Advanced search    Help

Clear all search criteria

Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).

• NPV--The National Popular Vote Initiative: Proposing Direct Election of the President Through an Interstate Compact [April 25, 2019]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "NPV's [National Popular Vote] origins can be traced to the 2000 presidential election. In that contest, Republican nominee George W. Bush won the presidency with a majority of 271 electoral votes to his Democratic opponent Al Gore Jr.'s 266, but Gore received 537,209 more popular votes nationwide than his opponent. This outcome, sometimes referred to as an electoral college 'misfire,' particularly by opponents of the system, occurred because (1) the Constitution requires a majority of electoral votes, not popular votes, to win; and (2) most states award electoral votes on a 'winner-take-all' basis--the popular vote winner takes all the state's electoral votes, while none are allocated to the runner-up. It is therefore possible to win the presidency by winning in states that control an electoral vote majority, while the opposing candidate wins more popular votes nationwide, but fewer votes in the electoral college."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2019-04-25
• Proposed Equal Rights Amendment: Contemporary Ratification Issues [Updated December 23, 2019]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Summary: "The proposed Equal Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (ERA) declares that 'equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex….' The ERA was approved by Congress for ratification by the states in 1972; the amendment included a customary, but not constitutionally mandated, seven-year deadline for ratification. Between 1972 and 1977, 35 state legislatures, of the 38 required by the Constitution, voted to ratify the ERA. Despite a congressional extension of the deadline from 1979 to 1982, no additional states approved the amendment during the extended period, at which time the amendment was widely considered to have expired. After 23 years in which no additional state voted to ratify the ERA, the situation changed when Nevada and Illinois approved the amendment, in March 2017 and May 2018, respectively. In addition, a change in party control of the Virginia legislature in the 2019 elections raised hopes among ERA supporters that this state might also vote to ratify, which would bring the number of approvals to 38, the requirement set by Article V for validation of a proposed amendment as part of the Constitution. In the context of these developments, ERA proponents have renewed efforts to restart the ratification process. These actions center on the assertion that because the amendment did not include a ratification deadline 'within the amendment text', it remains potentially viable and eligible for ratification indefinitely."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2019-12-23
• NPV--the National Popular Vote Initiative: Proposing Direct Election of the President Through an Interstate Compact [Updated October 29, 2019]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "The NPV [National Popular Vote] Initiative proposes an interstate compact, an agreement among the states that would effectively achieve direct popular election of the President and Vice President without a constitutional amendment. Each state that joins the NPV agrees to appoint electors pledged to the candidates who won the nationwide popular vote. Election authorities in the member states would count and certify the vote, which would be aggregated and certified as 'the nationwide popular vote.' Member state legislatures would then appoint the slate of electors pledged to the nationwide popular vote winner. They would do this regardless of who won the popular vote in their state. The compact would come into effect only if its success were assured--that is, only after states controlling a majority of electoral votes (270 or more) had joined the compact. States could withdraw from the compact, but if they did so within six months of a presidential election, the withdrawal would not take effect until after that election."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2019-10-29
• Presidential Disability Under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Constitutional Provisions and Perspectives for Congress [November 5, 2018]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Sections 3 and 4 of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provide for presidential disability or inability. Section 3 of the amendment sets the procedure whereby a President may declare himself or herself 'unable to discharge the powers and duties' of the office by transmitting a written declaration to this effect to the President pro tempore of the Senate (President pro tem) and the Speaker of the House of Representatives (Speaker). For the duration of the disability, the Vice President discharges the President's powers and duties as Acting President. When the President transmits 'a written declaration to the contrary' to the President pro tem and the Speaker, he or she resumes the powers and duties of the office. [...] Section 4 provides for instances of contingent presidential disability. It was intended by the Twenty-Fifth Amendment's authors to provide for cases in which a President was unable or unwilling to declare a disability. In these circumstances, the section authorizes the Vice President and a majority of either the Cabinet, or such other body established by law (a presidential disability review body), 'acting jointly,' to declare the President to be disabled. When they transmit a written message to this effect to the President pro tem and the Speaker, the Vice President immediately assumes the powers and duties of the office as Acting President."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2018-11-05
