document_title: United States House of Representatives

question_text: when does the house of representatives decide how many representatives can be sent from each state

question_tokens: when does the house of representatives decide how many representatives can be sent from each state

text: United States House of Representatives

text: History[edit]

text: Under the Articles of Confederation, the Congress of the Confederation was a unicameral body in which each state was equally represented, and in which each state had a veto over most action. After eight years of a more limited confederal government under the Articles, numerous political leaders such as James Madison and Alexander Hamilton initiated the Constitutional Convention in 1787, which received the Confederation Congress's sanction to "amend the Articles of Confederation". All states except Rhode Island agreed to send delegates.

text: The issue of how to structure Congress was one of the most divisive among the founders during the Convention. Edmund Randolph's Virginia Plan called for a bicameral Congress: the lower house would be "of the people", elected directly by the people of the United States and representing public opinion, and a more deliberative upper house that would represent the individual states, and would be less susceptible to variations of mass sentiment, would be elected by the lower house.[6]

text: The House is referred to as the lower house, with the Senate being the upper house, although the United States Constitution does not use that terminology. Both houses' approval is necessary for the passage of legislation. The Virginia Plan drew the support of delegates from large states such as Virginia, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, as it called for representation based on population. The smaller states, however, favored the New Jersey Plan, which called for a unicameral Congress with equal representation for the states.[6]

text: Eventually, the Convention reached the Connecticut Compromise or Great Compromise, under which one house of Congress (the House of Representatives) would provide representation proportional to each state's population, whereas the other (the Senate) would provide equal representation amongst the states.[6] The Constitution was ratified by the requisite number of states (nine out of the 13) in 1788, but its implementation was set for March 4, 1789. The House began work on April 1, 1789, when it achieved a quorum for the first time.

text: During the first half of the 19th century, the House was frequently in conflict with the Senate over regionally divisive issues, including slavery. The North was much more populous than the South, and therefore dominated the House of Representatives. However, the North held no such advantage in the Senate, where the equal representation of states prevailed.

text: Regional conflict was most pronounced over the issue of slavery. One example of a provision repeatedly supported by the House but blocked by the Senate was the Wilmot Proviso, which sought to ban slavery in the land gained during the Mexican–American War. Conflict over slavery and other issues persisted until the Civil War (1861–1865), which began soon after several southern states attempted to secede from the Union. The war culminated in the South's defeat and in the abolition of slavery. All southern senators except Andrew Johnson resigned their seats at the beginning of the war, and therefore the Senate did not hold the balance of power between North and South during the war.

text: The years of Reconstruction that followed witnessed large majorities for the Republican Party, which many Americans associated with the Union's victory in the Civil War and the ending of slavery. The Reconstruction period ended in about 1877; the ensuing era, known as the Gilded Age, was marked by sharp political divisions in the electorate. The Democratic Party and Republican Party each held majorities in the House at various times.

text: The late 19th and early 20th centuries also saw a dramatic increase in the power of the Speaker of the House. The rise of the Speaker's influence began in the 1890s, during the tenure of Republican Thomas Brackett Reed. "Czar Reed", as he was nicknamed, attempted to put into effect his view that "The best system is to have one party govern and the other party watch." The leadership structure of the House also developed during approximately the same period, with the positions of Majority Leader and Minority Leader being created in 1899. While the Minority Leader was the head of the minority party, the Majority Leader remained subordinate to the Speaker. The Speakership reached its zenith during the term of Republican Joseph Gurney Cannon, from 1903 to 1911. The powers of the Speaker included chairmanship of the influential Rules Committee and the ability to appoint members of other House committees. These powers, however, were curtailed in the "Revolution of 1910" because of the efforts of Democrats and dissatisfied Republicans who opposed Cannon's arguably heavy-handed tactics.

text: The Democratic Party dominated the House of Representatives during the administration of President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933–1945), often winning over two-thirds of the seats. Both Democrats and Republicans were in power at various times during the next decade. The Democratic Party maintained control of the House from 1955 until 1995. In the mid-1970s, there were major reforms of the House, strengthening the power of sub-committees at the expense of committee chairs and allowing party leaders to nominate committee chairs. These actions were taken to undermine the seniority system, and to reduce the ability of a small number of senior members to obstruct legislation they did not favor. There was also a shift from the 1990s to greater control of the legislative program by the majority party; the power of party leaders (especially the Speaker) grew considerably.

text: The Republicans took control of the House in 1995, under the leadership of Speaker Newt Gingrich. Gingrich attempted to pass a major legislative program, the Contract with America, on which the House Republicans had been elected, and made major reforms of the House, notably reducing the tenure of committee chairs to three two-year terms. Many elements of the Contract did not pass Congress, were vetoed by President Bill Clinton, or were substantially altered in negotiations with Clinton. The Republicans held on to the House until 2006, when the Democrats won control and Nancy Pelosi was subsequently elected by the House as the first female Speaker. The Republicans retook the House in 2011, with the largest shift of power since the 1930s.[7]

text: Membership, qualifications and apportionment[edit]

text:
This article is part of a series on the

United States House
of Representatives

History of the United States
House of Representatives

Members

Current members

(by seniority
by age
non-voting)

