Intensive 3-day Congressional Operations Briefing and Seminar
Judiciary Committee hearing on e-fairness, from Rep. Mike Pence
Congressional decision-making is driven by politics, policy and process. This engaging workshop and seminar on legislative operations provides the full Capitol Hill experience as our Washington-based experts focus on these 3 P’s. They discuss the policy-making process and the legislative agenda, help you understand the congressional budget process, and demystify the culture of the U.S. Congress.
You will gain a solid understanding of:
Congressional operations and the legislative process
How public and foreign policy become law
Congressional politics and leadership
Congressional budgeting today
The role of OMB in the legislative process
Effective communication with Congress
How the media covers the Hill
How Congress affects every federal agency
Current campaign and election trends
How members of Congress advance their legislative, public policy and political agendas
How personal and committee staff work
How you can build win/win relationships with congressional staff
Attend a congressional hearing and see the process in action.
Congressional decision-making is driven by politics, policy and process. In this engaging 3-day Congressional Briefing Conference, Washington-based experts discuss these 3 P’s and help you understand the complete policy-making process.
You’ll get a solid understanding of:
Congressional operations and the legislative process
How public and foreign policy become law
Congressional politics and leadership
Congressional budgeting today
The role of OMB in the legislative process
Effective communication with Congress
How the media covers the Hill
Current campaign and election trends
How members of Congress advance their legislative, public policy and political agendas
How personal and committee staff work
How you can build win/win relationships with staffers
Attend a congressional hearing and see the process in action.
Contempt of Congress 1: The power of Congress to punish for contempt is inextricably related to the power of Congress to investigate. Generally speaking, Congress’ authority to investigate and obtain information, including but not limited to confidential information, is extremely broad. While there is no express provision of the Constitution or specific statute authorizing the conduct of congressional oversight or investigations, the Supreme Court has firmly established that such power is essential to the legislative function as to be implied from the general vesting of legislative powers in Congress. The broad legislative authority to seek and enforce informational demands was unequivocally established in two Supreme Court rulings arising out of the 1920′s Teapot Dome scandal: McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927), and Sinclair v. United States, 279 U.S. 263 (1929). Subsequent Supreme Court rulings have consistently reiterated and reinforced the breadth of Congress’ investigative authority.
Tools available to Congress during investigations include subpoenas, contempt power, grants of immunity, and staff interviews and depositions. House and Senate rules authorize standing committees and subcommittees to compel individuals to appear and testify in hearings or to require the provision of documents to Congress. Either chamber could also by resolution delegate that power, or additional powers, to special or select committees. If an individual fails to provide testimony or documents as required, provisions in statute allow the full House or Senate to cite a witness for criminal contempt and refer the matter to the U.S. attorney; the Senate also has recourse to a civil contempt proceeding against witnesses other than executive-branch officials. In the past, the threat of a congressional subpoena or contempt citation has often led to negotiated or full compliance on the part of the targeted individual or office. Litigation is used at times, but federal judges generally encourage congressional and executive parties to settle their differences out of court.
Contempt of Congress is punishable by statute and under the inherent powers of Congress. Congress has not exercised its inherent contempt power for some time. The statutory contempt of Congress provision, 2 U.S.C. § 192, has been employed only slightly more often and rarely in recent years. Much of what we know of the offense comes from Cold War period court decisions. Congress’ contempt power is the means by which Congress responds to certain acts that in its view obstruct the legislative process. Contempt may be used to coerce compliance (inherent contempt), punish the contemnor (criminal contempt), and to remove the obstruction (civil contempt). Although arguably any action that directly obstructs the effort of Congress to exercise its constitutional powers may constitute a contempt, in the last seventy years the contempt power (primarily through the criminal contempt process) has generally been employed only in instances of refusals of witnesses to appear before committees, to respond to questions, or to produce documents.
Enforcement through one of the forms of contempt proceedings available to the House and Senate is undertaken only after committee and chamber approval. If a witness invokes a Fifth Amendment privilege against testifying, a committee might still compel testimony with a two-thirds vote of the committee in favor of seeking a court order to grant immunity and direct the witness to testify. The immunity granted protects the witness from use of the testimony in a criminal prosecution. A grant of immunity might then jeopardize criminal prosecution, the prosecutor bearing the burden of showing that the case is not based on or derived from the immunized testimony.
