Κογκρέσο των Ηνωμένων Πολιτειών: Διαφορά μεταξύ των αναθεωρήσεων
Περιεχόμενο που διαγράφηκε Περιεχόμενο που προστέθηκε
Χωρίς σύνοψη επεξεργασίας |
Ιων (συζήτηση | συνεισφορές) |
||
Γραμμή 221:
===Η σύγχρονη περίοδος (δεκαετία 1970–σήμερα)===
{{Image|ArchibaldCox.jpg|thumb|right|alt=Man with bowtie.|Η Γερουσία επέλεξε τον [[Άρτσιμπαλντ Κοξ]] για να χρηματίσει ειδικός κατήγορος στην έρευνα του Watergate.}}
Το Κογκρέσο ενεργοποίησε το πρόγραμμα ''Great Society'' του [[Λύντον Τζόνσον|Τζόνσον]] για την καταπολέμηση της φτώχειας και της πείνας. Το [[Σκάνδαλο Ουότεργκεϊτ]] είχε μεγάλη επίδραση στην αφύπνιση ενός κάπως αδρανούς Κογκρέσου το οποίο ερευνούσε τις προεδρικές ατασθαλίες και συγκαλύψεις· το σκάνδαλο "αναμόρφωσε ουσιαστικά" τις σχέσεις μεταξύ των κλάδων της κυβέρνησης, ισχυρίζεται ο [[πολιτικός επιστήμονας]] Μπρους Τζ. Σούλμαν.<ref name=tws2010Sep11t14dd7>{{cite news
|author= Bruce J. Schulman (author), Julian E. Zelizer (editor)
|title= The American Congress: The Building of Democracy
|publisher= Houghton Mifflin Company
|page=638
|year= 2004
|isbn= 0-618-17906-2
|url= http://books.google.com/books?id=_MGEIIwT5pUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Zelizer+Julian+2004+American+Congress+The+Building+of+Democracy#v=onepage&q=Zelizer%20Julian%202004%20American%20Congress%20The%20Building%20of%20Democracy&f=false
|accessdate=September 11, 2010
}}</ref> Η κομματικότητα επανεμφανίστηκε, ειδικά μετά το 1994· one analyst attributes partisan infighting to slim congressional majorities which discouraged friendly social gatherings in meeting rooms such as the ''Board of Education''.<ref name=tws2010Sep11t14dd4>{{cite news
|author= Julian E. Zelizer (editor) Joanne Barrie Freeman, Jack N. Rakove, Alan Taylor, and others
|title= The American Congress: The Building of Democracy
|publisher= Houghton Mifflin Company
|pages= xiii–xiv
|year= 2004
|isbn= 0-618-17906-2
|url= http://books.google.com/books?id=_MGEIIwT5pUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Zelizer+Julian+2004+American+Congress+The+Building+of+Democracy#v=onepage&q=Zelizer%20Julian%202004%20American%20Congress%20The%20Building%20of%20Democracy&f=false
|accessdate=September 11, 2010
}}</ref> Congress began reasserting its authority.<ref name="English14"/><ref>{{cite news|title=THE HOUSE: New Faces and New Strains|url=http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,945101,00.html|newspaper=Time|date=November 18, 1974}}</ref> [[Lobbying in the United States|Lobbying]] became a big factor despite the 1971 [[Federal Election Campaign Act]]. Political action committees or PACs could make substantive donations to congressional candidates via such means as ''soft money'' contributions.<ref name=tws2010Sep11jggha>{{cite news
|author= Steven S. Smith, Jason M. Roberts, Ryan J. Vander Wielen
|title= The American Congress (Fourth Edition)
|publisher= Cambridge University Press
|page= 58
|year= 2006
|url= http://books.google.com/books?id=fWpE_HxuxVEC&dq=Smith,+Steven+S.,+Jason+M.+Roberts,+and+Ryan+Vander+Wielen+%282007%29.+The+American+Congress&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
|accessdate=September 11, 2010
}}</ref> While soft money funds were not given to specific campaigns for candidates, the monies often benefited candidates substantially in an indirect way and helped reelect candidates.<ref name=tws2010Sep11jggha/> Reforms such as the 2002 [[McCain-Feingold]] act limited campaign donations but did not limit ''soft money'' contributions.<ref name=tws30sep05>{{cite news
| author = Nick Anderson
| title = Political Attack Ads Already Popping Up on the Web
| work = Los Angeles Times
| date = March 30, 2004
| url = http://articles.latimes.com/2004/mar/30/nation/na-online30
| accessdate =September 30, 2009
}}</ref> One source suggests post-[[Watergate]] laws amended in 1974 meant to reduce the "influence of wealthy contributors and end payoffs" instead "legitimized PACs" since they "enabled individuals to band together in support of candidates."<ref name=tws02oct201>{{cite news
| author = Susan Tifft, Richard Homik, Hays Corey
| title = Taking an Ax to the PACs
| work = Time
| date = August 20, 1984
| url = http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,954335,00.html
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref> From 1974 to 1984, PACs grew from 608 to 3,803 and donations leaped from $12.5 million to $120 million<ref name="tws02oct201"/><ref name=tws02oct223>{{cite news
| author = ADAM CLYMER,
| title = Campaign spending in congress races soars to new high
| work = The New York Times
| date = October 29, 1992
| url = http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/29/us/campaign-spending-in-congress-races-soars-to-new-high.html
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref><ref name=tws01oct22>{{cite news
| author = Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
| title = Cost of Congressional Campaigns Skyrockets
| work = The Washington Post
| date = October 3, 2004
| url = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2935-2004Oct2.html
| accessdate =October 1, 2009
}}</ref> along with concern over PAC influence in Congress.<ref name=tws02oct205>{{cite news
| author = Richard E. Cohen
| title = PAC Paranoia: Congress Faces Campaign Spending – Politics: Hysteria was the operative word when legislators realized they could not return home without tougher campaign finance laws.