Former members

Hill committees

(DCCC
NRCC)

Congressional districts

Speaker of the United States
House of Representatives (list)

Party leaders
Democratic Caucus
Republican Conference

Politics and procedure

Committee of the Whole

Closed session (list)
Saxbe fix

Committees (list)
Procedures

Origination Clause
Quorum call

Unanimous consent
Salaries

Apportionment (Huntington–Hill method)

Redistricting
Gerrymandering

Articles of impeachment

Self-executing rule
Rules suspension

General ticket
Plural district

Places

United States Capitol

House office buildings

(Cannon
Ford
Longworth
Rayburn)

v
t
e

text: Apportionments[edit]

text: Under Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution, seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned among the states by population, as determined by the census conducted every ten years. Each state is entitled to at least one Representative, however small its population.

text: The only constitutional rule relating to the size of the House states: "The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative."[8] Congress regularly increased the size of the House to account for population growth until it fixed the number of voting House members at 435 in 1911.[1] In 1959, upon the admission of Alaska and Hawaii, the number was temporarily increased to 437 (seating one Representative from each of those states without changing existing apportionment), and returned to 435 four years later, after the reapportionment consequent to the 1960 census.

text: The Constitution does not provide for the representation of the District of Columbia or of territories. The District of Columbia and the territories of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are each represented by one non-voting delegate. Puerto Rico elects a Resident Commissioner, but other than having a four-year term, the Resident Commissioner's role is identical to the delegates from the other territories. The five Delegates and Resident Commissioner may participate in debates; prior to 2011,[9] they were also allowed to vote in committees and the Committee of the Whole when their votes would not be decisive.[10]

text: Redistricting[edit]

text: States that are entitled to more than one Representative are divided into single-member districts. This has been a federal statutory requirement since 1967.[11] Prior to that law, general ticket representation was used by some states.

text: States typically redraw district boundaries after each census, though they may do so at other times, such as the 2003 Texas redistricting. Each state determines its own district boundaries, either through legislation or through non-partisan panels. "Malapportionment" is unconstitutional and districts must be approximately equal in population (see Wesberry v. Sanders). Additionally, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 prohibits redistricting plans that are intended to, or have the effect of, discriminating against racial or language minority voters.[12] Aside from malapportionment and discrimination against racial or language minorities, federal courts have allowed state legislatures to engage in gerrymandering for the benefit of political parties or incumbents.[13][14] In a 1984 case, Davis v. Bandemer, the Supreme Court held that gerrymandered districts could be struck down on the basis of the Equal Protection Clause, but the Court did not articulate a standard for when districts are impermissibly gerrymandered. However, the Court overruled Davis in 2004 in Vieth v. Jubelirer, and Court precedent currently holds gerrymandering to be a political question. According to calculations made by Burt Neuborne using criteria set forth by the American Political Science Association, about 40 seats, less than 10% of the House membership, are chosen through a genuinely contested electoral process, given partisan gerrymandering.[15][16]

text: Qualifications[edit]

text: Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution sets three qualifications for representatives. Each representative must: (1) be at least twenty-five years old; (2) have been a citizen of the United States for the past seven years; and (3) be (at the time of the election) an inhabitant of the state he or she represents. Members are not required to live in the districts they represent, but they traditionally do.[17] The age and citizenship qualifications for representatives are less than those for senators. The constitutional requirements of Article I, Section 2 for election to Congress are the maximum requirements that can be imposed on a candidate.[18] Therefore, Article I, Section 5, which permits each House to be the judge of the qualifications of its own members does not permit either House to establish additional qualifications. Likewise a State could not establish additional qualifications.

text: Disqualification: under the Fourteenth Amendment, a federal or state officer who takes the requisite oath to support the Constitution, but later engages in rebellion or aids the enemies of the United States, is disqualified from becoming a representative. This post–Civil War provision was intended to prevent those who sided with the Confederacy from serving. However, disqualified individuals may serve if they gain the consent of two-thirds of both houses of Congress.

text: Elections[edit]

text: Elections for representatives are held in every even-numbered year, on Election Day the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. By law, Representatives must be elected from single-member districts. After a census is taken (in a year ending in 0), the year ending in 2 is the first year in which elections for U.S. House districts are based on that census (with the Congress based on those districts starting its term on the following Jan. 3).

text: In most states, major party candidates for each district are nominated in partisan primary elections, typically held in spring to late summer. In some states, the Republican and Democratic parties choose their respective candidates for each district in their political conventions in spring or early summer, which often use unanimous voice votes to reflect either confidence in the incumbent or the result of bargaining in earlier private discussions. Exceptions can result in so-called floor fight—convention votes by delegates, with outcomes that can be hard to predict. Especially if a convention is closely divided, a losing candidate may contend further by meeting the conditions for a primary election.