• Presidential Terms and Tenure: Perspectives and Proposals for Change [Updated April 15, 2019]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Introduction: "The issue of the President and Vice President's term of office is generally regarded as an accepted constitutional norm that arouses little controversy in the 21st century. Both the four-year term and the venerable two-term tradition, initiated by George Washington and ultimately incorporated in the Constitution in 1951 by the Twenty-Second Amendment, appear to be fixed elements in the nation's political landscape. In marked comparison, the issues of tenure and reelection of the President, and of the Vice President (an office added almost as an afterthought during the Constitutional Convention of 1787), were the subject of intense and prolonged debate during the Philadelphia gathering. Delegates argued for three months over the length of the presidential term and whether the chief executive should be eligible for reelection before reaching a compromise package of provisions--a four-year term, and eligibility for reelection--several days before the convention adjourned."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2019-04-15
• Article V Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments: Historical Perspectives for Congress [July 10, 2012]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The Philadelphia Convention of 1787 provided two methods of proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution. In the first, Congress, by two-thirds vote in both houses, proposes amendments to the states. If three-fourths of the states (38 at present) vote to ratify the amendment, it becomes part of the Constitution. Since 1789, Congress has proposed 33 amendments by this method, 27 of which have been adopted. In the second method, if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states (34 at present) apply, Congress must call a convention to consider and propose amendments, which must meet the same 38-state ratification requirement. This alternative, known as the Article V Convention, has not been implemented to date. Several times during the 20th century, organized groups promoted a convention that they hoped would propose amendments to the states, or to 'prod' Congress to propose amendments they favored. The most successful was the movement for direct election of Senators, which helped prod Congress to propose the 17th Amendment. The most recent, which promoted a convention to consider a balanced federal budget amendment, gained 32 applications, just two short of the constitutional threshold. […] Only the states can summon an Article V Convention, by application from their legislatures. Some of the issues concerning this process include procedures within the state legislatures; the scope and conditions of applications for a convention; steps in submitting applications to Congress; and the role of the state governors in the process."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2012-07-10
• Electoral College Reform: 111th Congress Proposals and Other Current Developments [September 13, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "American voters elect the President and Vice President indirectly, through presidential electors. Established by Article II, Section 1, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, this electoral college system has evolved continuously since the first presidential elections. Despite a number of close contests, this arrangement has selected the candidate with the most popular votes in 48 of 52 presidential elections since the current voting system was established by the 12th Amendment in time for the 1804 contest. Three times, however, candidates were elected who won fewer popular votes than their opponents (1876, 1888, 2000), and in a fourth (1824), four candidates split the popular and electoral vote, leading to selection of the President by the House of Representatives. These controversial elections occurred because the system requires a majority of electoral, not popular, votes to win the presidency. This feature, which is original to the U.S. Constitution, has been the object of persistent criticism and numerous reform plans. In the contemporary context, proposed constitutional amendments generally fall into two basic categories: those that would eliminate the electoral college and substitute direct popular election of the President and Vice President, and those that would retain the existing system in some form, while correcting its perceived defects. In the absence of congressional action since 1977, proponents of direct election have in recent years advanced the National Popular Vote (NPV) plan, a non-constitutional reform option. NPV would bypass the electoral college system through a multi-state compact enacted by the states. Relying on their constitutional authority to appoint electors, NPV would commit participating states to choose electors committed to the candidates who received the most popular votes nationwide, notwithstanding results within the state. NPV would become effective when adopted by states that together possess a majority of electoral votes (270). Since 2006, the compact has been introduced in the legislatures of all 50 states and the District of Columbia during at least one session. At the present time, six states with a combined total of 73 electoral votes (Hawaii, 4; Illinois, 21; Maryland, 10; Massachusetts, 12; New Jersey, 15; and Washington, 11) have approved the compact."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2010-09-13
• Electoral College Reform: Contemporary Issues for Congress