| work = Los Angeles Times
| date = August 12, 1990
| url = http://articles.latimes.com/1990-08-12/opinion/op-739_1_campaign-finance-laws
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref><ref name=tws02oct212>{{cite news
| author = Walter Isaacson, Evan Thomas, other bureaus
| title = Running with the PACs
| work = Time
| date = October 25, 1982
| url = http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,953584-2,00.html
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref> In 2009, there were 4,600 business, labor and special-interest PACs<ref name=tws02oct209>{{cite news
| author = John Fritze
| title = PACs spent record $416M on federal election
| work = USA Today
| date = 3/2/2009
| url = http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-03-01-pacmoney_N.htm
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref> including ones for [[Association of Trial Lawyers of America|lawyers]], [[International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers|electricians]], and [[National Association of Realtors|real estate brokers]].<ref name=tws02oct204>{{cite news
| author = Thomas Frank
| title = Beer PAC aims to put Congress under influence
| publisher = USA TODAY
| date = October 29, 2006
| url = http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-10-29-beer-lobby_x.htm
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref> From 2007 to 2008, 175 members of Congress received "half or more of their campaign cash" from PACs.<ref name="tws02oct209"/><ref name=tws02oct211>{{cite news
| author = Michael Isikoff and Dina Fine Maron
| title = Congress – Follow the Bailout Cash
| work = Newsweek
| date = March 21, 2009
| url = http://www.newsweek.com/id/190363
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref><ref name=tws02oct219>{{cite news
| author = Richard L. Berke
| title = Campaign Finance; Problems in the PAC's: Study Finds Frustration
| work = The New York Times
| date = February 14, 1988
| url = http://www.nytimes.com/1988/02/14/us/campaign-finance-problems-in-the-pac-s-study-finds-frustration.html
| accessdate =October 2, 2009
}}</ref>
Στο τέλος του 20ου αιώνα, τα μέσα ενημέρωσης έγιναν πιο σημαντικά στο έργο του Κογκρέσου.<ref name=tws2010Sep11t14dd1>{{cite news
|author= Julian E. Zelizer (editor) Michael Schudson (author)
|title= The American Congress: The Building of Democracy
|publisher= Houghton Mifflin Company
|year= 2004
|isbn= 0-618-17906-2
|url= http://books.google.com/books?id=_MGEIIwT5pUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Zelizer+Julian+2004+American+Congress+The+Building+of+Democracy#v=onepage&q=Zelizer%20Julian%202004%20American%20Congress%20The%20Building%20of%20Democracy&f=false
|accessdate=September 11, 2010
}}</ref> Ο αναλυτής Μάικλ Σούντσον ισχυρίστηκε ότι η μεγαλύτερη δημοσιότητα υπονόμευσε την δύναμη των πολιτικών κομμάτων και προκάλεσε "more roads to open up in Congress for individual representatives to influence decisions."<ref name=tws2010Sep11t14dd1 /> Norman Ornstein suggested that media prominence led to a greater emphasis on the negative and sensational side of Congress, and referred to this as the ''tabloidization'' of media coverage.<ref name=tws2010Sep11t14cc/> Others saw pressure to squeeze a political position into a thirty-second soundbite.<ref name=tws2010Sep11t14cc54>{{cite news
|author= Steven S. Smith, Jason M. Roberts, Ryan J. Vander Wielen
|title= The American Congress (Fourth Edition)
|publisher= Cambridge University Press
|page= 12
|year= 2006
|url= http://books.google.com/books?id=fWpE_HxuxVEC&dq=Smith,+Steven+S.,+Jason+M.+Roberts,+and+Ryan+Vander+Wielen+%282007%29.+The+American+Congress&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
|accessdate=September 11, 2010
}}</ref> A report characterized Congress in 2013 as being unproductive, gridlocked, and "setting records for futility."<ref>Mark Murray, NBC News, Jun 30, 2013, [http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/30/19206400-unproductive-congress-how-stalemates-became-the-norm-in-washington-dc?lite Unproductive Congress: How stalemates became the norm in Washington DC], Accessed June 30, 2013</ref> Τον Οκτώβριο του 2013, με το Κογκρέσο ανίκανο να συμβιβαστεί, η κυβέρνηση ανέστειλε τις λειτουργίες της για αρκετές εβδομάδες και ρίσκαρε μια σοβαρή χρεοκοπία λόγω πληρωμών του χρέους, κάνοντας το 60% των ψηφοφόρων να λέει ότι "θα απομάκρυνε κάθε μέλος του Κογκρέσου" περιλαμβανομένου του αντιπροσώπου της περιοχής τους.<ref name=NBCNews1>Domenico Montanaro, NBC News, October 10, 2013, [http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/10/20903531-nbcwsj-poll-60-percent-say-fire-every-member-of-congress?lite NBC/WSJ poll: 60 percent say fire every member of Congress], Accessed October 10, 2013, “...60 percent of Americans ... if they had the chance to vote to defeat and replace every single member of Congress ... they would...”</ref>
==Παραπομπές==
| |||