text: The courts generally do not consider ballot access rules for independent and third party candidates to be additional qualifications for holding office and there are no federal regulations regarding ballot access. As a result, the process to gain ballot access varies greatly from state to state, and in the case of a third party may be affected by results of previous years' elections.

text: In 1967, the United States Congress passed the Uniform Congressional District Act, which requires almost all representatives be elected from single-member-districts,[19][20] Following the Wesberry v. Sanders decision, Congress was motivated by fears that courts would impose at-large plurality districts on states that did not redistrict to comply with the new mandates for districts roughly equal in population, and Congress also sought to prevent attempts by southern states to use such voting systems to dilute the vote of racial minorities.[21] Several states have used multi-member districts in the past, although only two states (Hawaii and Maine) used multi-member districts in 1967.[20] Hawaii and Maine were made exempt from the Uniform Congressional District Act, and are free to use multi-member districts, although neither state chooses to do so.[20]

text: Louisiana is unique in that it holds an all-party "primary election" on the general Election Day with a subsequent runoff election between the top two finishers (regardless of party) if no candidate received a majority in the primary. The states of Washington and California now use a similar (though not identical) system to that used by Louisiana. Seats vacated during a term are filled through special elections, unless the vacancy occurs closer to the next general election date than a pre-established deadline. The term of a member chosen in a special election usually begins the next day, or as soon as the results are certified.

text: Non-voting delegates[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Additionally, Washington D.C. and the five inhabited U.S. territories each elect a non-voting delegate. With the exception of the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico, each representative and delegate serves for a two-year term. They have a voice and can introduce bills on the floor, but cannot vote there.

text: Terms[edit]

text: Representatives and Delegates serve for two-year terms, while the Resident Commissioner serves for four years. The Constitution permits the House to expel a member with a two-thirds vote. In the history of the United States, only five members have been expelled from the House; in 1861, three were removed for supporting the Confederate states' secession: John Bullock Clark (D-MO), John William Reid (D-MO) and Henry Cornelius Burnett (D-KY). Michael Myers (D-PA) was expelled after his criminal conviction for accepting bribes in 1980, and James Traficant (D-OH) was expelled in 2002 following his conviction for corruption.[22] The House also has the power to formally censure or reprimand its members; censure or reprimand of a member requires only a simple majority, and does not remove that member from office.

text: Comparison to the Senate[edit]

text: As a check on the regional, popular, and rapidly changing politics of the House, the Senate has several distinct powers. For example, the "advice and consent" powers (such as the power to approve treaties) are a sole Senate privilege.[23] The House, however, has the exclusive power to initiate bills for raising revenue, to impeach officials, and to choose the President in the event that a presidential candidate fails to get a majority of the Electoral College votes.[24] The Senate and House are further differentiated by term lengths and the number of districts represented: the Senate has longer terms of six years, fewer members (currently one hundred, two for each state), and (in all but seven delegations) larger constituencies per member. The Senate is informally referred to as the "upper" house, and the House of Representatives as the "lower" house.

text: Salary and benefits[edit]

text: Salaries[edit]

text: As of December 2014[update], the annual salary of each Representative is $174,000.[25][26] The Speaker of the House and the Majority and Minority Leaders earn more: $223,500 for the Speaker and $193,400 for their party leaders (the same as Senate leaders).[26] A cost-of-living-adjustment (COLA) increase takes effect annually unless Congress votes to not accept it. Congress sets members' salaries; however, the Twenty-seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution prohibits a change in salary (but not COLA[27]) from taking effect until after the next election of the whole House. Representatives are eligible for retirement benefits after serving for five years.[28] Outside pay is limited to 15% of congressional pay, and certain types of income involving a fiduciary responsibility or personal endorsement are prohibited.[26]

text: Titles[edit]

text: Representatives use the prefix "The Honorable" before their names. A member of the House is referred to as a representative, congressman, or congresswoman. While senators are members of Congress, the terms congressman and congresswoman are not generally used by them.

text: Pension[edit]

text: All members of Congress are automatically (without the option of withdrawal) enrolled in the Federal Employees Retirement System, a pension system also used for federal civil servants. They become eligible to receive benefits after five years of service (two and one-half terms in the House). The FERS is composed of three elements:

text:
Social Security
The FERS basic annuity, a monthly pension plan based on the number of years of service and the average of the three highest years of basic pay
The Thrift Savings Plan, a 401(k)-like defined contribution plan for retirement account into which participants can deposit up to a maximum of $18,000 in 2017.[needs update] Their employing agency matches employee contributions up to 5% of pay.