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The electoral college has been the subject of criticism and proposals for reform since before 1800. Constitutional and structural criticisms have centered on several of its features: (1) although today all electors are chosen by the voters in the presidential election, it is claimed to be not fully democratic, since it provides indirect election of the President; (2) it can lead to the election of candidates who win the electoral college but fewer popular votes than their opponents, or to contingent election in Congress if no candidate wins an electoral college majority; (3) it results in electoral vote under- and over-representation for some states between censuses; and (4) 'faithless' electors can vote for candidates other than those they were elected to support. Legislative and political criticisms include (1) the general ticket system, currently used in all states except Maine and Nebraska, which is alleged to disenfranchise voters who prefer the losing candidates in the states; (2) various asserted 'biases' that are alleged to favor different states and groups; and (3) the electoral college 'lock,' which has been claimed to provide an electoral college advantage to both major parties at different times."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2017-10-06
• Electoral College Reform: 111th Congress Proposals and Other Current Developments [November 4, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "American voters elect the President and Vice President indirectly, through presidential electors. Established by Article II, Section 1, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, this electoral college system has evolved continuously since the first presidential elections. Despite a number of close contests, the electoral college system has selected the candidate with the most popular votes in 48 of 52 presidential elections since the current voting system was established by the 12th Amendment in time for the 1804 contest. [...] In the absence of congressional action since 1977, proponents of direct election have advanced a non-constitutional option in recent years, the National Popular Vote (NPV) plan. This would bypass the electoral college system through a multi-state compact enacted by the states. Relying on the states' constitutional authority to appoint electors, NPV would commit participating states to choose electors committed to the candidates who received the most popular votes nationwide, notwithstanding results within the state. NPV would become effective when adopted by states that together possess a majority of electoral votes (270). At the present time, five states with a combined total of 61 electoral votes (Hawaii, 4; Illinois, 21; Maryland, 10; New Jersey, 15, and Washington, 11) have approved the compact, while the compact is under active consideration by the legislature of several other states. For additional information on contemporary operation of the system, please consult CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL32611, 'The Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections', by Thomas H. Neale. This report will be updated as events warrant."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2009-11-04
• Filling U.S. Senate Vacancies: Perspectives and Contemporary Developments [July 16, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report reviews the constitutional origins of the appointments provision and its incorporation in the 17th Amendment. It also examines and analyzes contemporary developments, including the disposition of recent vacancies and proposals to eliminate or restrict gubernatorial power to name temporary Senators."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2013-07-16
• Electoral College: Reform Proposals in the 109th Congress [Updated March 12, 2007]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "American voters elect the President and Vice President of the United States under a complex arrangement of constitutional provisions, federal and state laws, and political party practices known as the electoral college system. For additional information on contemporary operation of the system, please consult CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report RL32611, 'The Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections', by Thomas H. Neale. Despite occasional close elections, this system has delivered uncontested results in 47 of 51 elections since the 12th Amendment was ratified in 1804. Down these many years, however, it has been the subject of persistent criticism and numerous reform proposals. In the contemporary context, related measures fall into two basic categories: those that would eliminate the electoral college and substitute direct popular election of the President and Vice President, and those that would retain the existing system in some form, while correcting perceived defects. Four relevant proposed amendments were introduced in the 109th Congress: H.J.Res. 8 (Representative Gene Green, and others); H.J.Res. 17 (Representative Eliot Engel and others); H.J.Res. 36, (Representative Jesse Jackson, Jr., and others); H.J.Res. 50 (Representative Zoe Lofgren and others); and S.J.Res. 11 (Senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer). All proposed to eliminate the electoral college and substitute direct popular election, while H.J.Res. 8, H.J.Res. 17, H.J.Res. 50 and S.J.Res. 11 also sought to empower Congress to set federal standards for various aspects of voting registration and election administration procedures. The House measures were referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and to its Subcommittee on the Constitution, while S.J.Res. 11 was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. No further action was taken on any of them during the life of the 109th Congress. For additional information on electoral college contingencies and broader aspects of reform proposals, please consult CRS Report RL30804, 'The Electoral College: An Overview and Analysis of Reform Proposals', by L. Paige Whitaker and Thomas H. Neale. This report will not be updated."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2007-03-12
• President's State of the Union Address: Tradition, Function, and Policy Implications [January 12, 2009]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Over time, the State of the Union address has evolved considerably. The format and delivery of the speech has changed, and its length has fluctuated widely. Technology has also influenced the delivery of the address, with the advent of radio, television, and the Internet playing significant roles in the transformation. Although each President uses the State of the Union address to outline his administration's policy agenda, most incorporate common rhetorical arguments and ceremonial traditions. Bipartisanship, attention to both the past and the future, and optimism are recurring themes in State of the Union addresses. The legislative success rate of policy proposals mentioned in State of the Union addresses varies widely. Addresses given after a President's election or reelection and during periods of unified party government tend to produce higher rates of legislative success. Presidents can also use the State of the Union address to increase media attention for a particular issue. Immediately following the State of the Union address, the political party not occupying the White House provides an opposition response. The response, usually much shorter than the State of the Union, outlines the opposition party's policy agenda and serves as an official rejoinder to the proposals outlined by the President."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Shogan, Colleen J., 1975-; Neale, Thomas H.

