina, and Oregon each gained one; conversely, California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia each lost one.[30] States with only one seat, such as Alaska and Delaware, elect their representative at-large without district boundaries.[32] Within each state allocated multiple seats, single-member congressional districts are drawn to ensure roughly equal population representation, as mandated by the Supreme Court's interpretation of Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution in Wesberry v. Sanders (1964), which requires districts to be as nearly equal in population as practicable.[34] Federal law imposes no requirements for district contiguity, compactness, or preservation of political subdivisions or communities of interest, leaving such criteria to state constitutions or statutes.[35] The average district population after the 2020 apportionment exceeds 760,000 residents, varying slightly by state due to the equal proportions method's prioritization of larger states.[29] Redistricting occurs primarily after each decennial census, with states required to redraw congressional maps to reflect updated apportionment and population shifts, typically completed before the next federal elections.[36] In 41 states, the state legislature holds primary authority over congressional redistricting, subject to gubernatorial veto or override; eight states employ independent or advisory commissions to propose or finalize maps, often to mitigate partisan influence.[37] Mid-decade redistricting is rare and generally prohibited by state law or court rulings to prevent opportunistic manipulation, though exceptions like court-ordered adjustments for legal violations occur.[38] The process must adhere to timelines set by state law, with the Census Bureau providing redistricting data by April 1 of the year following the census.[39] Districts must comply with Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, prohibiting dilution of racial minority voting strength, though the Supreme Court in Rucho v. Common Cause (2019) ruled that federal courts cannot remedy partisan gerrymandering claims, deeming them non-justiciable political questions.[40] Partisan gerrymandering, involving techniques like packing (concentrating opponents into few districts) or cracking (dispersing them to weaken influence), entrenches advantages for the map-drawing party, reducing electoral competition and producing outcomes misaligned with statewide vote shares.[41] Empirical analysis indicates that while such practices create safe seats and bias in individual states, their national effects often offset across partisan-controlled legislatures, yielding minimal net distortion in House composition.[42] Post-2020 redistricting, for instance, Republican-drawn maps in states like Florida and Texas secured additional seats relative to neutral benchmarks, while Democratic efforts in states like Illinois had countervailing impacts.[43] State courts increasingly intervene under their constitutions to strike maps deemed extreme, as in North Carolina and Pennsylvania cases post-2020.[44]Elections, Terms, and Voter Representation
Members of the House of Representatives are elected to two-year terms, with all 435 seats contested in each general election held biennially.[10][45] This structure, mandated by Article I, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, ensures frequent accountability to voters, as no member serves beyond two years without reelection.[3] General elections occur on the Tuesday following the first Monday in November of even-numbered years, as established by federal statute.[46] Primaries and other preliminary contests precede the general election, with procedures varying by state but subject to federal oversight for compliance with constitutional requirements such as equal population in districts. Apportionment of the 435 seats among the states occurs every ten years following the decennial census, using the Huntington-Hill method to allocate representatives based on resident population, including overseas federal employees but excluding certain non-citizen groups for apportionment purposes.[30] The current apportionment, effective from the 2023–2033 Congresses, derives from the 2020 Census and results in district populations averaging approximately 761,169 residents, though actual district sizes vary slightly due to state-level adjustments and minimum seat guarantees for smaller states.[29] This fixed size, set by the Reapportionment Act of 1929, caps House membership despite U.S. population growth exceeding 100 million since its enactment, leading to reduced per capita representation over time.[45] Congressional districts are drawn by states following each census, primarily through state legislatures or independent commissions in some jurisdictions, to ensure substantially equal population across districts within a state as required by Supreme Court precedents like Wesberry v. Sanders (1964).[37] Most states employ single-member districts with first-past-the-post voting, where the candidate receiving the plurality of votes wins, though ranked-choice or other systems exist in limited cases subject to state law. Redistricting processes often involve partisan considerations, with state legislatures controlling maps in 41 states for congressional districts, potentially influencing electoral outcomes through boundary adjustments.[37] Voter eligibility for House elections aligns with qualifications for the most numerous branch of the state legislature, as specified in Article I, Section 2, but is constrained by federal standards including U.S. citizenship, age 18 or older, and residency.[3] This framework promotes direct popular representation, distinguishing the House from the Senate's equal state allocation, though district-based elections can amplify majority preferences while marginalizing minority views within states. Turnout and competitiveness vary, with non-competitive districts comprising a significant portion due to safe seats from redistricting practices.[2]Leadership and Internal Organization
Officers, Speaker, and Non-Member Officials
The Speaker of the House of Representatives is elected by a majority vote of House members at the start of each new Congress, pursuant to Article I, Section 2, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which states that the House "shall choose their Speaker and other Officers."[1] The Speaker serves as the chamber's presiding officer, though typically delegates day-to-day presiding duties to others, while retaining authority to maintain order, interpret rules, and manage debate.[47] In this role, the Speaker controls the House calendar, assigns bills to committees, appoints select committee members, and influences the legislative agenda, often aligning it with the majority party's priorities.[48] As the de facto leader of the majority party, the Speaker also represents the House in negotiations with the Senate, the president, and external entities, and stands third in the presidential line of succession after the vice president and Senate president pro tempore.[49] Although the Constitution imposes no requirement that the Speaker be a House member, all 60 individuals to hold the office since Frederick Muhlenberg's election on April 1, 1789, have been sitting representatives, typically from the majority party.[50][51] In addition to the Speaker, the House elects four principal non-member officers at the outset of each Congress to support administrative and operational functions: the Clerk of the House, Sergeant at Arms, Chief Administrative Officer, and Chaplain.[52] The Clerk, elected under 2 U.S.C. § 83, serves as the chief record-keeper, administers oaths of office to members, prepares the daily journal, and manages legislative documents and electronic voting systems. The Sergeant at Arms, established by House rules and 2 U.S.C. § 182, enforces order on the floor, oversees security in coordination with the Capitol Police, and supervises page operations and facilities. The Chief Administrative Officer, created by the House Administration Reform Resolution of 1994 (H. Res. 988, 103rd Congress), directs financial, personnel, and technological services for the chamber, including budgeting over $1.2 billion annually in member allowances and operations as of fiscal year 2023.[52] The Chaplain, a position dating to May 1, 1789, delivers the opening prayer at sessions and provides pastoral care, selected traditionally from diverse faiths but historically dominated by Protestant clergy until recent expansions.[52] Other non-member officials include appointed roles such as the Parliamentarian, who advises the Speaker and members on procedural rules, precedents, and legislative language under House traditions formalized in the 20th century; the Historian, responsible for archiving and interpreting the House's institutional records since the office's creation in 1972; and the Inspector General, established by the House Administrative Reform Resolution of 1993 (H. Res. 250, 103rd Congress), who conducts independent audits and investigations into waste, fraud, and abuse within House operations.[52] These officials, lacking voting privileges, operate independently of electoral politics to ensure continuity and impartiality in administrative support. The House also includes six non-voting delegates and one resident commissioner from territories and the District of Columbia—representing American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Washington, D.C.—who participate in committees, introduce bills, and speak on the floor but cannot vote on final passage, as authorized by statutes like 48 U.S.C. § 491 for D.C. and expanded over time from the Northwest Ordinance of 1787.[53]Party Leadership, Caucuses, and Partisanship