tag: ol

text: Members of Congress may retire with full benefits at age 62 after five years of service, at age 50 after twenty years of service, and at any age after twenty-five years of service. They may retire with reduced benefits at ages 55 to 59 after five years of service. Depending on birth year, they may receive a reduced pension after ten years of service if they are between 55 years and 57 years of age.[29]

text: Tax deductions[edit]

text: Members of Congress are permitted to deduct up to $3,000 of living expenses per year incurred while living away from their district or home state.[30]

text: Health benefits[edit]

text: Prior to 2014, members of Congress and their staff had access to essentially the same health benefits as federal civil servants; they could voluntarily enroll in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP), an employer-sponsored health insurance program, and were eligible to participate in other programs, such as the Federal Flexible Spending Account Program (FSAFEDS).[31]

text: However, Section 1312(d)(3)(D) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) provided that the only health plans that the federal government can make available to members of Congress and certain congressional staff are those created under the ACA or offered through a health care exchange. The Office of Personnel Management promulgated a final rule to comply with Section 1312(d)(3)(D).[31] Under the rule, effective January 1, 2014, members and designated staff are no longer able to purchase FEHBP plans as active employees.[31] However, if members enroll in a health plan offered through a Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP) exchange, they remain eligible for an employer contribution toward coverage, and members and designated staff who are eligible for retirement may enroll in a FEHBP plan upon retirement.[31]

text: The ACA and the final rule do not affect members' or staffers' eligibility for Medicare benefits.[31] The ACA and the final rule also do not affect members' and staffers' eligibility for other health benefits related to federal employment, so current members and staff are eligible to participate in FSAFEDS (which has three options within the program), the Federal Employees Dental and Vision Insurance Program, and the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program.[31]

text: There is an Office of the Attending Physician at the U.S. Capitol, which current members may seek health care from for an annual fee.[31] The attending physician provides routine exams, consultations, and certain diagnostics, and may write prescriptions (although it does not dispense them).[31] The office does not provide vision or dental care.[31]

text: Current members (but not their dependents, and not former members) may also receive medical and emergency dental care at military treatment facilities.[31] There is no charge for outpatient care if it is provided in the National Capital Region, but members are billed at full reimbursement rates (set by the Department of Defense) for inpatient care.[31] (Outside the National Capital Region, charges are at full reimbursement rates for both inpatient and outpatient care).[31]

text: Personnel, mail and office expenses[edit]

text: House members are eligible for a Member's Representational Allowance (MRA) to support them in their official and representational duties to their district.[32] The MRA is calculated based on three components: one for personnel, one for official office expenses and one for official or franked mail. The personnel allowance is the same for all members; the office and mail allowances vary based on the members' district's distance from Washington, D.C., the cost of office space in the member's district, and the number of non-business addresses in their district. These three components are used to calculate a single MRA that can fund any expense—even though each component is calculated individually, the franking allowance can be used to pay for personnel expenses if the member so chooses. In 2011 this allowance averaged $1.4 million per member, and ranged from $1.35 to $1.67 million.[33]

text: The Personnel allowance was $944,671 per member in 2010. Each member may employ no more than 18 permanent employees. Members' employees' salary is capped at $168,411 as of 2009.[33]

text: Travel allowance[edit]

text: Each member-elect and one staffer can be paid for one round trip between their home in their congressional district and Washington, D.C. for organization caucuses.[33]

text: Officers[edit]

text: Member officials[edit]

text: The party with a majority of seats in the House is known as the majority party. The next-largest party is the minority party. The Speaker, committee chairs, and some other officials are generally from the majority party; they have counterparts (for instance, the "ranking members" of committees) in the minority party.

text: The Constitution provides that the House may choose its own Speaker.[34] Although not explicitly required by the Constitution, every Speaker has been a member of the House. The Constitution does not specify the duties and powers of the Speaker, which are instead regulated by the rules and customs of the House. Speakers have a role both as a leader of the House and the leader of their party (which need not be the majority party; theoretically, a member of the minority party could be elected as Speaker with the support of a fraction of members of the majority party). Under the Presidential Succession Act (1947), the Speaker is second in the line of presidential succession behind the Vice President.

text: The Speaker is the presiding officer of the House but does not preside over every debate. Instead, s/he delegates the responsibility of presiding to other members in most cases. The presiding officer sits in a chair in the front of the House chamber. The powers of the presiding officer are extensive; one important power is that of controlling the order in which members of the House speak. No member may make a speech or a motion unless s/he has first been recognized by the presiding officer. Moreover, the presiding officer may rule on a "point of order" (a member's objection that a rule has been breached); the decision is subject to appeal to the whole House.

text: Speakers serve as chairs of their party's steering committee, which is responsible for assigning party members to other House committees. The Speaker chooses the chairmen of standing committees, appoints most of the members of the Rules Committee, appoints all members of conference committees, and determines which committees consider bills.

text: Each party elects a floor leader, who is known as the Majority Leader or Minority Leader. The Minority Leader heads their party in the House, and the Majority Leader is their party's second-highest-ranking official, behind the Speaker. Party leaders decide what legislation members of their party should either support or oppose.