  2009-01-12
• Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress [March 7, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two methods of proposing amendments. First, Congress, with the approval of two-thirds of both houses, may propose amendments to the states for ratification, a procedure used for all 27 current amendments. Second, if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states apply, 34 at present, Congress 'shall' call a convention for considering and proposing amendments. This alternative, known as an Article V Convention, has yet to be implemented. This report examines the Article V Convention, focusing on contemporary issues for Congress. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report R42592, 'The Article V Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments: Historical Perspectives for Congress', examines the procedure's constitutional origins and history and provides an analysis of related state procedures."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2014-03-07
• Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress [April 11, 2014]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two ways of amending the nation's fundamental charter. Congress, by a two-thirds vote of both houses, may propose amendments to the states for ratification, a procedure used for all 27 current amendments. Alternatively, if the legislatures of two-thirds of the states apply, 34 at present, Congress 'shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments....' This alternative, known as an Article V Convention, has yet to be implemented. This report examines the Article V Convention, focusing on contemporary issues for Congress. CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report R42592, 'The Article V Convention for Proposing Constitutional Amendments: Historical Perspectives for Congress' examines the procedure's constitutional origins and history and provides an analysis of related state procedures. Significant developments in this issue have occurred recently: in March 2014, the Georgia Legislature applied for a convention to consider a balanced federal budget amendment, revoking its rescission of an earlier application; in April 2014, Tennessee took similar action. While both applications are valid, they may revive questions as to the constitutionality of rescissions of state applications for an Article V Convention and whether convention applications are valid indefinitely. Either issue could have an impact on the prospects for a convention. In other recent actions, the legislatures of Ohio, in November 2013, and Michigan, in March 2014, applied to Congress for an Article V Convention to consider a balanced federal budget amendment; these are the first new state applications since 1982 and are also the 33rd and 34th applications for the balanced budget amendment convention."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2014-04-11
• Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Current Developments [March 29, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Introduction: "Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two alternatives for amending the nation's fundamental charter: proposal of amendments to the states by vote of two-thirds of the Members of both houses of Congress, and proposal by a convention called as a result of applications from two-thirds of the states, the 'Article V Convention.' From the 1960s to the 1980s, supporters of Article V Conventions mounted vigorous but ultimately unsuccessful campaigns to call conventions to consider such issues as school busing to achieve racial balance, restrictions on abortion, apportionment in state legislatures, and a balanced federal budget. Since approximately 2010, after more than 20 years of comparative inaction, the Article V Convention alternative has drawn a new generation of supporters. Advocacy groups across a broad range of the political spectrum are pushing for conventions to consider various amendments. This report provides information for Members of Congress and congressional staff on current developments in Congress, the states, and the advocacy community on the Article V Convention alternative."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2016-03-29
• Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections [April 13, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When Americans vote for a President and Vice President, they are actually choosing presidential electors, known collectively as the electoral college. It is these officials who choose the President and Vice President of the United States. The complex elements comprising the electoral college system are responsible for one of the most important processes of the American political and constitutional system: election of the President and Vice President. A failure to elect a President, or worse, the choice of a chief executive whose legitimacy might be open to question, could precipitate a constitutional crisis that would require prompt, judicious, and well-informed action by Congress."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2016-04-13
• Presidential Elections: Vacancies in Major- Party Candidacies and the Position of President-Elect [October 6, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "What would happen in 2016 if a candidate for President or Vice President were to die or leave the ticket any time between the national party conventions and the November 8 election day? What would happen if this occurred during presidential transition, either between election day and the December 19, 2016, meeting of the electoral college; or between December 19 and the inauguration of the President and Vice President on January 20, 2017? Procedures to fill these vacancies differ depending on when they occur. […] Succession procedures during the presidential election campaign period and the transition are governed by party rules, federal law, and constitutional requirements. […] It may be assumed that party rules would be adequate to provide for some future incident, although an extremely volatile post-election political climate or the prospect of a faithless elector or electors might introduce complicating factors, as noted previously in this report. With respect to the transition period itself, the 20th and 25th Amendments have anticipated most potential contingencies, and could be implemented to address a succession issue during the period between the meetings of the electoral college and inauguration of the President."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2016-10-06
• Article V Convention to Propose Constitutional Amendments: Contemporary Issues for Congress [March 29, 2016]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two ways to amend the nation's fundamental charter. Congress, by a two-thirds vote of both houses, may propose amendments to the states for ratification, a procedure that has been used for all 27 current amendments. Alternatively, on the application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the states, 34 at present, Article V directs that Congress 'shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments....' This alternative, known as an 'Article V Convention,' has yet to be implemented. This report examines the Article V Convention alternative, focusing on related contemporary issues for Congress. […] This report identifies a range of policy questions Congress might face if an Article V Convention seemed imminent. Some of these include the following: what constitutes a legitimate state application? Does Congress have discretion as to whether it must call a convention? What legislative vehicle would be appropriate to call a convention? Could a convention consider any issue, or would it be limited to the specific issue cited in state applications? Could a 'runaway' convention propose amendments outside its mandate? Could Congress choose not to propose a convention-approved amendment to the states? What role, if any, does the President have? What role would Congress have in the mechanics of a convention, including rules of procedure and voting, number and apportionment of delegates, funding and duration, service by Members of Congress, and other related questions?"