The House can also adopt a simple resolution–a resolution of inquiry–requesting information or documents from the president or directing a department or agency head to supply such information. Such a resolution is used to obtain factual information, not to request opinions or investigations. Congressional committees often use staff interviews to collect information as part of an investigation. This staff work provides tighter focus to the questioning and witness list for investigative hearings. On some occasions, House and Senate resolutions have provided specific authority to a committee for staff members to take sworn depositions. Special committee procedures have usually been established under these circumstances. Among other things, depositions, which are conducted in private, might lead to more efficient use of hearing time, facilitate more candid responses from witnesses than they would provide in a hearing, and allow further investigation of witness allegations prior to the airing of those allegations at a public hearing. Under certain circumstances, a committee might seek a court order to grant partial or full immunity to a witness as a means of obtaining testimony.
House rules give the Oversight and Government Reform Committee wide latitude in conducting oversight. Senate rules do the same for the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Each committee may conduct oversight government-wide and on intergovernmental programs and activities, and each is given a special responsibility to study GAO reports and recommend action to Congress based on those reports. In addition to general provisions encouraging oversight, House and Senate rules give specific committees “special” or “comprehensive” authority to conduct oversight in certain policy areas, although a particular policy area might fall within the legislative jurisdiction of several committees.
From time to time, Congress has also established temporary commissions to investigate particular events or issues. Such commissions have varied in their mandates, authorities, and profiles. The 9/11 Commission, for example, was established by law (P.L. 107-306; 116 Stat. 2408), and was populated by experienced and knowledgeable individuals who demonstrated a determination to reach consensus and see the commission’s recommendations implemented. The commission had the power to hold hearings and collect evidence, and was granted subpoena power.
Contempt of Congress 3: Many also feel that the “Contempt of Congress” is Congress’ contempt for citizens, similar to that expressed in the Puck cartoon below.
Congressional contempt, by Frederick Burr Opper, in Puck, January 31, 1883, Caption: Republican Congressman "He is howling for help." Monopolist "Throw him a promise!" Source:Library of Congress 2012645443
As part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), P.L. 111-148, as amended, Congress enacted a “minimum coverage provision,” which compels certain individuals to have a minimum level of health insurance (i.e., an “individual mandate”). Individuals who fail to do so may be subject to a monetary penalty, administered through the tax code. Congress has never compelled individuals to buy health insurance, and there has been significant controversy and debate over whether the requirement is within the scope of Congress’ legislative powers.
The Supreme Court,—"As It May Hereafter Be Constituted", in Puck, 1896
Shortly after ACA was enacted, several lawsuits were filed that challenge the individual mandate on constitutional grounds. While some of these cases have been dismissed for procedural reasons, others have moved forward. These challenges have now reached the Supreme Court. During the last week of March, the Court heard arguments in HHS v. Florida, a case in which attorneys general and governors in 26 states as well as others brought an action against the Administration, seeking to invalidate the individual mandate and other provisions of ACA. Besides evaluating the constitutionality of the individual mandate, the Court is examining the question of whether the Anti-Injunction Act currently prevents the Court from ruling on the merits of the case. It also is considering the extent to which the minimum coverage provision can be severed from the remainder of ACA, if it is found to be unconstitutional. Finally, the Court is analyzing ACA’s expansion of the Medicaid program and whether it unconstitutionally “coerces” states into compliance with federal requirements.
While there is no specific enumerated constitutional power to regulate health care or establish a minimum coverage provision, Congress’s taxing power or its power to regulate interstate commerce may be pertinent. With regard to the taxing power, the requirement to purchase health insurance might be construed as a tax and upheld so long as it was found to comply with the constitutional restrictions imposed on direct and indirect taxes. On the other hand, opponents of the minimum coverage provision may argue that since it is imposed conditionally and may be avoided by compliance with regulations set out in the statute, that the requirement may be more accurately described as a penalty. If so, the taxing power alone might not provide Congress the constitutional authority to support this provision.