text: Each party also elects a Whip, who works to ensure that the party's members vote as the party leadership desires. The current majority whip in the House of Representatives is Steve Scalise, who is a member of the Republican Party. The current minority whip is Steny Hoyer, who is a member of the Democratic Party. The whip is supported by chief deputy whips.

text: In the 112th Congress, the Democratic Party has an additional Assistant Minority Leader, Jim Clyburn, who ranks between the whips and the caucus/conference chair.

text: After the whips, the next ranking official in the House party's leadership is the Party Conference Chair (styled as the Republican Conference Chair and Democratic Caucus Chair).

text: After the Conference Chair, there are differences between each party's subsequent leadership ranks. After the Democratic Caucus Chair is the Campaign Committee Chair (Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee), then the co-chairs of the Steering Committee. For the Republicans it is the Chair of the House Republican Policy Committee, followed by the Campaign Committee Chairman (styled as the National Republican Congressional Committee).

text: The chairs of House committees, particularly influential standing committees such as Appropriations, Ways and Means, and Rules, are powerful but not officially part of House leadership hierarchy. Until the post of Majority Leader was created, the Chair of Ways and Means was the de facto majority leader.

text: Leadership and partisanship[edit]

text: When the Presidency and Senate are controlled by a different party from the one controlling the House, the Speaker can become the de facto "leader of the opposition". Some notable examples include Tip O'Neill in the 1980s, Newt Gingrich in the 1990s, and John Boehner and Paul Ryan in the 2010s. Since the Speaker is a partisan officer with substantial power to control the business of the House, the position is often used for partisan advantage.

text: In the instance when the Presidency and both Houses of Congress are controlled by one party, the Speaker normally takes a low profile and defers to the President. For that situation the House Minority Leader can play the role of a de facto "leader of the opposition", often more so than the Senate Minority Leader, due to the more partisan nature of the House and the greater role of leadership.

text: Non-member officials[edit]

text: The House is also served by several officials who are not members. The House's chief such officer is the Clerk, who maintains public records, prepares documents, and oversees junior officials, including pages, until the junior position's discontinuation in 2011. The Clerk also presides over the House at the beginning of each new Congress pending the election of a Speaker. Another officer is the Chief Administrative Officer, responsible for the day-to-day administrative support to the House of Representatives. This includes everything from payroll to foodservice.

text: The position of Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) was created by the 104th Congress following the 1994 mid-term elections, replacing the positions of Doorkeeper and Director of Non-Legislative and Financial Services (created by the previous congress to administer the non-partisan functions of the House). The CAO also assumed some of the responsibilities of the House Information Services, which previously had been controlled directly by the Committee on House Administration, then headed by Representative Charlie Rose of North Carolina, along with the House "Folding Room".

text: The Chaplain leads the House in prayer at the opening of the day. There is also a Sergeant at Arms, who as the House's chief law enforcement officer maintains order and security on House premises. Finally, routine police work is handled by the United States Capitol Police, which is supervised by the Capitol Police Board, a body to which the Sergeant at Arms belongs, and chairs in even-numbered years.

text: Procedure[edit]

text: Daily procedures[edit]

text: Like the Senate, the House of Representatives meets in the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C. At one end of the chamber of the House is a rostrum from which the Speaker, Speaker Pro Tempore, or (when in the Committee of the Whole) the Chair presides.[35] The lower tier of the rostrum is used by clerks and other officials. Members' seats are arranged in the chamber in a semicircular pattern facing the rostrum and are divided by a wide central aisle.[36] By tradition, Democrats sit on the left of the center aisle, while Republicans sit on the right, facing the presiding officer's chair.[37] Sittings are normally held on weekdays; meetings on Saturdays and Sundays are rare. Sittings of the House are generally open to the public; visitors must obtain a House Gallery pass from a congressional office.[38] Sittings are broadcast live on television and have been streamed live on C-SPAN since March 19, 1979,[39] and on HouseLive, the official streaming service operated by the Clerk, since the early 2010s.

text: The procedure of the House depends not only on the rules, but also on a variety of customs, precedents, and traditions. In many cases, the House waives some of its stricter rules (including time limits on debates) by unanimous consent.[40] A member may block a unanimous consent agreement; in practice, objections are rare. The presiding officer, the Speaker of the House enforces the rules of the House, and may warn members who deviate from them. The Speaker uses a gavel to maintain order.[41] The box in which legislation is placed to be considered by the House is called the hopper.[42]

text: In one of its first resolutions, the U.S. House of Representatives established the Office of the Sergeant at Arms. In an American tradition adopted from English custom in 1789 by the first Speaker of the House, Frederick Muhlenberg of Pennsylvania, the Mace of the United States House of Representatives is used to open all sessions of the House. It is also used during the inaugural ceremonies for all Presidents of the United States. For daily sessions of the House, the sergeant at Arms carries the mace in front of the Speaker in procession to the rostrum. It is placed on a green marble pedestal to the Speaker's right. When the House is in committee, the mace is moved to a pedestal next to the desk of the Sergeant at Arms.[43]