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2016-03-29
• Presidential Succession: Perspectives, Contemporary Analysis, and 110th Congress Proposed Legislation [October 3, 2008]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Presidential succession was widely considered to be a settled issue prior to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. These events demonstrated the potential to disable both the legislative and executive branches of government, and raised the question of whether current arrangements are adequate to guarantee continuity in government under such circumstances. Members' concerns may be heightened as the 110th Congress prepares not only for its successor, but a change of administration, as well. Is the United States Government at greater risk of terrorist attack during this period of transition? Are present arrangements adequate to ensure continuity in the presidency in the event of a 'worst-case' scenario? Some analysts and Members of Congress advocate modifications to existing laws to eliminate gaps and enhance procedures in the area of presidential succession."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2008-10-03
• President-Elect: Succession and Disability Issues During the Transition Period [November 26, 2008]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Procedures governing replacement of a President or Vice President-elect during the transition period depend on when the events that might lead to a temporary or permanent replacement occur. At the general election, voters choose members of the electoral college, which formally selects the President and Vice President several weeks later. Between election day and the electors' meeting, the two major political parties' rules provide that replacement candidates would be chosen by their national committees should vacancies occur. Most authorities agree that the President- and Vice President-elect will have been chosen once the electoral votes are cast on December 15, 2008. The electoral votes are counted and declared when Congress meets in joint session for this purpose on January 8, 2009. During this period, between December 15 and the January 20 inauguration, if the President-elect dies, the Vice President-elect becomes President-elect, under the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. Although the 20th Amendment does not specifically address questions of disability or resignation by a President- or Vice President-elect, the words 'failure to qualify' found in the amendment might arguably be interpreted to cover such contingencies. While the 20th Amendment does not address vacancies in the position of Vice President-elect, these would be covered after the inauguration by the 25th Amendment. In the event no person qualifies as President or Vice President, then the Presidential Succession Act (61 Stat. 380, 3 U.S.C. 19) would apply: the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the President pro tempore of the Senate and duly confirmed Cabinet officers, in that order, would act as President. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, observers have expressed concern that an attack during the presidential inauguration ceremony might lead to the death or disability of most or all officials in the line of presidential succession. This concern takes particular note of the fact that there are generally few, if any, duly confirmed cabinet members at that time. One potential remedy for this situation would be for an official in the line of succession to be absent from the ceremony. Another might be for a cabinet secretary from the outgoing Administration to remain in office until after the inauguration; alternatively, a cabinet secretary-designate of the new administration might be nominated by the incumbent President, confirmed by the Senate, and installed prior to the inauguration. Either action would avoid a gap in the line of presidential succession under these circumstances."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2008-11-26
• Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections [Updated September 8, 2003]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When Americans vote for a President and Vice President, they actually vote for presidential electors, known collectively as the electoral college. It is these electors, chosen by the people, who elect the chief executive. The Constitution assigns each state a number of electors equal to the combined total of its Senate and House of Representatives delegations; at present, the number of electors per state ranges from three to 55, for a total of 538. Anyone may serve as an elector, except for Members of Congress, and persons holding offices of 'Trust or Profit' under the Constitution. In each presidential election year, a group (ticket or slate) of candidates for elector is nominated by political parties and other groups in each state, usually at a state party convention, or by the party state committee. It is these elector-candidates, rather than the presidential and vice presidential nominees, for whom the people vote in the election held on Tuesday after the first Monday in November (November 2, 2004). In most states, voters cast a single vote for the slate of electors pledged to the party presidential and vice presidential candidates of their choice. The slate winning the most popular votes is elected; this is known as the winner-take-all, or general ticket, system. Maine and Nebraska use the district system, under which two electors are chosen on a statewide, at-large basis, and one is elected in each congressional district. Electors assemble in their respective states on Monday after the second Wednesday in December (December 13, 2004). They are pledged and expected, but not required, to vote for the candidates they represent. Separate ballots are cast for President and Vice President, after which the electoral college ceases to exist for another four years. The electoral vote results are counted and declared at a joint session of Congress, held on January 6 of the year succeeding the election. A majority of electoral votes (currently 270 of 538) is required to win. This report will be updated as events warrant."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2003-09-08
• Filling U.S. Senate Vacancies: Perspectives and Contemporary Developments [June 7, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "This report reviews the constitutional origins of the appointments provision and its incorporation in the 17th Amendment. It also examines and analyzes contemporary developments, including the disposition of recent vacancies and proposals to eliminate or restrict gubernatorial power to name temporary Senators."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2013-06-07
• U.S. Senate Vacancies: Contemporary Developments and Perspectives [March 10, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Introduction: "This report discusses the latest developments in vacancies in the Senate; identifies state provisions to appoint or elect Senators to fill vacancies; and reviews the constitutional origins of the appointments provision and its incorporation in the Seventeenth Amendment."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2017-03-10
• Presidential Succession: An Overview with Analysis of Legislation Proposed in the 109th Congress [June 29, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "Whenever the office of President of the United States becomes vacant due to 'removal ... death or resignation' of the chief executive, the Constitution provides that 'the Vice President shall become President.' When the office of Vice President becomes vacant for any reason, the President nominates a successor, who must be confirmed by a majority vote of both houses of Congress. If both of these offices are vacant simultaneously, then, under the Succession Act of 1947, the Speaker of the House of Representatives becomes President, after resigning from the House and as Speaker. If the speakership is also vacant, then the President Pro Tempore of the Senate becomes President, after resigning from the Senate and as President Pro Tempore. If both of these offices are vacant, or if the incumbents fail to qualify for any reason, then cabinet officers are eligible to succeed, in the order established by law (3 U.S.C. §19, see Table 3). In every case, a potential successor must be duly sworn in his or her previous office, and must meet other constitutional requirements for the presidency, i.e., be at least 35 years of age, a 'natural born citizen,' and for 14 years, a 'resident within the United States.'"

