The dominant player in international politics is unmistakably the United States of America. U.S. economic, military and cultural superiority is shaping world politics and setting the stage for the next generation. U.S. foreign policy features the image of the United States President and to a lesser extent that of the Secretary of State and Defense. They are the predominant figures that drive U.S. foreign policy on the international stage. The system of checks and balances neatly involves two branches of government – executive and legislative – in a construct of interdependence. Congress is the government branch of ‘the people’. The two-year term cycles for House Representatives and the large number of districts make Congress the most ‘representative’ institution in the U.S. government. In contemporary political science the state of being represented is described by ‘Principle-Agent-Relationship’, in which the representative – the agent – closely represents his constituency – the principle. "It doesn′t pay off for my constituency"
said Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA) when asked, why she wanted to get off of the House International Relations Committee (HIRC). This incident was my first impression of foreign policy in the U.S. Congress. Having heard that, I went to a HIRC oversight hearing to see how they conduct their business. What struck me most was the fact that the members devoted approx. half of their speaking time of total five minutes to the actual issue at stake and the other half to an issue that was absolutely irrelevant to the pending business. As I found out later, the irrelevant issues were important for the individual member to have been mentioned to the panel and C-SPAN. The subsequent past months I spent on ‘the Hill’, observing congressional (foreign) policy- and decision-making, with three leading questions bearing in mind:
1. Is the U.S. Congress important for U.S. foreign policy?
2. What factors influence decision making in foreign policy?
3. Does constituency play a role in the making and shaping of foreign policy?
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Congress and its Role in Foreign Policy
2.1 Constitutional Perspective
2.2 Historical Perspective
2.3 Institutional Perspective
2.4 SUMMARY I
|INTERMEZZO
3 Influences on Foreign policy decision making
3.1 Party
3.2 Interest groups
3.3 Public Opinion
3.4 Constituency
3.5 Fellow Members of Congress
3.6 Staff
3.7 Ideology
3.8 SUMMARY II
4 GENERAL CONCLUSION
5 Appendix
Research Objectives and Themes
This paper examines the role of the U.S. Congress in foreign policy decision-making, specifically investigating how individual Members of Congress navigate institutional and external pressures. The central research objective is to determine whether constituency interests, party affiliation, and other factors significantly shape foreign policy legislative behavior, or if foreign policy remains primarily an executive domain.
- The institutional capacity and limitations of Congress in foreign policy.
- Internal and external influences on legislative voting behavior.
- The role of constituency and public opinion in foreign policy-making.
- The impact of internal legislative dynamics, such as staff influence and coalition building.
- The "intermestic" dilemma of distinguishing domestic from foreign policy interests.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2 Interest groups
"Lobbying is Washington's second largest industry, after government". "[Lobbyists] collectively constitute the fourth branch." (Crabb 2000, 137f)
Unfortunately, empirical data research is scarce which does not allow for a solid conclusion. Still, my personal impression from working on foreign policy in a congressional office and from statements of staff and members, portray interest groups as an important part of the Hill. Therefore, I will lay out the spectrum of interest group activity in the foreign policy field.
The history of lobby activity goes back as far as to the Civil War when pro- and antislavery groups contested control of national policy. Throughout the first half of the 20th century groups lobbied primarily around tariff issues and around the discussion of isolationism in the 1920s and 1930s. In the last forty years, advocates of civil and human rights have also entered the scene. The growth of interest group activity has been nourished through several factors: decentralization of House and Senate, declining party discipline, and the lack of organization among congressional committees (Crabb 2000, 140) are some of the internal factors, while highly developed mass media and communication and a more polarized public are some external factors.
There are four major cluster of interest group activity that work in the foreign policy field: ethnic minority group lobbying, foreign government sponsored lobbying, advocacy/cause groups lobbying, and inter-branch lobbying.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter outlines the dominance of the executive in foreign policy and introduces the research questions regarding the importance of Congress and the factors influencing its decision-making.
2 Congress and its Role in Foreign Policy: This section explores how Congress functions within the constitutional and institutional framework, highlighting the "power of the purse" and its historical struggle for influence.
3 Influences on Foreign policy decision making: This central section identifies and analyzes eight external and internal factors—including party, interest groups, constituency, and staff—that impact congressional voting behavior and participation.
4 GENERAL CONCLUSION: The final chapter synthesizes the findings, confirming that while the President holds significant prerogatives, Congress remains a critical actor that cannot be ignored in the foreign policy process.
5 Appendix: Provides empirical data, including roll call vote statistics and regression analyses, supporting the arguments made in the paper.
Keywords
U.S. Congress, Foreign Policy, Decision-Making, Constituency, Interest Groups, Party Influence, Legislative Process, Checks and Balances, Executive Power, Lobbying, Public Opinion, Political Ideology, Voting Behavior, Intermestic, Congressional Oversight.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
The paper examines the role and influence of the United States Congress in the creation and shaping of foreign policy, challenging the notion that foreign affairs are strictly under presidential control.
What are the primary thematic fields covered?
The study covers legislative institutional roles, factors of voting behavior, the impact of constituency, interest group lobbying, and the influence of political ideology and internal staff dynamics.
What is the central research question?
The research asks: Is the U.S. Congress important for U.S. foreign policy, what factors influence that decision-making, and what role does constituency play in this process?
Which scientific method is applied?
The author combines qualitative observation from congressional experience with the analysis of existing empirical data and scholarly literature on political science and congressional behavior.
What is addressed in the main body of the paper?
The main body details the historical, constitutional, and institutional context of Congress, followed by an in-depth investigation into specific variables (party, interest groups, public opinion, constituency, fellow members, and staff) that sway congressional participation.
Which keywords best characterize this work?
Key terms include U.S. Congress, foreign policy, legislative decision-making, constituency, interest groups, and political ideology.
How does the concept of "intermestic" issues impact the author's analysis?
The "intermestic" dilemma refers to the blurring of lines between domestic and foreign policy; the author acknowledges this complicates his analysis of trade and defense, as these issues are often driven by domestic constituency benefits rather than pure foreign policy objectives.
Why does the author focus on the "power of the purse" in his conclusion?
The author emphasizes the power of the purse as the primary mechanism through which Congress exerts its institutional check on executive power and holds the executive branch accountable on an annual basis.
- Quote paper
- Karl Lemberg (Author), 2003, All politics is local - congressional decision-making in foreign policy, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/45858
