Pols Exam 3

political institutions w formal authority

state legislature, execs, bureaucracy, and courts

state legislature inherent conflict, important trait

conflict between representative func and lawmaking role. bicameral (two chambers)

func of state legislature

lawmaking institution aka wholesale politics (make laws, budget, oversight) and representative institution aka retail politics (represent interests of constituents, bring funds/projects to districts)

diff ways of taking on legislative roles

delegate(mirror pref of constituents), trustee(uses own judgement to make choices) and politico(combo)

citizen leg. body

aka lay or part time; made of volunteers/little salary, short and infrequent sessions, 1-2 terms usually served

professional leg. body

aka full time, full salary, long sessions, many terms, more staff, leg, and constituent services

makeup of state legislators

members sent by smaller constituencies, legislatures are mainly lay bodies (chill), tend to be upper-middle class, college educated, business/law/real estate

descriptive representation

mirrors politically relevant characteristics (age, gender, race, edu) but in reality, there is little to moderate congruency between legislators and citizens

substantive representation

represents the interests of groups, even if they arent a member of one. linked to constituents by interest groups, parties, elections, etc

tx house of representatives

150 members, 21+, 2 year terms, no term limits

tx senate

31 members, 26+, 5 yrs as citizen, 4 year term, no term limits

key points about legislature

unique culture w rules and traditions. rely on expertise of others (other legislature, lobbyists). individual power depends on votes they can draw in. supermajorities voting together can cut out the minority party from lawmaking processes

institutionalization

develops legislative culture; rules, patterns, organizational structure. dev enabled by stability of membership(low turnover = high institutional memory), more staff/salary, more complex rules and procedures

partisanship in legislature

organized on partisan lines (party in govt), partisan divisions dominate lawmaking, more polarization leading to either gridlock or shutout

pork barrel legislation

lawmaking serves interests of constituents

constituent services

help out constituents and boost public image of incumbents. redistricting makes uncompetitive districts to protect incumbents

geographic basis of representation

divided into geographic districts; each level of govt has its own boundaries (house, senate, state senate/house) and they can overlap

who draws electoral boudaries?

state legislatures usually draw both state leg. districts and us congressional districts

legislative apportionment

stats with census, then congressional districts are drawn within 2% of ideal size. state districts have looser standards, deviations respecting political subdivisions are usually ok (e.g. a city or county)

malapportionment

courts viewed redistricting as a political question until baker v carr, which established one person, one vote

formal legal rules for redistricting

equality of pop (one person one vote), contiguity (district must be touching), protected groups (can't dilute minority votes), district shape (can be odd but not bizarre??)

redistricting principles

compactness, contiguity, maintain communities of interest (ppl who share the same views), respect for political boundaries (minimize splitting of counties, towns, etc)

types of gerrymandering

partisan (draw in favor of party, legal, both parties do it) and racial (illegal under vra if its negative, legal if it's affirmative but controversial). packing and cracking voting blocs is how gerrymandering is done

2003 tx redistricting

Controversy over excessive partisanship, mid-decade redistricting, dilution of Hispanic votes

League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry

eroded gerrymandering limits; set perpetual redistricting to be legal, and partisanship acceptable as only goal of redistricting

2011 tx redistricting

failed to get preclearance under VRA, leads to shelby country v holder

shelby county v holder

tx is no longer covered under vra and immediately implements a controversial map

can the fed gov't do anything abt partisan gerrymandering?

no, it's beyond the scope of federal courts

more partisan/racial supreme court cases

rucho v common cause was partisan but nat'l gov't gets no say, abbott v perez was racial, and one district was ruled impermissible but many were allowed to stand

2020 census and redistricting

abbott holds 3rd special session where leg. approves new maps. led to federal lawsuits against maps as well as state lawsuit claiming the districts violate the tx constitution

can redistricting be fixed?

fed can't help w partisan gerrymandering. state level is trying to change to new approaches to map drawing. reform will largely happen through popular initiative, but faces strong opposition from legislatures

roles of state leg. as lawmaking institutions

make statutory laws, budgetary power, amend constitutions

the art of "passing and considering legislation"

state leg. only pass 20-25% of laws, less if it's professional. most are never even considered!