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2005-06-29
• Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections [May 15, 2017]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "When Americans vote for a President and Vice President, they are actually choosing presidential electors, known collectively as the electoral college. It is these officials who choose the President and Vice President of the United States. The complex elements comprising the electoral college system are responsible for election of the President and Vice President. The 2016 presidential contest was noteworthy for the first 'simultaneous' occurrence in presidential election history of four rarely occurring electoral college eventualities. These included (1) the election of a President and Vice President who received fewer popular votes than their major opponents; (2) the actions of seven 'faithless electors,' who voted for candidates other than those to whom they were pledged; (3) the split allocation of electoral votes in Maine, which uses the district system to allocate electors; and (4) objections to electoral votes at the joint session of Congress to count the votes. These events are examined in detail in the body of this report."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2017-05-15
• Electoral College: Options for Change and 117th Congress Proposals [April 2, 2021]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  From the Document: "American voters elect the President and Vice President of the United States indirectly: they vote in their states and the District of Columbia for presidential electors pledged to the candidates of their choice. The electors are known collectively as the electoral college. Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution assigns to each state a number of electors equal to the total of the state's Senators and Members of the House of Representatives, a total of 538 at present, including three electors for the District of Columbia provided by the Twenty-third Amendment. The Twelfth Amendment requires that candidates for President and Vice President each win a majority of the electoral votes cast for their office to be elected. Candidates for the office of presidential elector are nominated by the state political parties. In 48 of 50 states, the candidates winning the most popular votes win all the state's electoral votes, the general ticket or 'winner-take-all' (WTA) system; Maine and Nebraska are the only exceptions, awarding electoral votes on combined statewide and congressional district totals."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2021-04-02
• Electoral College: An Overview and Analysis of Reform Proposals [Updated November 5, 2004]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "American voters elect the President and Vice President of the United States indirectly, through an arrangement known as the electoral college system. The electoral college system comprises a complex mosaic of constitutional provisions, state and federal laws, and political party rules and practices. Although the electoral college system has delivered uncontested results in 46 out of 50 presidential elections since it assumed its present constitutional form in 1804, it has been the subject of persistent criticism and frequent proposals for reform. Reform advocates cite several problems with the current system, including a close or multi-candidate election can result in no electoral college majority, leading to a contingent election in Congress; the current system can result in the election of a President and Vice President who received a majority of electoral votes, but fewer popular votes, than their opponents; the formula for assignment of electoral votes is claimed to provide an unfair advantage for less populous states and does not account for population changes between censuses; and the winner-take-all system used by most states does not recognize the proportional strength of the losing major party, minor party, and independent candidates. On the other hand, defenders assert that the electoral college system is an integral and vital component of federalism, that it has a 92% record of non-controversial results, and that it promotes an ideologically and geographically broad two-party system. They maintain that repair of the electoral college system, rather than abolition, would eliminate any perceived defects while retaining its overall strengths."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Whitaker, L. Paige; Neale, Thomas H.