text: The Constitution provides that a majority of the House constitutes a quorum to do business.[44] Under the rules and customs of the House, a quorum is always assumed present unless a quorum call explicitly demonstrates otherwise. House rules prevent a member from making a point of order that a quorum is not present unless a question is being voted on. The presiding officer does not accept a point of order of no quorum during general debate, or when a question is not before the House.[45]

text: During debates, a member may speak only if called upon by the presiding officer. The presiding officer decides which members to recognize, and can therefore control the course of debate.[46] All speeches must be addressed to the presiding officer, using the words "Mr. Speaker" or "Madam Speaker". Only the presiding officer may be directly addressed in speeches; other members must be referred to in the third person. In most cases, members do not refer to each other only by name, but also by state, using forms such as "the gentleman from Virginia", "the distinguished gentlewoman from California", or "my distinguished friend from Alabama".

text: There are 448 permanent seats on the House Floor and four tables, two on each side. These tables are occupied by members of the committee that have brought a bill to the floor for consideration and by the respective party leadership. Members address the House from microphones at any table or "the well," the area immediately in front of the rostrum.[47]

text: Passage of legislation[edit]

text: Per the constitution, the House determines the rules according to which it passes legislation. The rules are in principle open to change with each new Congress, but in practice each new session amends a standing set of rules built up over the history of the body in an early resolution published for public inspection.[48] Before legislation reaches the floor of the House, the Rules Committee normally passes a rule to govern debate on that measure (which then must be passed by the full House before it becomes effective). For instance, the committee determines if amendments to the bill are permitted. An "open rule" permits all germane amendments, but a "closed rule" restricts or even prohibits amendment. Debate on a bill is generally restricted to one hour, equally divided between the majority and minority parties. Each side is led during the debate by a "floor manager", who allocates debate time to members who wish to speak. On contentious matters, many members may wish to speak; thus, a member may receive as little as one minute, or even thirty seconds, to make his/her point.[49]

text: When debate concludes, the motion in question is put to a vote. In many cases, the House votes by voice vote; the presiding officer puts the question, and members respond either "yea" or "aye" (in favor of the motion) or "nay" or "no" (against the motion). The presiding officer then announces the result of the voice vote. A member may however challenge the presiding officer's assessment and "request the yeas and nays" or "request a recorded vote". The request may be granted only if it is seconded by one-fifth of the members present. In practice, however, members of congress second requests for recorded votes as a matter of courtesy. Some votes are always recorded, such as those on the annual budget.[50]

text: A recorded vote may be taken in one of three different ways. One is electronically. Members use a personal identification card to record their votes at 46 voting stations in the chamber. Votes are usually held in this way. A second mode of recorded vote is by teller. Members hand in colored cards to indicate their votes: green for "yea", red for "nay", and orange for "present" (i.e., to abstain). Teller votes are normally held only when electronic voting breaks down. Finally, the House may conduct a roll call vote. The Clerk reads the list of members of the House, each of whom announces their vote when their name is called. This procedure is only used rarely (such as for the election of a Speaker) because of the time consumed by calling over four hundred names.[50]

text: Voting traditionally lasts for, at most, fifteen minutes, but it may be extended if the leadership needs to "whip" more members into alignment.[50] The 2003 vote on the prescription drug benefit was open for three hours, from 3:00 to 6:00 a.m., to receive four additional votes, three of which were necessary to pass the legislation.[51] The 2005 vote on the Central American Free Trade Agreement was open for one hour, from 11:00 p.m. to midnight.[52] An October 2005 vote on facilitating refinery construction was kept open for forty minutes.[53]

text: Presiding officers may vote like other members. They may not, however, vote twice in the event of a tie; rather, a tie vote defeats the motion.[54]

text: Committees[edit]

text: The House uses committees and their subcommittees for a variety of purposes, including the review of bills and the oversight of the executive branch. The appointment of committee members is formally made by the whole House, but the choice of members is actually made by the political parties. Generally, each party honors the preferences of individual members, giving priority on the basis of seniority. Historically, membership on committees has been in rough proportion to the party's strength in the House as a whole, with two exceptions: on the Rules Committee, the majority party fills nine of the thirteen seats;[55] and on the Ethics Committee, each party has an equal number of seats.[56] However, when party control in the House is closely divided, extra seats on committees are sometimes allocated to the majority party. In the 109th Congress, for example, the Republicans controlled about 53% of the House as a whole, but had 54% of the Appropriations Committee members, 55% of the members on the Energy and Commerce Committee, 58% of the members on the Judiciary Committee, and 69% of the members on the Rules Committee.

