Free Lawmaking And Political Parties Essay Sample

The process of creating laws within the United States is often a complicated process involving many different players. Lawmakers, interest groups, parties, bureaucracy, and the courts can all play a role in affecting the creation and implementation of public policy. There are also many different steps that a bill must go through in order to become law. Of course, public opinion is also necessary to complete a law, which can put lawmakers in difficult positions when deciding to choose between what they see as right, or their district.
The lawmaking process begins with an analysis of a problem worth addressing. This is the problem definition or issue formation stage, and it is part of the three steps in the pre-policy lawmaking stage. In order to create a piece of legislation, lawmakers will have to come to some consensus on an issue worth addressing. Sometimes these are issues that greatly concern the public, so the goal is to aid public opinion, and others are done more with lobbyist groups and special interests. There are numerous issues that lawmakers can address, so issues have to be prioritized in some way (Cochran 9). For example, immigration reform is a major issue that needs to be addressed within the lawmaking process. However, there is a wide variety of opinions regarding why immigration is a problem, so it is often hard to come to a consensus on what issue regarding the immigration system should be addressed. Lawmakers have differing beliefs and values, and the issues that are chosen within the problem definition are the result of many different political influences, especially those of political parties. Seeing as the US government only has a two major political parties, there are usually at least two competing views on which issues should be addressed and to what degree of importance.
The next step is the policy demands stage, which is where all the opposing views about the issue chosen come out (Cochran 10). For the immigration issue, this would be where policy makers debate between an increase in border control in the South, or how many green cards to admit. Views regarding a more lenient plan for illegal immigrants will be debated with those who favor deportation. The policy demands stage is where proposals on every perspective to address a certain problem come out, and then lawmakers have the difficult choice of pursuing a plan to actually bring to the floor.
This naturally leads the agenda setting stage when the actual issues to be addressed by the government will be set forth. Many people feel passionately about many issues, and the ones that are actually selected have a lot to do with politics, especially the political party in control of Congress (Cochran 10). Seeing as the majority part will have the leadership positions in both Congress and the individual committees, this provides an advantage to setting the agenda. If the Democrats were to be in control of Congress, it would be more likely that a plan favoring amnesty and leniency towards illegal immigrants would reach the floor of Congress. It would make it much more difficult for a Republican plan to reach the floor of Congress, which shows the large role political parties can play in shaping the policy agenda.
Agenda setting is a crucial step in the policy formation process, and there are typically three approaches to who gets to set agendas. For the most the United States try to obtain a pluralist approach to setting the agenda. This means that many difference factors and entities influence the agenda. There are a number of competing interests, from businesses, political parties, the people, congressmen, and other factors. All these forces compete against each other in an attempt to shape the agenda. The key is that there is an open marketplace for ideas. However, a more cynical view of the agenda setting phase is the elitist approach. This is the belief that those who shape the agenda are the ones in power or have the money. It favors the majority party, and the big businesses with the ability to lobby. The last approach to the agenda setting phase is the state-centered approach which is where government agencies themselves compete in the policy making process to further promote their causes. While there are some elitist tendencies in this approach, the difference is these agencies are not working to further their own agendas. They are working on behalf of their agency, which usually works for the people (Peters 2007). The point is that there are many influencing voices within the agenda setting stage, as this will decide which issues actually get discussed and into the lawmaking process. It is a crucial step that political parties often try to shape for their own benefit.
Once the agenda has been set, the lawmaking process goes to the policy adoption stage. The policies decided on during the pre-policy stages are then further debated, and input from interest groups, policy experts, and normal citizens are taken into account. There is often a great deal of compromising and bargaining throughout this stage, as a bill has to be produced in some form. Sometimes provisions are attached to appease certain interest group or congressional districts, which adds to the complexity of getting a bill to pass (Cochran 11). Political parties also play a role in this stage as well because the House and Senate majority leaders can block or allow certain bills depending on whether or not they agree with the position being presented. This is why even if a Republican leaning bill on immigration could make its way out of the pre-policy stage, in a Democratic controlled Congress, the bill would likely be blocked.