The majority party in the House of Representatives selects its leadership through internal elections within its caucus, granting it control over key procedural and organizational roles, including the nomination of the Speaker, who must then be elected by a majority of the full House.[54] In the 119th Congress, convened on January 3, 2025, Republicans hold a narrow majority of 220 seats to Democrats' 213, enabling them to retain the speakership.[55] Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) was re-elected on the first ballot with 218 votes.[56] The Speaker presides over sessions, sets the legislative agenda in coordination with committee chairs, and represents the House in external affairs, while the Majority Leader, currently Steve Scalise (R-LA), manages floor scheduling and strategy, and the Majority Whip, Tom Emmer (R-MN), enforces party discipline by counting votes and urging attendance.[57] The minority party mirrors this structure with its own leader—Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) as Minority Leader—and whip, who advocate for their party's priorities but lack control over the calendar or rules.[58] Formal party caucuses, known as the House Democratic Caucus for Democrats and the House Republican Conference for Republicans, convene privately to elect leaders every two years at the start of each Congress, deliberate on policy priorities, and enforce unity through incentives like committee assignments or campaign support.[54] These bodies trace their organized roles to the mid-19th century, when parties formalized caucus voting to nominate candidates for Speaker amid growing factionalism, evolving from informal gatherings in the early Republic to binding mechanisms for agenda-setting by the 1850s.[59] Beyond party caucuses, over 400 informal congressional member organizations (CMOs), including ideological and issue-specific groups, operate as of the 119th Congress, influencing legislation through networking and advocacy but without formal authority over votes or rules; notable examples include the Republican Study Committee (conservative Republicans), the conservative House Freedom Caucus (formed 2015 to push fiscal restraint and limited government), and the Democratic Progressive Caucus (emphasizing expanded social programs).[60] Partisanship in the House has intensified since the late 20th century, driven by ideological sorting and electoral incentives, resulting in high rates of party-unity voting where members align with their leadership over 90% of the time on contested bills in recent sessions.[61] GovTrack's 2024 ideology scores place House Republicans and Democrats at opposite extremes, with the median Republican legislator scoring more conservative than 99% of Democrats and vice versa, reflecting a widening gap from the more overlapping ideologies of prior decades.[61] The Lugar Center's Bipartisan Index for the 118th Congress (2023-2025) ranked House bipartisanship at historic lows, with only a few members crossing party lines frequently, as procedural tools like the motion to recommit and closed rules further entrench majority control.[62] This polarization traces to post-Civil War party realignments, accelerating in the 1990s with the Gingrich-led Republican revolution emphasizing confrontational tactics, and persists amid slim majorities that amplify internal caucus pressures over compromise.[54]Committees, Subcommittees, and Procedural Rules
The House of Representatives divides its legislative, oversight, and investigative responsibilities among a structured committee system, consisting primarily of standing committees, subcommittees, select committees, and joint committees with the Senate. This system enables specialized review of bills referred by the Speaker, agency oversight, and policy development, with most legislation originating or being shaped in committees before floor consideration. Standing committees, the core of the system, are permanent bodies established by House rules, numbering 20 in the 119th Congress (2025–2027), each assigned jurisdiction over defined subject areas such as agriculture (Committee on Agriculture), fiscal matters (Committee on Ways and Means), and national security (Committee on Armed Services).[63][64] Subcommittees serve as operational subunits within standing committees, handling narrower policy domains, conducting hearings, and drafting legislation or reports for full committee markup. House Rule X limits most standing committees to five subcommittees, though exceptions permit a sixth for committees with overlapping jurisdictions or specific mandates, such as the Committee on Appropriations, which oversees 12 subcommittees aligned with federal spending categories. Subcommittee chairs and membership are allocated by the full committee chair, typically reflecting party ratios, and they exercise significant autonomy in investigations and bill refinement while remaining accountable to the parent committee.[65] Select committees, also known as special committees, are temporary panels created by House resolution for targeted inquiries, such as the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party in the 119th Congress, which focuses on geopolitical threats without legislative authority. Joint committees, comprising members from both chambers, address bicameral issues like economic policy (Joint Economic Committee) or taxation (Joint Committee on Taxation), but they lack authority to report legislation directly. Committee assignments are determined by party steering committees at the session's start, with ratios mirroring the House's partisan balance—majority party members holding chairs and a slight edge in seats—and limited to service on one major committee plus additional panels based on seniority and leadership preferences.[66][67] Procedural rules for committees derive from House Rule XI, which mandates open meetings unless closed by majority vote for national security or personnel matters, and requires committees to maintain records of proceedings, votes, and witnesses. Each committee adopts its own rules at the Congress's outset, consistent with House rules, governing quorum (a majority of members for conducting business), voting (simple majority for most actions), hearings (public notice at least one week in advance), and markups (amendment and approval of measures). Oversight responsibilities include mandatory biennial reviews of programs under committee jurisdiction, with powers to subpoena witnesses and documents enforced through House authority. The Committee on Rules, while primarily managing floor procedures, influences committee operations indirectly by shaping special rules for bill consideration post-committee referral. These mechanisms ensure committee efficiency but have drawn criticism for potential partisan gatekeeping, particularly when majority control limits minority input on agendas or subpoenas.[68][64]Legislative Procedures and Functions
Daily Operations and Session Management