what makes a bill bad, how are they killed

disagrees w constituents, wastes resources, morally wrong. leg. is set up well for killing bills; lends advantage to status quo, designed for delay+killing bills

bills and every step they can die at

leg must sponsor and introduce bill (can be hard to find sponsor), all bills assigned to committee (many never even deliberated), bills assigned to a calendar (that can never happen), bills have to pass both chambers and be exactly alike (so may not pass even w votes) and then go to governor!

life cycle of a major bill

introduced early in session, has companion bills to make success more likely (similar or even identical bill introduced in other chamber), more amendments, more likely to die, later final action, veto is rare

the committee system

committees are workhorses of legislature; division of labor divides into 20/30 committees, specialization of labor means that legislators can specialize and develop policy expertise

legislative leadership

both presiding officers and partisans; can introduce tools to help bills (signal priority, assign to easy committee, give a good calendar spot) or kill them (impossible committee, give a do nothing spot). bills need support of speaker and governor

tx legislative session

140 days, try to introduce bills before day 60 where new bills require 80% consent, last two week logjam passes 80% of bills, abt equal are passed/killed daily

the three readings of a bill

first is the committee assignment, the second places a copy of the whole bill on each desk (this is when debate occurs), and then a final vote happens (must be the next day)

senate stuff that hopefully doesn't matter

all bills that reach the floor pass, only 1 member must be present

how do members decide how to vote?

don't decide during debate! determine position by either being expert, looking to expert legislators, or aligning w organized interests (groups, lobbyists, constituents)

hyper-partisanship in texas

many gatekeepers of leg. process. parties are more polarized(more coherence within but further from each other). till 2001 bills authorized by both parties were strongest, now it's by members of majority party

debate of governing v ruling

bills wo leadership support get no attention, supermajorities can totally ignore minority party, partisan gerrymandering entrenches majority control

backgrounds of us governors

media image, usually sons of political families, some legal background, rarely women. governorship can be a springboard to nat'l office, even like president

usual, common, and universal traits of governors

usual (lots of experience in public affairs), common (experience in other statewide, elected office), and universal (political ambition)

us gubernatorial elections

always partisan, contested, usually competitive, very expensive. often elected in midterm years. term limits/restrictions diff by state. incumbents have an advantage

removal from office (governor)

13 states can recall bc of political dissatisfaction (TX does not have this), 49 states can impeach (impeach by trial in state legislature in response to wrongdoing)

which way is governor power trending?

it's been increasing; state gov'ts are also playing a larger role. media desire to give policy a face is boosting informal powers of governors

roles played by governors

administrator, legislator, ceremonial, negotiator, public opinion leader, and party leader

formal vs informal gubernational powers

formal includes appointment, tenure potential, managerial, fiscal, legislative stuff vs informal varies (stuff like talking to people to persuade them)

appointment power

power to choose other executive officials, key to the strength of office. doesn't guarantee cooperation. TX is very weak because most statewide positions are elected

tenure potential

ability to remain in office (length of term, reelection restrictions). Varies greatly - TX has no term limits or restrictions

managerial powers

oversight of administration/executive orders, reorganization of executive branch (improves political control, tx doesn't have this), weaker if boards are insulated from political control due to staggered terms

fiscal power

governor usually supervises preparation of budget, but not in texas. TX has the weakest fiscal influence, bc they get no formal input to the content of gov't and cannot appoint to the legislative budget board. shares power to transfer emergency money, but does have line-item veto power

legislative power

above avg in texas; includes veto power, line item vetos, and override requires 2/3 of both houses. good tool for bargaining w leg. can also call special session, but no guarantee of siccess for agenda. also a bargaining tool (threat of special session). agneda setting power, can declare emergency items

2021 state of the state emergency items

election integrity, bail reform, expanding broadband access, covid business shield, punishing gov'ts that defund the police

informal power

ability to get things done despite institutional limits; use of de facto leadership of the state. depends on personality and political skill of governor, but also circumstance. basically popularity points. tx is pretty high

plural executives

an executive branch with power divided among several independent officers and a weak chief executive; why governor isn't going to have absolute power despite appearing to be

federal govt executive type

unitary; president is a unitary executive

executive power in the states + TX

often plural; tx is plural bc executive power is divided among many officials

common state executive offices

governor, secretary of state, attorney general, treasurer, auditor/comptroller (appointed OR elected, depends on state)

statewide elected leaders tx

lieutenant governor, comptroller, land commissioner, railroad commission, ag commission, attorney general

lt. governors in the states

power of them (second in command) varies greatly; some have few formal powers and depend on power delegated by governor, other states have legal foundation for competent powers