text: The largest committee of the House is the Committee of the Whole, which, as its name suggests, consists of all members of the House. The Committee meets in the House chamber; it may consider and amend bills, but may not grant them final passage. Generally, the debate procedures of the Committee of the Whole are more flexible than those of the House itself. One advantage of the Committee of the Whole is its ability to include otherwise non-voting members of Congress.

text: Most committee work is performed by twenty standing committees, each of which has jurisdiction over a specific set of issues, such as Agriculture or Foreign Affairs. Each standing committee considers, amends, and reports bills that fall under its jurisdiction. Committees have extensive powers with regard to bills; they may block legislation from reaching the floor of the House. Standing committees also oversee the departments and agencies of the executive branch. In discharging their duties, standing committees have the power to hold hearings and to subpoena witnesses and evidence.

text: The House also has one permanent committee that is not a standing committee, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and from time to time may establish committees that are temporary and advisory in nature, such as the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. This latter committee, created in the 110th Congress and reauthorized for the 111th, has no jurisdiction over legislation and must be chartered anew at the start of every Congress. The House also appoints members to serve on joint committees, which include members of the Senate and House. Some joint committees oversee independent government bodies; for instance, the Joint Committee on the Library oversees the Library of Congress. Other joint committees serve to make advisory reports; for example, there exists a Joint Committee on Taxation. Bills and nominees are not referred to joint committees. Hence, the power of joint committees is considerably lower than those of standing committees.

text: Each House committee and subcommittee is led by a chairman (always a member of the majority party). From 1910 to the 1970s, committee chairs were powerful. Woodrow Wilson in his classic study,[57] suggested:

text: Power is nowhere concentrated; it is rather deliberately and of set policy scattered amongst many small chiefs. It is divided up, as it were, into forty-seven seigniories, in each of which a Standing Committee is the court-baron and its chairman lord-proprietor. These petty barons, some of them not a little powerful, but none of them within the reach of the full powers of rule, may at will exercise almost despotic sway within their own shires, and may sometimes threaten to convulse even the realm itself.

text: From 1910 to 1975 committee and subcommittee chairmanship was determined purely by seniority; congressmembers sometimes had to wait 30 years to get one, but their chairship was independent of party leadership. The rules were changed in 1975 to permit party caucuses to elect chairmen, shifting power upward to the party leaders. In 1995, Republicans under Newt Gingrich set a limit of three two-year terms for committee chairs. The chairman's powers are extensive; he controls the committee/subcommittee agenda, and may prevent the committee from dealing with a bill. The senior member of the minority party is known as the Ranking Member. In some committees like Appropriations, partisan disputes are few.

text: Legislative functions[edit]

text: Most bills may be introduced in either House of Congress. However, the Constitution states, "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives". As a result of the Origination Clause, the Senate cannot initiate bills imposing taxes. This provision barring the Senate from introducing revenue bills is based on the practice of the British Parliament, in which only the House of Commons may originate such measures. Furthermore, congressional tradition holds that the House of Representatives originates appropriation bills.

text: Although it cannot originate revenue bills, the Senate retains the power to amend or reject them. Woodrow Wilson wrote the following about appropriations bills:[58]

text: [T]he constitutional prerogative of the House has been held to apply to all the general appropriations bills, and the Senate's right to amend these has been allowed the widest possible scope. The upper house may add to them what it pleases; may go altogether outside of their original provisions and tack to them entirely new features of legislation, altering not only the amounts but even the objects of expenditure, and making out of the materials sent them by the popular chamber measures of an almost totally new character.

text: The approval of the Senate and the House of Representatives is required for a bill to become law. Both Houses must pass the same version of the bill; if there are differences, they may be resolved by a conference committee, which includes members of both bodies. For the stages through which bills pass in the Senate, see Act of Congress.

text: The President may veto a bill passed by the House and Senate. If he does, the bill does not become law unless each House, by a two-thirds vote, votes to override the veto.

text: Checks and balances[edit]

text: The Constitution provides that the Senate's "advice and consent" is necessary for the President to make appointments and to ratify treaties. Thus, with its potential to frustrate Presidential appointments, the Senate is more powerful than the House.

text: The Constitution empowers the House of Representatives to impeach federal officials for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" and empowers the Senate to try such impeachments. The House may approve "articles of impeachment" by a simple majority vote; however, a two-thirds vote is required for conviction in the Senate. A convicted official is automatically removed from office and may be disqualified from holding future office under the United States. No further punishment is permitted during the impeachment proceedings; however, the party may face criminal penalties in a normal court of law.

text: In the history of the United States, the House of Representatives has impeached sixteen officials, of whom seven were convicted. (Another, Richard Nixon, resigned after the House Judiciary Committee passed articles of impeachment but before a formal impeachment vote by the full House.) Only two Presidents of the United States have ever been impeached: Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1998. Both trials ended in acquittal; in Johnson's case, the Senate fell one vote short of the two-thirds majority required for conviction.