  2004-11-05
• Electoral College: Reform Proposals in the 108th Congress [Updated June 30, 2005]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "American voters elect the President and Vice President of the United States under a complex arrangement of constitutional provisions, federal and state laws, and political party practices known as the electoral college system. For additional information on contemporary operation of the system, please see CRS Report RL32611, The Electoral College: How It Works in Contemporary Presidential Elections, by Thomas H. Neale. Despite occasional close elections, this system has delivered uncontested results in 46 of 50 elections since adoption of the 12th Amendment, effective in 1804. Throughout this period, nevertheless, it has been the subject of persistent criticism and many reform proposals. Related measures fall into two basic categories: those that would eliminate the electoral college and substitute direct popular election of the President and Vice President, and those that would retain the existing system in some form and correct perceived defects."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2005-06-30
• President's State of the Union Address: Tradition, Function, and Policy Implications [November 17, 2010]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "The State of the Union (SOTU) address is a communication between the President and Congress in which the chief executive reports on the current conditions of the United States and provides policy proposals for the upcoming legislative year. Formerly known as the 'Annual Message,' the State of the Union address originates in the Constitution. As part of the system of checks and balances, Article II, Section 3, clause 1 mandates that the President 'shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.' In recent decades, the President has expanded his State of the Union audience, addressing the speech to both the nation and Members of Congress. Over time, the State of the Union address has evolved considerably. [...] Although each President uses the State of the Union address to outline his administration's policy agenda, most incorporate common rhetorical arguments and ceremonial traditions. Bipartisanship, attention to both the past and the future, and optimism are recurring themes in State of the Union addresses. [...] Presidents can also use the State of the Union address to increase media attention for a particular issue. Immediately following the State of the Union address, the political party not occupying the White House provides an opposition response. The response, usually much shorter than the State of the Union, outlines the opposition party's policy agenda and serves as an official rejoinder to the proposals outlined by the President."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Shogan, Colleen J., 1975-; Neale, Thomas H.

  2010-11-17
• Filling U.S. Senate Vacancies: Perspectives and Contemporary Developments [February 13, 2013]

  Show summary     Open resource [pdf]     (open full abstract)

  "United States Senators serve a term of six years. Vacancies occur when an incumbent Senator leaves office prematurely for any reason; they may be caused by death or resignation of the incumbent, by expulsion or declination (refusal to serve), or by refusal of the Senate to seat a Senator-elect or -designate. This report provides information on current vacancies in the Senate, the constitutional origins of the Senate vacancy clause, the appointment process by which most vacancies are filled, and related contemporary issues. It will be revised and updated to reflect current developments in vacancies, appointments, and special elections."

  Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service

  Neale, Thomas H.

  2013-02-13