TX Lieutenant Governor

most institutionally powerful, 4 yr term and not paired w governor (run separately), next in line but has few executive func

legislator in chief

president of tx senate, most powerful legislator, NOT ceremonial like vp- actually does stuff

most important bill of any legislature

budget

legislative budget board

lt. governor is co-chair and appoints half it's members!! this is a key agenda-setting power

tx executive branch

governor has no broad powers over most stuff, lt governor is mainly a super-legislator, plural executive (many independent grants of power, most offices directly elected)

comptroller of public accounts

4 yr terms, broad financial responsibilities (taxes, treasury, estimate state rev), at the heart of the budgetary process

land commissioner

4 yr term, head of general land office. manages texas public land and resources (mineral rights, oil stuff), issues permits for exploration (that become valuable revenue)

public lands tx

12% is public land, only state to control all its public lands, royalties from these lands added to state funds

Railroad Commission of Texas

3 commissioners, 6 year terms, staggered. regulates oil gas and pipelines. power to write regulations and implementation of energy laws

challenges of RRC

at the heart of oil and gas regulation controversies, "captive agency" eg many members are from oil/gas indistry

ag commissioner

4 yr term, head of dept of agriculture. power go enforce state agricultural laws, also responsible for environmental laws and consumer protection (conflict of interest?)

attorney general

4 yr, chief legal officer of state (mostly civil not criminal law, represents state in lawsuits). powers to issue legal opinions on statutes that have THE EFFECT OF LAW unless they're overturned by the court or altered by leg. action

secretary of state

appointed by governor, confirmed by senate!! power to administrate election laws, maintain public records. since they're chief elections officer, subject to extreme political scrutiny

issues w plural executives

lack of energy in admin, fragmented state wide policy, increased power to interest groups

branches of govt and their powers

legislature (make laws and budget, power of the purse), executives (power to enforce laws, power of the sword), courts (judge cases that arise under the law)

setup of court system

can be very different from leges and execs; federal courts are splinters lifetime for example, but some states elect

disputes before courts must be...

justiciable; able to be resolved by legal principles, matter is neither unripe (not a controversy) or moot (decision wouldn't affect controversy)

to bring a case, a party must...

have standing (inquiry and legal redress are done)

two types of law

criminal (harms to society) and civil (disputes bt individuals or businesses)

stare decidis

idea of precedent; idea for stand by things already decided

judicial restraint/activism answer what question

what value should judges place on deference to political branches and legal precedent?

judicial restraint

view court as passive and reactive, generally deferential, minimize policymaking role

rationale for judicial restraint

courts are least democratic institution (bc they're appointed), and judges are generalists that lack qualifications to balance interests and make policy choices

judicial activism

courts should have a greater role, make bold policy decisions/interpretations

rationale for judicial activism

court should be a policymaker, transition can have a positive contribution on govt, have the ability to be more farsighted

Two kinds of jurisdiction

original (courts power to hear a case the first time) and appellate (review decision coming from lower court). some have both, like supreme court

courts of original jurisdiction

aka trial courts. answer two types of questions: questions of fact (answered by jury, where was the person? did they commit the crime?) and questions of law (legal shit)

appellate jurisdiction

aka courts of appeal. only take issue w trial judge's decisions regarding questions of laws. panel of judges hears objections to lower court decisions. can affirm (uphold) or vacate (reverse) judgement if lose courts.

what happens if a case is vacated?

it's remanded to a lower courf

dual court system in the us

federal (issues under federal law) and state (the majority of things happen here bc state law governance most aspects of daily lives)

structure of state courts

courts of limited jurisdiction (specific cases like traffic court), major trial courts (co first instance), appellate courts, and court of last resort (supreme court type beat)

tx court structure

TWO courts of last resort, 14 courts of appeals, 488 district courts, various local courts (country courts, municipal, justice of peace)

supreme court hears...

foreign diplomat cases, stuff involving any law that makes it all the way up. if state cases raise federal questions, the supreme court may hear it (contingent on scotus agreeing to hear it)

judicial federalism

state courts get final say in interpretation of state statutes, laws

two kinds of legal actors

lay (no formal training, outsiders) and elite (often have formal training in law & background in legal profession)

functions of grand jury

review state's evidence, decide whether or not to indict accused (if person should be out in trial, issue bill of indictment and if not, "no bill")