The Speaker of the House, or a Member designated as presiding officer under Rule I, calls the chamber to order precisely at the hour to which the House adjourned the previous legislative day.[69] The legislative day begins with formalities including an invocation delivered by the House Chaplain, approval or correction of the Journal summarizing prior proceedings (typically by unanimous consent without reading), and recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance.[70] These steps ensure procedural continuity while adhering to traditions established since the First Congress. A quorum, comprising a majority of the House's 435 constitutional membership (218 Members assuming full seating, adjusted for vacancies), is constitutionally required under Article I, Section 5 for conducting any business beyond procedural motions. Any Member may question the presence of a quorum, triggering a roll-call verification by the Clerk via electronic voting system, during which debate and votes halt until at least 218 Members respond or the Speaker declares a quorum secured.[71] In practice, quorum calls serve both to confirm attendance and as a dilatory tactic in partisan disputes, with the House able to compel attendance via a call of the House ordering the Sergeant-at-Arms to retrieve absent Members.[72] The daily order of business, prescribed by Rule XIV unless modified, prioritizes handling items on the Speaker's table—such as engrossing bills for presidential action or messages from the Senate—followed by unfinished business from the prior session, and then the "orders of the day": committee reports under the call of committees, Private Calendar business (typically Mondays after the first segment), motions to suspend the rules (Mondays and Tuesdays after the Private Calendar), and Consent Calendar items for non-controversial measures.[69] This sequence promotes efficiency in routine matters but yields frequently to special rules adopted by the Committee on Rules, which structure debate, amendments, and voting for major legislation, often waiving regular order to expedite consideration.[73] Unanimous consent requests further adapt the agenda, allowing leadership to bundle votes or set time limits without objection. Session management vests primarily in the Speaker, who enforces rules of decorum, recognizes Members for speeches or motions, interprets procedural questions (appealable to the House), and controls recesses or adjournments.[69] An adjournment terminates the legislative day, resetting the order of business upon reconvening, while a recess merely suspends proceedings temporarily within the same legislative day, enabling the House to extend sessions across multiple calendar days if needed.[74] During recesses exceeding three days, the House conducts pro forma sessions—brief, non-legislative gatherings with no quorum required—to avert an unintended sine die adjournment that would end the Congress prematurely under constitutional constraints.[74] In the 119th Congress (2025–2027), sessions adhere to a leadership-determined calendar, typically convening mid-morning on Tuesdays through Fridays for votes and debates, with electronic voting periods clustered to minimize floor time amid slim partisan margins.Bill Introduction, Debate, and Passage
Bills in the United States House of Representatives are introduced by members during sessions by placing the printed text in a designated box known as the hopper, located adjacent to the Clerk's desk on the House floor.[75] Each bill receives a sequential number prefixed "H.R." for House bills, along with a title and sponsor's name, and is officially recorded in the Congressional Record.[76] Per Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution, all bills raising revenue must originate in the House, though the Senate may amend them.[10] The Speaker of the House then refers the bill to the appropriate standing committee or committees based on subject matter, often guided by precedents and consultations with the Parliamentarian.[77] Following referral, bills undergo committee consideration, including hearings for testimony from experts and stakeholders, markup sessions for proposed amendments, and a committee vote to report the bill favorably, unfavorably, or with amendments to the full House.[78] If reported, the bill is placed on one of several legislative calendars, such as the House Calendar for public bills or the Union Calendar for those affecting revenue or appropriations.[79] To reach the floor, the majority party leadership, typically through the Rules Committee, proposes a special rule—a resolution specifying debate time, amendment eligibility, and germaneness requirements—which the House must approve by majority vote before considering the underlying bill.[80] This structured approach contrasts with the Senate's more open debate, enabling the House to manage its larger membership efficiently without filibusters.[81] On the floor, debate is limited and structured by the special rule, with time allocated equally between majority and minority proponents and opponents, often divided among members via party leaders.[80] Amendments must generally adhere to germaneness standards to prevent unrelated changes, and they are considered in a specified order, such as the "committee of the whole" for flexibility in debating and amending before returning to the House for final approval.[81] The House Parliamentarian advises on procedural compliance, ensuring adherence to House rules derived from the standing Rules of the House adopted at the start of each Congress.[77] Passage requires a quorum of at least 218 members and a simple majority vote of those present and voting, unless a supermajority is specified for certain measures like constitutional amendments.[77] Voting occurs via voice vote for routine matters, division vote for clarification, or recorded electronic vote displaying members' yea/nay positions on chamber screens, with results entered into the Congressional Record.[80] A motion to recommit may send the bill back to committee with or without instructions, potentially altering or derailing it before final passage.[81] Upon House approval in identical form to any Senate version or after conference reconciliation, the bill advances to the President; otherwise, it may die or require further action.[82]Appropriations, Impeachment, and Oversight Roles
The United States House of Representatives holds the constitutional authority to originate all bills for raising revenue, including appropriations for federal spending, as established in Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which states that "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."[83] This "power of the purse" enables the House to exert significant influence over executive priorities by controlling funding allocations through the Committee on Appropriations, which reviews the president's annual budget request, conducts hearings with agency heads, and drafts 12 annual appropriations bills covering discretionary spending across federal programs.[13][84] These bills must pass the House by majority vote before proceeding to the Senate, where amendments are permitted but cannot fundamentally alter the revenue-originating requirement, ensuring the House's primacy in fiscal matters despite frequent bipartisan negotiations and occasional government shutdowns when deadlines are missed, such as the 35-day partial shutdown from December 22, 2018, to January 25, 2019.[85] Under Article I, Section 2, Clause 5, the House possesses the sole power of impeachment, allowing it to charge federal civil officers, including the president, vice president, and judges, with "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" by a simple majority vote, after which the Senate conducts the trial and determines removal by a two-thirds vote.[22] Since 1789, the House has initiated impeachment proceedings more than 60 times, culminating in 21 full impeachments of federal officials, with only eight resulting in Senate removal, primarily judges; notable presidential impeachments include Andrew Johnson in 1868, Bill Clinton in 1998, and Donald Trump in 2019 and 2021, none of whom were convicted by the Senate.[86][87] Impeachment proceedings typically begin in the House Judiciary Committee, which investigates allegations and drafts articles of impeachment, reflecting the framers' intent to provide a check on executive overreach without requiring criminal convictions.[88] The House exercises oversight over the executive branch to monitor policy implementation, ensure accountability, and investigate misconduct, primarily through standing committees like the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, which has jurisdiction over federal government operations, procurement, and efficiency, conducting hearings, subpoenas, and audits to evaluate agency performance.[89][90] This role, implicit in Congress's legislative authority, involves reviewing executive actions for compliance with law, as seen in investigations into matters like the Fast and Furious operation (2011–2012) or Biden family business dealings (2023–2024), and extends to other committees such as Ways and Means or Energy and Commerce for domain-specific scrutiny.[89] Oversight findings can lead to legislation, budget adjustments, or impeachment referrals, underscoring the House's function in maintaining separation of powers, though partisan divisions often influence inquiry scopes and outcomes.[90]Historical Development