Once a law has been adopted, it reaches the policy implementation stage. This is where the actual money is spent, and the law has to be enforced by the proper administrative agency. This stage usually involves the executive branch as it is their role to enforce the policy. This is why proper funding is crucial in order to get a meaningful policy in place that creates some sort of impact. The overall goal of the lawmaking process is to produce an impact in line with the goals of the bill (Cochran 11). For the immigration example, the goal would be to productively deal with the current illegal immigrants as well as reforming the procedures and border policies that currently govern the nation. Funding will play a large role in this, as will the effective administration of the law. If the chief executive does not believe in the law, there is a chance it will not be as effectively enforced. This is commonly seen in immigration, as President Obama just issued an Executive Order describing which immigration policies he would enforce, and those he would overlook. This was a political move that angered many Republicans, which shows that political parties can still effect the implementation of public policy. If the policy implementation stage fails, the law will not produce an impact and will have to be re-evaluated, which is the last stage of the policy formation process.
The policy evaluation process takes into consideration public opinion, legal precedent, and empirical data regarding the policy. The goals of the policy evaluation stage is to determine the goals of the law and if they have been reached. The reasons for success and failures must be analyzed, and further resources may have to allocated or reallocated. This step can often restart the policy formation process, as a further law or bill may be needed to correct the actions of prior legislation (Cochran 14). This is why the policy formation process works more like a cycle as opposed to linear progression. According to Cochran, “Policy is more like an endless game of Monopoly than a bicycle repair (Cochran 11).”
In the American system, there is a specific procedure for how a bill becomes a law within the policy formation process. This system directly speaks to the importance of political parties and how they can shape the legislative agenda. In Congress, a bill can be introduced in either the House or the Senate. Any member of Congress can submit a proposal, as can the President. The bill is read and assigned to a specific committee by the Speaker of the House and the Senate Majority Leader. The committee stage is where the bill is formulated, and is part of the policy demands stage. The committees work out the details and decide on a form they will present to large assembly. The bill is then voted on by either the House or Senate, and once approved, goes to the other chamber for approval. If a slightly different version passes, the differences will have to be resolved and voted on until the same version is approved by both houses of Congress. The President then will have the choice whether to sign or veto the bill (Peters 2007). The President’s political party will impact whether or not the bill is signed, because the president is the leader of their political party.
The reason political parties play such a large role is because of the power in the Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader in the Senate. These two positions get to prioritize and schedule the bills that come to the floor. This is how certain bills can be blocked and never come to the floor of Congress. The leaders of both chambers of Congress can stop certain bills, so it is politically advantageous to have these authoritative positions. Furthermore, committee chairs are determined by the majority party, and this can also shape which bills come to the floor of Congress (Peters 2007).
Because political parties play such a large influence in the formation of public policy, this raises the issue of whether or not lawmakers should vote for their views of their district, or based on what they think is right. Lawmakers often receive calls from their districts regarding positions people take on certain issues, and public opinion is often consulted to see the ramifications of voting for a certain policy. In ideal circumstances, a politician’s viewpoints will most often align with those of their constituents and their political party, which should not cause many problems. If a candidate was voted in by a district with Tea Party beliefs and ideology, and the candidate shared this, there should not be much of an issue. There may be issues within the Republican Party as they do not reflect every tenant of the Tea Party. In any case, voting against one’s district or political party is a risky move. Politicians are ultimately representative of the people, and they should carry the people’s views in mind when voting on legislation.
Of course, there are many factors at play when a politician determines to support certain legislation. Interest groups and lobbyists play a fundamental role in swaying a vote, as money is a strong influence. However, lawmakers also have to consider the political party and its interest (“How a Member Decides to Vote”). If the Democrats need all the votes in their party to pass legislation, but the bill could go against the constituents of a certain representative, this proposes a difficult choice. There is no exact right or wrong answer. A lawmaker certainly has the right to vote whichever way they want, and it may be hard to fight leadership on major issues. Political parties can threaten to withdraw funding if a representative votes against their own interests enough, so all these factors must be taken into account when deciding whether or not to support a certain proposal.
There is no easy answer to which views a lawmaker should support in a legislative body. In the end, they should vote for what they believe is in the best interest of their constituents. Even if this goes against their constituents or parties beliefs, the main role of a lawmaker is to improve the country or state for the common good. Sometimes the people are wrong about an issue, and certainly each party’s platforms do not have all the answers. Lawmakers should ultimately answer to the people, not a rigid ideological platform, so it is best if lawmakers simply work in the best interests of the people, rather than support a certain ideology.

Works Cited

Cochran, Clarke E. American Public Policy: An Introduction 10th Edition. New York: Wadsworth, 2012. Print.
Peters, B. Guy. American Public Policy: Promise and Performance. 7th ed. S.l.: Cq, 2007. Print.
"How a Member Decides to Vote." Indiana University. Web. 7 Mar. 2015. <http://www.centeroncongress.org/how-member-decides-vote>.