In evaluating the minimum coverage provision under the Commerce Clause, one of several issues that may be examined is whether the individual mandate is a regulation of economic activity. Some argue that the requirement to purchase health insurance is economic in nature because it regulates how an individual participates in the health care market, through insurance or otherwise. Conversely, others argue that forcing individuals to participate in commerce in order to regulate them goes beyond the bounds of the clause.
This report analyzes certain constitutional issues raised by requiring individuals to purchase health insurance under Congress’ authority under its taxing power or its power to regulate interstate commerce. It also addresses whether the exceptions to the minimum coverage provision to purchase health insurance satisfy First Amendment freedom of religion protections. Finally, this report discusses some of the more publicized legal challenges to ACA, as well additional issues that are currently before the Court.
A free download of TheCapitol.Net’s Pocket Constitution is available on Scribd. While supplies last, single copies of this Pocket Constitution are available at no charge. For details, see TCNConst.com
Congressional decision-making is driven by politics, policy and process. In this engaging 3-day Congressional Briefing Conference, Washington-based experts discuss these 3 P’s and help you understand the complete policy-making process.
You’ll get a solid understanding of:
Congressional operations and the legislative process
How public and foreign policy become law
Congressional politics and leadership
Congressional budgeting today
The role of OMB in the legislative process
Effective communication with Congress
How the media covers the Hill
Current campaign and election trends
How members of Congress advance their legislative, public policy and political agendas
How personal and committee staff work
How you can build win/win relationships with staffers
Attend a congressional hearing and see the process in action.
June 13-15, 2012, 8:30 am – 4 pm all three days.
Approved for 1.7 CEUs from George Mason University.
Congressional decision-making is driven by politics, policy and process. In this engaging 3-day Congressional Briefing Conference, Washington-based experts discuss these 3 P’s and help you understand the complete policy-making process.
You’ll get a solid understanding of:
Congressional operations and the legislative process
How public and foreign policy become law
Congressional politics and leadership
Congressional budgeting today
The role of OMB in the legislative process
Effective communication with Congress
How the media covers the Hill
Current campaign and election trends
How members of Congress advance their legislative, public policy and political agendas
How personal and committee staff work
How you can build win/win relationships with staffers
Attend a congressional hearing and see the process in action.
June 13-15, 2012, 8:30 am – 4 pm all three days.
Approved for 1.7 CEUs from George Mason University.
Congressional decision-making is driven by politics, policy and process. In this engaging 3-day Congressional Briefing Conference, Washington-based experts discuss these 3 P’s and help you understand the complete policy-making process.
You’ll get a solid understanding of:
Congressional operations and the legislative process
How public and foreign policy become law
Congressional politics and leadership
Congressional budgeting today
The role of OMB in the legislative process
Effective communication with Congress
How the media covers the Hill
Current campaign and election trends
How members of Congress advance their legislative, public policy and political agendas
How personal and committee staff work
How you can build win/win relationships with staffers
Attend a congressional hearing and see the process in action.
June 13-15, 2012, 8:30 am – 4 pm all three days.
Approved for 1.7 CEUs from George Mason University.
This advanced three-day course builds on the skills of those who have already learned the legislative process and basic congressional operations. In this course, participants learn how to develop high-level strategies and tactics to help educate Congress and influence legislation.
August 4-6, 2010, 9 am – 4 pm all three days.
Approved for 1.6 CEUs from George Mason University.
Where: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K Street NW, Suite 200 (12th and K Streets NW), Washington, DC (McPherson Square station)
Designed for attorneys, advocates, lobbyists, and anyone who must persuade others using the written word.
Do you suffer from “writer’s block” when you are asked to draft a one-page document, such as a position paper, in a clear, cogent, yet persuasive manner? If your answer is “yes”, this one-day program is for you. Our instructors will give you a practical framework for persuasive writing and specific strategies for writing persuasive documents through instruction and hands-on exercises.
This program will help you better write any document where you must persuade others.
April 16, 2010, 9 am to 4 pm
Approved for .6 CEUs from George Mason University.
Where: DC Bar Conference Center, 1101 K Street NW, Suite 200 (12th and K Streets NW), Washington, DC (McPherson Square Metro station)
This is an elective course for the Certificate in Communication and Advocacy.
For more information, including secure online registration, see WritingToPersuade.com
)