Early Republic and Formative Years (1789–1860)
The House of Representatives achieved a quorum and organized its first session on April 1, 1789, at Federal Hall in New York City, nearly a month after the constitutional start date of March 4 due to incomplete elections and travel delays across states.[91] [92] Frederick Augustus Conrad Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania was unanimously elected Speaker that day, marking the beginning of the office's role in presiding over debates, enforcing rules, and appointing select committees.[93] The body initially comprised 65 members apportioned by an act of the First Congress itself, using population estimates from 1785 state censuses since no federal enumeration had yet occurred.[94] This temporary arrangement reflected the Constitution's directive for decennial reapportionment but prioritized immediate functionality amid the new government's fragile start.[95] Early proceedings emphasized establishing operational rules and committees, with the first select committee appointed on April 2, 1789, to draft standing rules of procedure modeled partly on the Continental Congress and state legislatures.[96] The House relied predominantly on ad hoc select committees for legislation, such as those handling the Judiciary Act of 1789, which created federal courts, and tariff bills to fund the government, rather than permanent standing panels.[97] This committee-centric approach decentralized power from the Speaker initially but evolved as membership grew; by the 1790s, a few standing committees emerged for ongoing tasks like elections and claims.[98] Political factions coalesced into proto-parties—Federalists favoring strong central authority and Democratic-Republicans opposing it—driving contentious Speaker elections and influencing committee assignments, as seen in Muhlenberg's reelection in 1791 amid shifting majorities.[99] The 1790 census, enumerating 3,929,214 inhabitants, prompted the Apportionment Act of 1792, expanding the House to 105 seats using the constitutional method of equal proportions to balance representation and cap total size.[95] Subsequent acts followed decennial censuses: 142 members in 1802, 181 in 1811 (delayed by war), 213 in 1822, and 223 in 1842 after debates over ratios that favored smaller states' influence.[100] [94] Speakers like Henry Clay of Kentucky (1811–1814, 1815–1820, 1823–1825) wielded growing influence, leveraging the role to expedite war funding during the War of 1812 and broker compromises like the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which admitted Missouri as a slave state while prohibiting slavery north of 36°30' in the Louisiana Territory via House-passed enabling legislation.[93] Sectional tensions over slavery intensified House proceedings from the 1830s, as antislavery petitions surged—over 130,000 signatures in 1838 alone—prompting Southern members to enact the "gag rule" in 1836, which automatically tabled such petitions without debate to prevent disruption.[101] Former President John Quincy Adams, as a Massachusetts representative, led opposition, arguing the rule violated petition rights under the First Amendment; it faced annual challenges and was repealed in 1844 after Northern gains eroded Southern control.[102] Later flashpoints included the House's passage of the Wilmot Proviso in 1846 (barring slavery in Mexican Cession territories, though defeated in Senate) and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854, which organized territories with popular sovereignty on slavery, fracturing parties and sparking violent "Bleeding Kansas" conflicts that foreshadowed civil war.[103] By 1860, the House had 237 members, reflecting westward expansion, but speakership elections grew deadlocked over slavery's expansion, as evidenced by the 1855–1856 contest requiring 133 ballots before Nathaniel Banks's election under a coalition excluding strict pro-slavery factions.[100] [93] These dynamics underscored the House's populist yet volatile nature, amplifying regional divides in a body designed for frequent turnover and direct voter accountability.[94]Civil War Era to Progressive Reforms (1861–1920)
The secession of Southern states at the outset of the Civil War in 1861 resulted in the departure of 73 Democratic representatives, leaving the 37th Congress (1861–1863) with a Republican majority of 105 to 43, supplemented by Unionists.[54] This shift enabled the House to enact key wartime measures, including the Legal Tender Act of 1862 and the National Banking Act of 1863, without Southern opposition, while the body operated with reduced membership until Reconstruction addressed readmission. The 38th Congress (1863–1865) saw a narrowed Republican edge following midterm losses, yet retained sufficient control to fund the Union effort and advance emancipation policies.[104] During Reconstruction, the House, dominated by Radical Republicans, initially barred former Confederates from seating through the Ironclad Oath and other tests of loyalty, as in the 39th Congress (1865–1867), where Southern states' representatives were excluded pending congressional approval of new constitutions.[105] The Joint Committee on Reconstruction, comprising nine House members and six senators, drafted policies leading to the Reconstruction Acts of 1867, which divided the South into military districts and mandated Black male suffrage.[106] This era saw the House impeach President Andrew Johnson on February 24, 1868, over violations of the Tenure of Office Act, though the Senate acquitted him.[107] Black representation emerged, with Joseph Rainey of South Carolina becoming the first Black member seated on December 12, 1870, followed by up to eight serving concurrently by 1875, totaling 16 during the period amid expanded Southern electorates.[108] By the late 1870s, Democratic gains and violence eroded these gains, ending Radical control after the Compromise of 1877.[109] Apportionment expanded the House following the 1870 census; the Act of February 28, 1872, increased seats to 283, reflecting population growth while maintaining district-based elections.[110] Further delays in reapportionment after the 1880 and 1890 censuses preserved a smaller House until the 1911 Act, based on the 1910 census, permanently capped membership at 435 starting with the 63rd Congress in 1913.[111] These adjustments favored established districts, contributing to rural overrepresentation as urbanization accelerated. In the Gilded Age, procedural battles intensified partisanship. Speaker Thomas B. Reed (R-ME) in 1889–1891 enforced rulings that counted members merely present for quorum purposes, effectively ending the "disappearing quorum" tactic used by Democrats to obstruct Republican majorities.[112] The Reed Rules, formally adopted February 14, 1890, further curtailed dilatory motions and required votes from all present unless excused, consolidating majority control and reducing minority obstruction.[113] This marked a shift toward efficient majority rule amid growing chamber size and complexity. The Progressive Era challenged centralized Speaker authority. Under Joseph G. Cannon (R-IL), Speaker from 1903 to 1911, the office wielded near-absolute control over committee assignments and the Rules Committee, blocking progressive bills on tariffs and trusts.[114] A bipartisan revolt culminated on March 19, 1910, when Progressive Republicans and Democrats passed a resolution during an all-night session, stripping the Speaker of committee appointment powers and expanding the Rules Committee to include non-leaders, decentralizing authority to standing committees.[115] This reform, while not ousting Cannon immediately, diminished the Speakership's dominance and aligned with broader demands for transparency and committee autonomy.[116] Jeannette Rankin (R-MT) became the first woman elected to the House on November 7, 1916, serving in the 65th Congress (1917–1919) and advancing suffrage and peace measures, reflecting gradual inclusion amid the 19th Amendment's ratification push.[117] By 1920, these changes had professionalized the House, with longer member tenures and structured partisanship, setting the stage for modern operations.[54]Mid-20th Century Changes and Postwar Dynamics (1921–2000)
Following the 1920 census, Congress failed to reapportion House seats, leaving the chamber at 435 members despite population shifts that increasingly underrepresented urban and growing states until the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 formalized this size and established a formula for future automatic adjustments based on decennial censuses.[45] This delay exacerbated malapportionment, with rural areas overrepresented relative to burgeoning cities, influencing legislative priorities toward agricultural interests during the 1920s Republican majorities.[118] Republicans held House control from the 67th Congress (1921–1923) through the 71st (1929–1931), with majorities ranging from 225 to 267 seats, before Democrats seized power in the 72nd Congress (1931–1933) amid the Great Depression, maintaining it for most subsequent decades until 1995.[54] Democratic dominance, often with supermajorities exceeding 250 seats in the 1930s and 1960s, enabled passage of expansive legislation including New Deal programs and Great Society initiatives, though southern Democrats' seniority entrenched conservative blocs on committees, delaying civil rights measures until external pressures mounted in the 1960s.[54] The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946 marked a pivotal postwar reform, reducing House standing committees from 33 to 19, centralizing authority under fewer chairs, enhancing legislative oversight of the executive through expanded investigative powers, and providing staff resources to counter bureaucratic growth.[119] Enacted after Republicans gained a 246–188 majority in the 80th Congress (1947–1949)—their first in 18 years—the Act also raised congressional salaries by 25 percent and established a retirement system, aiming to professionalize operations amid Cold War demands.[120] These changes facilitated bipartisan foreign policy consensus but preserved seniority-based committee leadership, which Democrats reclaimed in 1949. Influential Speakers shaped procedural dynamics: Nicholas Longworth (R, 1925–1931) enforced strict decorum and curtailed dilatory tactics, while Sam Rayburn (D, 1940–1941, 1941–1947, 1949–1953, 1955–1961) wielded informal influence to build coalitions, notably advancing civil rights bills like the 1957 Act after decades of obstruction.[93] Postwar partisanship intensified in the 1970s with reforms curbing unchecked committee power, including subcommittee autonomy and recorded votes via the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, responding to Vietnam and Watergate scandals that eroded public trust.[121] The 1994 elections delivered Republicans a 230–204 majority under Newt Gingrich (Speaker, 1995–1999), ending 40 years of Democratic control and implementing rules reforms like the six-term limit for committee chairs and enhanced ethics enforcement to dismantle entrenched interests.[54] This "Republican Revolution," driven by the Contract with America, emphasized fiscal restraint and welfare overhaul, though internal divisions and impeachments tested unity by 2000.[122] Throughout the era, the House adapted to demographic shifts and executive expansion, balancing representational responsiveness with institutional efficiency.[123]Contemporary Era and Recent Reforms (2001–Present)
The period from 2001 onward has been characterized by intense partisan polarization in the House, narrow majorities that frequently shifted control between Republicans and Democrats, and procedural adaptations to manage legislative gridlock.[124][54] Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the 107th Congress (2001–2003) under Republican Speaker Dennis Hastert demonstrated brief bipartisan unity in passing the USA PATRIOT Act on October 24, 2001, and authorizing military force against those responsible for the attacks on October 11, 2001.[125] However, divisions soon deepened over the Iraq War resolution, approved by the House on October 10, 2002, with 296 Republicans and 131 Democrats voting in favor.[54] Republicans retained slim majorities through the 109th Congress (2005–2007), with seats at 232–201, enabling passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act in November 2003, but facing internal challenges like the 2006 Abramoff lobbying scandal that contributed to the party's midterm losses.[54] Democrats gained control in the 110th Congress (2007–2009) with 233 seats to 202, implementing reforms such as a six-month earmark ban announced by Speaker Nancy Pelosi on January 5, 2007, and reinstating pay-as-you-go budgeting rules to curb deficits.[54] The 111th Congress (2009–2011) saw Democratic majorities swell to 257–178, facilitating the Affordable Care Act's House passage on November 7, 2009, amid Tea Party opposition that fueled the 2010 Republican wave, flipping 63 seats and yielding a 242–193 majority in the 112th Congress (2011–2013).[54] Republican control persisted through the 115th Congress (2017–2019) with margins up to 247–188, passing the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on November 16, 2017, but struggling with internal factions evident in failed Obamacare repeal attempts.[54] Democrats reclaimed the House in the 116th Congress (2019–2021) at 235–199, launching two impeachments of President Donald Trump—on December 18, 2019, for abuse of power and obstruction related to Ukraine, and on January 13, 2021, for incitement of insurrection following the January 6 Capitol events.[126] The 117th Congress (2021–2023) narrowed to 222 Democrats and 213 Republicans, marked by COVID-19 relief packages like the American Rescue Plan Act passed March 10, 2021, and ongoing earmark revival in 2021 after a decade-long moratorium.[54] The 118th Congress (2023–2025) began with Republicans at 222–213, but Speaker Kevin McCarthy's September 15, 2023, ouster—the first in U.S. history—highlighted factional rifts, resolved by electing Mike Johnson on October 25, 2023.[127] Rules changes that Congress lowered the motion-to-vacate threshold, allowing any single member to force a Speaker vote, and introduced a "church rule" for quicker committee ratio adjustments.[128][129] Republicans narrowly retained control in the 119th Congress (2025–2027) with the slimmest modern majority, prompting H. Res. 5 on January 3, 2025, to adopt rules emphasizing single-subject bills, reinstating a modified Hastert rule for majority-of-the-majority support on floor votes, and prioritizing measures like border security and fiscal restraint amid ongoing productivity challenges from razor-thin margins.[130][124][131] These reforms reflect adaptations to polarization, with rules packages evolving to balance party discipline against minority input, though critics argue they exacerbate gridlock by restricting amendments and favoring leadership control.[132][133] Overall, the era has seen declining legislative output, with annual bills passed dropping from averages over 600 in the early 2000s to under 100 by the 2020s, attributed to procedural hurdles and ideological sorting.[134]Current Composition and Dynamics
Party Breakdown and Membership as of October 2025
As of October 25, 2025, the Republican Party holds 219 seats in the 435-member United States House of Representatives, while the Democratic Party holds 214 seats, with 2 vacancies pending special elections. A majority of 218 seats is required for party control of the House, including electing the Speaker and organizing the chamber.[6][135] This narrow Republican majority resulted from the 2024 elections, which initially seated 220 Republicans and 215 Democrats, followed by adjustments due to resignations and deaths requiring special elections.[136][137]| Party | Voting Seats |
|---|---|
| Republican | 219 |
| Democratic | 214 |
| Vacant | 2 |
| Total | 435 |
Outcomes of the 2024 Elections and Special Elections
The 2024 United States House of Representatives elections, held on November 5, 2024, resulted in the Republican Party securing 220 seats and maintaining a slim majority, while the Democratic Party won 215 seats.[142][143] This outcome represented a net Republican gain of approximately five seats compared to the effective party division at the end of the 118th Congress, amid a national popular vote share for House candidates of about 50.9% for Republicans and 47.6% for Democrats.[144] The final uncalled race, California's 13th congressional district, was decided on December 4, 2024, with Democrat Adam Gray defeating Republican John Duarte by a margin of 50.3% to 49.7%, confirming the 220–215 split.[145][146] Several special elections occurred in 2025 to fill vacancies in the 119th Congress arising from resignations, deaths, or appointments. In Florida's 1st congressional district, vacated by Republican Matt Gaetz upon his nomination for attorney general, Republican Jimmy Patronis won the April 1, 2025, special election with 73.6% of the vote against Democrat Gay Valimont, preserving Republican control of the seat.[147][148] In Virginia's 11th congressional district, following the death of Democrat Gerry Connolly on May 21, 2025, Democrat James Walkinshaw prevailed in the September 9, 2025, special election, capturing 74.9% of the vote against Republican Stewart Whitson and retaining Democratic hold of the district.[149][150] These and other held specials, including one in Arizona where Democrat Adelita Grijalva filled a vacancy, produced no net partisan shifts as incumbency party affiliates won the respective seats.[151] As of October 25, 2025, the House partisan composition reflects 219 Republicans and 213 Democrats among filled seats, with three vacancies pending resolution, including the Texas 18th congressional district special election scheduled for November 4, 2025, to replace the late Democrat Sylvester Turner.[152][137] The vacancies stem from unresolved transitions, maintaining Republican nominal majority status despite the reduced filled-seat count.[152]| Event | Date | District | Winner (Party) | Partisan Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| General Elections | November 5, 2024 | All 435 | Republicans (220 seats) | Republican majority retained |
| FL-01 Special | April 1, 2025 | Florida 1st | Jimmy Patronis (R) | No change (R hold) |
| VA-11 Special | September 9, 2025 | Virginia 11th | James Walkinshaw (D) | No change (D hold) |
| TX-18 Special (pending) | November 4, 2025 | Texas 18th | TBD | Vacant (historically D-leaning) |
Rules Changes in the 119th Congress
On January 3, 2025, the House of Representatives adopted H. Res. 5 by a vote of 220-215, establishing the rules for the 119th Congress by incorporating the standing rules of the 118th Congress with specified amendments and separate orders.[130] [153] These changes primarily aimed to enhance procedural efficiency, strengthen oversight capabilities, and stabilize leadership amid the Republican majority's narrow 220-215 edge following the 2024 elections.[154] [155] A significant amendment to Rule IX modified the process for motions to declare a Speaker vacancy, requiring any such privileged resolution to be sponsored by a majority party member and cosponsored by at least eight additional majority party members, effectively necessitating support from nine Republicans to trigger a floor vote on removal.[156] [155] This provision addressed instabilities from the prior Congress, where single-member motions led to multiple Speaker changes, by raising the threshold for intra-party challenges while preserving the option for a full House majority vote if initiated.[131] [155] Amendments to committee procedures included authorizing standing committees to conduct depositions under subpoena, expanding investigative tools beyond select committees, and permitting chairs to allow remote testimony from state and local officials at their discretion to facilitate oversight without travel mandates.[156] [153] Floor-related updates retained the Holman Rule, enabling amendments in appropriations bills to reduce funding for specific programs, offices, or employee compensation, and introduced provisions for single-issue spending reduction amendments to target deficit increases.[156] Committees gained authority to adopt rules for electronic voting, subject to regulations from the Committees on Rules and House Administration, with results to be printed in the Congressional Record.[154] Ethics reforms renamed the Office of Congressional Ethics to the Office of Congressional Conduct and mandated a committee vote within 30 days on appointing its staff director and chief counsel, aiming to ensure quicker operational startup while continuing prior anti-harassment and anti-discrimination policies for employing offices.[156] Separate orders extended the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party with revised reporting deadlines and preserved transparency measures, such as improved public access to legislative documents and integration of artificial intelligence tools for committee operations.[156] Additional administrative tweaks reserved bill numbers H.R. 1–10 for the Speaker and H.R. 11–20 for the Minority Leader, and empowered the Speaker to designate "district work periods" on legislative days to align with member travel needs.[154]Comparisons with Other Institutions
Differences from the United States Senate
The United States House of Representatives and the Senate, the two chambers of Congress, exhibit fundamental differences in composition, election processes, legislative powers, and procedural rules, as delineated in Article I of the U.S. Constitution. These distinctions reflect the framers' intent to balance popular representation with state equality, with the House designed for more direct responsiveness to population shifts and the Senate for stability and deliberation.[14][2]| Aspect | House of Representatives | Senate |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Members | 435 voting members, apportioned by state population, plus non-voting delegates from territories.[157][141] | 100 members (two per state).[158] |
| Term Length | Two years, with all seats up for election every even-numbered year.[159] | Six years, with approximately one-third of seats up for election every two years.[160][161] |
| Representation Basis | Districts drawn based on population decennial census data, ensuring proportional representation.[2] | Equal representation regardless of state population, providing smaller states amplified voice.[2] |
| Exclusive Powers | Originates all revenue bills; initiates impeachment proceedings against federal officials.[82][162] | Conducts impeachment trials; ratifies treaties (by two-thirds vote); confirms presidential appointments (by majority vote).[82][162] |
| Debate and Procedure | Strict rules limit debate time, prohibit filibusters, and emphasize majority rule for efficiency in a large body.[82] | Permits unlimited debate, enabling filibusters to delay or block measures unless ended by cloture (60-vote threshold).[163][82] |
Interactions in Checks and Balances System
The House of Representatives exercises checks on the executive branch primarily through its exclusive authority to initiate revenue-raising bills under Article I, Section 7, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution, which requires all such legislation to originate there, though the Senate may amend them.[83] This fiscal primacy extends to appropriations bills, enabling the House to control federal spending and thereby constrain executive priorities, as Congress holds the "power of the purse" to fund or withhold resources for agencies and programs.[165] The House further checks the executive via its sole power of impeachment, granted by Article I, Section 2, Clause 5, allowing a simple majority to charge civil officers, including the President, with "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"; the Senate then tries the case, requiring a two-thirds vote for conviction and removal. Historical instances include the House's impeachment of President Andrew Johnson on February 24, 1868, for violating the Tenure of Office Act; President Bill Clinton on December 19, 1998, for perjury and obstruction of justice; and President Donald Trump on December 18, 2019, for abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, as well as on January 13, 2021, for incitement of insurrection—none resulting in Senate conviction.[86] In the legislative process, the House's interactions with the executive incorporate mutual checks: after bicameral passage, the President may veto bills under Article I, Section 7, Clause 2, but the House, alongside the Senate, can override with a two-thirds vote of members present, assuming a quorum.[166] Successful overrides are rare, occurring only 111 times in over 1,500 vetoes since 1789, underscoring the veto's potency as an executive restraint on House-initiated legislation.[167] The House also nominally shares war declaration powers with the Senate under Article I, Section 8, Clause 11, though post-World War II practice has seen Congress delegate authority via resolutions, such as the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, allowing executive-led operations without formal declarations.[165] The judiciary checks House actions through judicial review, as established in Marbury v. Madison (1803), invalidating statutes deemed unconstitutional, including those originating in the House; conversely, the House can impeach federal judges for misconduct, with 15 judges removed following House impeachment since 1789. Bicameral checks with the Senate require House concurrence on non-revenue bills and resolutions, often resolved via conference committees, preventing unilateral House dominance while ensuring broader representation in lawmaking.[168] These mechanisms, rooted in separation of powers, empirically promote deliberation but have faced critiques for enabling gridlock, as evidenced by fewer than 300 laws enacted annually in recent Congresses amid partisan veto threats and overrides.[169]Compensation, Benefits, and Accountability
Salaries, Pensions, and Financial Perks
Members of the United States House of Representatives receive an annual base salary of $174,000, which has remained unchanged since January 1, 2009, despite cost-of-living adjustments being applied to other federal employees.[170] The Speaker of the House earns $223,500 annually, while majority and minority leaders receive $193,400 each.[171] These salaries are set by law and funded through taxpayer appropriations, with no automatic annual increases tied to inflation unless Congress approves them.[172] Pensions for House members are provided under the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS), which applies to those entering service after 1983, combining a defined benefit annuity, Social Security, and the Thrift Savings Plan (TSP).[173] Eligibility for the FERS basic annuity requires at least five years of service, with vesting at age 62, or reduced benefits available at age 50 with 20 years of service, or after 25 years regardless of age.[173] The annuity formula yields 1% of the average of the highest three years' salary multiplied by years of service, supplemented by automatic 1% government contributions to TSP and matching up to 5% of employee contributions.[174] Members under the older Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) receive higher annuities averaging 1.7% per year of service but without TSP or full Social Security integration.[175] Additional financial perks include access to the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) program for comprehensive health, dental, and vision coverage, with the government covering approximately 72% of premiums on average.[176] Life insurance through the Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) is available, as is disability coverage under workers' compensation.[177] These benefits, while standard for federal employees, provide House members with subsidized retirement security and health protections exceeding typical private-sector offerings for similar tenure, funded entirely by public resources.[171]Staff, Travel, and Operational Allowances
Members of the House of Representatives receive a Members' Representational Allowance (MRA), a consolidated annual budget to support official duties, including staffing, travel, office operations, and communications with constituents.[178] The MRA amount varies by member based on factors such as district population, distance from Washington, D.C., and regional cost differences, with allocations determined by formulas established in House rules and appropriations.[170] For fiscal year 2025, the House's overall MRA funding contributes to a legislative branch budget request exceeding $800 million for member offices, though per-member figures typically range from approximately $1.4 million to $2 million depending on specific district characteristics.[179] Staff allowances under the MRA fund personal office personnel in both Washington, D.C., and district offices, with no fixed limit on staff numbers but practical constraints tied to the budget.[180] Members commonly employ 15 to 25 staffers, covering roles like legislative aides, communications specialists, and district representatives, with total staff compensation comprising the largest share of MRA expenditures.[181] Staff salaries are capped at $225,700 annually as of 2025, though average pay per staffer varies by party and office priorities, with reported averages around $1.4 million in total staff costs per House member office.[182][183] These funds must be used for official purposes, subject to House Ethics Committee oversight prohibiting personal or campaign-related uses.[184] Travel allowances within the MRA cover round-trip transportation between a member's district and Washington, D.C., typically up to 64 trips per year for non-contiguous states or more limited for others, plus official district travel and per diem rates for meals and incidental expenses during official duties.[170] Economy-class airfare is standard, with reimbursements processed through the MRA for costs incurred in representational activities, such as constituent meetings or oversight site visits.[184] Since 2023, House rules have permitted reimbursements for Washington, D.C., lodging and subsistence expenses under a per diem structure aligned with General Services Administration rates, averaging $200–$300 daily for meals and incidentals in the capital region, to cover costs of maintaining dual residences while in session.[185][186] Privately funded travel requires pre-approval and disclosure to mitigate influence concerns.[187] Operational allowances from the MRA support office infrastructure, including district and D.C. lease payments, utilities, equipment, and supplies, often amounting to hundreds of thousands of dollars annually per office.[180] The franking privilege enables members to send official mail—such as newsletters and casework correspondence—at government expense without postage, with annual allocations historically in the tens of millions collectively for the House, though usage has declined from $113 million in 1988 to under $20 million by 2018 due to electronic alternatives and restrictions on mass communications near elections.[188][189] All MRA expenditures are publicly reported quarterly via the Clerk of the House's Statement of Disbursements, promoting transparency while prohibiting partisan or fundraising applications.[190] Unused funds do not carry over and revert to the Treasury at session's end.[178]Criticisms of Insider Advantages and Term Limits Debates
Incumbent members of the United States House of Representatives benefit from significant electoral advantages, contributing to reelection rates consistently exceeding 90%. In the 2024 elections, 95% of House incumbents seeking reelection prevailed, reflecting a pattern where incumbents leverage name recognition, established donor networks, and institutional resources unavailable to challengers.[191] [192] This incumbency effect is empirically linked to financial disparities, as incumbents raise substantially more campaign funds; for instance, in cycles analyzed by the Center for Responsive Politics, incumbents outpaced challengers in total receipts by margins often exceeding 2:1, enabling superior advertising and voter outreach.[193] The franking privilege further amplifies these advantages by permitting members to send official mail to constituents at taxpayer expense without postage, a practice criticized for blurring lines between constituent service and implicit campaigning. This perk, rooted in colonial-era precedents but expanded post-1970s reforms, allows mass distribution of newsletters and updates that enhance visibility, with studies indicating it correlates with higher voter retention rates for incumbents.[194] [195] Critics, including reform advocates, argue such mechanisms entrench power, fostering a professionalized class of legislators detached from grassroots accountability, as evidenced by the rarity of competitive primaries or general election upsets absent scandals.[193] These structural insider benefits have fueled ongoing debates over term limits for House members, who face no constitutional restrictions beyond two-year election cycles. Proponents contend that limits—typically proposed as three terms (six years)—would disrupt entrenched advantages, promote turnover, and compel reliance on policy merit over incumbency inertia, aligning with public sentiment where 87% of Americans favor such reforms per 2023 polling.[196] Organizations like U.S. Term Limits argue this would counter the 97% reelection rate observed in 2024, reducing opportunities for careerism and special interest capture.[197] Historical proposals, such as the 1990s push culminating in failed amendments, underscore the causal link between unlimited tenure and diminished responsiveness, though state-level experiments were invalidated by the Supreme Court in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton (1995) for infringing federal uniformity.[198] Opponents, including many political scientists, counter that term limits erode institutional knowledge, increasing dependence on unelected staff and lobbyists while limiting voter sovereignty to retain experienced lawmakers on complex issues like appropriations.[199] Empirical analyses suggest short-term disruptions in state legislatures but no sustained reduction in corruption or polarization, potentially exacerbating gridlock as novices navigate procedural hurdles.[200] Bipartisan bills, such as those reintroduced in the 119th Congress limiting House service to three terms, persist amid these tensions, yet require a two-thirds vote for constitutional amendment, highlighting the debate's entrenchment in federalist principles over empirical panacea.[201]Controversies and Empirical Critiques
Gerrymandering Practices and Partisan Impacts
Gerrymandering practices in the U.S. House of Representatives involve state legislatures redrawing congressional district boundaries following each decennial census to concentrate or dilute voters of opposing parties, typically through "packing" opponents into few districts where they win by large margins or "cracking" them across many where they lose narrowly.[202] This process occurs primarily in states where one party controls the legislature and governorship, allowing maps to be enacted without veto override risks, as seen in Republican trifectas in states like North Carolina and Wisconsin after the 2010 elections.[203] Empirical analyses indicate that such manipulation amplifies preexisting geographic biases, where Democratic voters' urban clustering naturally leads to higher vote efficiency for Republicans under neutral maps, but intentional districting can shift outcomes by 5-10 seats nationally per cycle.[204] In the 2010s redistricting cycle, Republican-controlled legislatures in approximately 20 states drew maps that contributed to a partisan skew, exemplified by the 2012 elections where Democrats received 1.17 million more votes nationwide than Republicans but secured 33 fewer House seats.[205] The efficiency gap—a metric calculating the difference in "wasted votes" (votes exceeding the margin needed to win a district or cast in losing districts) divided by total votes—registered a pro-Republican bias of around 7-8% in key battleground states like Pennsylvania and Michigan during this period, equating to an estimated 16-20 extra GOP seats beyond what uniform partisan swings would predict.[206] [43] However, aggregate national effects often partially offset due to countervailing Democratic gerrymanders in states like Maryland and Illinois, with studies showing that partisan districting's net impact on House control hovers near zero when averaged across all states, as geographic voter distribution accounts for most baseline asymmetry.[42] [207] The 2020s cycle has seen diminished Republican advantages from gerrymandering, partly due to court interventions and independent commissions in states like Virginia and Michigan, resulting in maps closer to proportional representation.[208] In 2024, Democratic gerrymanders in New York and Illinois preserved seats despite vote disadvantages, while Republican efforts in Texas and Florida yielded modest gains, with overall efficiency gaps under 3% nationally—far lower than the 2010s peaks—and contributing to only a net handful of seats favoring either party.[209] [210] These practices reduce electoral competition, with only about 10-15% of districts remaining truly competitive (decided by under 5% margins) post-redistricting, entrenching incumbents and correlating with higher polarization as representatives cater to partisan bases rather than median voters.[211] The Supreme Court's 2019 ruling in Rucho v. Common Cause declined to impose a federal justiciability standard for partisan gerrymandering, leaving remedies to state courts and legislatures, which has led to varied outcomes including map invalidations in six states by 2022.[212]| Redistricting Cycle | Estimated Net Partisan Seat Shift from Gerrymandering | Primary Beneficiary | Key States |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | +16 to +20 Republican seats | Republicans | NC, WI, PA, MI[43] [205] |
| 2020s | Near neutral (0 to +5 mixed) | Balanced/Democratic in blue states | NY, IL (Dem); TX, FL (GOP)[209] [210] |
Campaign Finance, Lobbying, and Corruption Scandals
Campaign finance for U.S. House elections is regulated by the Federal Election Commission under laws including the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 and Supreme Court decisions such as Citizens United v. FEC (2010), which permitted unlimited independent expenditures by corporations and unions. [213] House candidates face individual contribution limits of $3,300 per election from persons and $5,000 per year from multicandidate PACs as of the 2023-2024 cycle, but super PACs and dark money groups can spend unlimited amounts independently. Total spending on federal races, including House contests, reached record levels in 2024, with campaigns raising approximately $8.6 billion between January 2023 and April 2024 across House, Senate, and presidential races.[214] Dark money—undisclosed spending by nonprofits and shell entities—hit $1.9 billion in 2024 federal races, often amplifying partisan messaging without donor transparency, though studies indicate it does not independently predict House election outcomes when controlling for candidate and super PAC spending.[215] [216] Lobbying exerts significant influence on House members through direct advocacy and financial ties, with federal lobbying expenditures climbing to a record $4.4 billion in 2024, up $150 million from the prior year.[217] The "revolving door" facilitates this, as former lawmakers leverage insider knowledge; for instance, 48.38% of former members of the 115th Congress (2017-2019) transitioned to lobbying firms, and revolving-door lobbyists succeed in 63% of their policy efforts compared to lower rates for non-revolving peers.[218] [219] House rules impose a one-year cooling-off period for former members before lobbying Congress, but enforcement relies on self-reporting, allowing shadow lobbying via consultants.[220] Critics argue this system prioritizes special interests over constituents, with 80% of Americans perceiving large donors and lobbyists as having excessive sway over congressional decisions.[221] Corruption scandals have periodically implicated House members, often involving bribery, misuse of campaign funds, or insider trading, leading to convictions, expulsions, or resignations. In 2005, Representative Duke Cunningham (R-CA) pleaded guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors for contract influence, receiving an eight-year sentence.[222] Representative Bob Ney (R-OH) resigned in 2006 amid the Jack Abramoff scandal, pleading guilty to conspiracy and false statements for receiving trips and campaign contributions in exchange for legislative favors.[222] In 2008, Representative William Jefferson (D-LA) was convicted on 11 counts of bribery after $90,000 in cash was found in his freezer, tied to business deals in Africa.[222] More recently, Representative George Santos (R-NY) was expelled in December 2023 following a House Ethics Committee report documenting fraud, money laundering, and campaign finance lies, including fabricating his biography and stealing donor identities.[223] Representative Chris Collins (R-NY) resigned in 2019 after pleading guilty to insider trading and lying to the FBI regarding a biotechnology stock tip.[222] These cases, spanning parties, underscore vulnerabilities where campaign finance opacity and lobbying access enable personal gain, though bipartisan ethics reforms like STOCK Act (2012) aim to curb abuses via disclosure requirements.[224]| Notable House Corruption Convictions (2000-2025) | Member | Party/State | Key Charges | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Duke Cunningham | R-CA | Bribery, tax evasion | 8 years prison (2005) | [222] |
| Bob Ney | R-OH | Conspiracy, false statements | 30 months prison (2006) | [222] |
| William Jefferson | D-LA | Bribery | 13 years prison (2009, reduced) | [222] |
| Chris Collins | R-NY | Insider trading, lying to FBI | 26 months prison (2020) | [222] |
| George Santos | R-NY | Fraud, money laundering | Expelled (2023), federal charges pending | [223] |