text: Under the Twelfth Amendment, the House has the power to elect the President if no presidential candidate receives a majority of votes in the Electoral College. The Twelfth Amendment requires the House to choose from the three candidates with the highest numbers of electoral votes. The Constitution provides that "the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote." It is rare for no presidential candidate to receive a majority of electoral votes. In the history of the United States, the House has only had to choose a President twice. In 1800, which was before the adoption of the Twelfth Amendment, it elected Thomas Jefferson over Aaron Burr. In 1824, it elected John Quincy Adams over Andrew Jackson and William H. Crawford. (If no vice-presidential candidate receives a majority of the electoral votes, the Senate elects the Vice President from the two candidates with the highest numbers of electoral votes.)

text: Latest election results and current party standings[edit]

text: Current standing[edit]

text:
Affiliation
Members
Delegates/resident
commissioner
(non-voting)
State
majorities

Republican Party
238
2
32

Democratic Party
192
3
12

Independent
0
1
0

Vacant
5
0

Total
435
6

text: End of previous Congress[edit]

text:
Affiliation
Members
Delegates/resident
commissioner
(non-voting)
State
majorities

Republican Party
246
0

Democratic Party
187
5

Independent
0
1[59]
0

Vacant
2
0

Total
435
6


document_title: Ghosts (Pac-Man)

question_text: what is the orange ghost name in pacman

question_tokens: what is the orange ghost name in pacman

root

text: Ghosts (Pac-Man)

text: History[edit]

text: The enemies in Pac-Man are known variously as "ghosts", "goblins", and "monsters".[1][2][3] Despite the seemingly random nature of the enemies, their movements are strictly deterministic, which players have used to their advantage. In an interview, creator Toru Iwatani stated that he had designed each enemy with its own distinct personality in order to keep the game from becoming impossibly difficult or boring to play.[4] More recently, Iwatani described the enemy behaviors in more detail at the 2011 Game Developers Conference. He stated that the red enemy chases Pac-Man, and the pink and blue enemies try to position themselves in front of Pac-Man's mouth.[5] Although he claimed that the orange enemy's behavior is random, the game's code reveals that it actually chases Pac-Man most of the time, but also moves toward the lower-left corner of the maze when it gets too close to Pac-Man.[citation needed]

tag: p

text: Cartoons[edit]

text: In the Pac-Man cartoon, with the male Ghost Monsters wearing various styles of hats and partnered with a new ghost named Sue (who was purple and wore earrings), the Ghost Monsters work for Mezmaron who assigns them the job of finding the Power Pellet Forest. Just as Pac-Man could "chomp" the Ghost Monsters to devour their "suits" after gulping down a power pellet and thus turning the Ghost Monsters blue — with their disembodied "eyes" floating back to Mezmaron's lair — the Ghost Monsters themselves, whenever Pac-Man hadn't been able to consume a power pellet for a time, could likewise "chomp" Pac-Man to defeat him. The episodes "Chomp-Out at the O.K. Corral" and "The Greatest Show in Pacland" featured the Ghost Monsters' 3-year-old cousin named Dinky who was bratty, which greatly annoyed all the male ghost monsters.

text: In the 2013 TV series Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures, the four Ghosts come from the Netherworld. Though they are ruled by Lord Betrayus, they are actually good-natured spirits and often supply Pac-Man with information about Lord Betrayus' plots, while ensuring Betrayus doesn't catch them in the act. It is also suggested that they could be reunited with their bodies and brought back to life, though their 'living' forms are unknown. There were also some Ghosts that were exclusive to the TV series like Cyclops Ghosts (a race of heavyset, horned Ghosts with one eye), Fire Ghosts (a race of orange Ghosts who can emit fire from their body), Tentacle Ghosts (a race of 4-eyed purple-black Ghosts who look similar to jellyfish), Guardian Ghosts (a race of large Ghosts who guard the Netherworld), and Aqua Ghosts (a race of light blue Ghosts with fins on their head).

text: Known ghosts[edit]

text: Below is the description of each Ghost.[6]

text:
Color
Pac Man (Original)[7]
Pac-Man (English version)

Character
(Personality)
Translation
Nickname
Translation
Alternate
Character
Alternate
Nickname
Character
(Personality)
Nickname

Red
Oikake (追いかけ)
Chaser
Akabei (赤ベイ)
Red guy
Urchin
Macky
Shadow
Blinky

Pink
Machibuse (待ち伏せ)
Ambusher
Pinky (ピンキー)
Pink guy
Romp
Micky
Speedy
Pinky

Cyan
Kimagure (気まぐれ)
Fickle
Aosuke (青助)
Blue guy
Stylist
Mucky
Bashful
Inky

Orange
Otoboke (お惚け)
Feigned Ignorance
Guzuta (愚図た)
Slow guy
Crybaby
Mocky
Pokey
Clyde

tag: table

text: Blinky[edit]

text: Shadow, better known by his nickname, Blinky, is a red ghost who, in the original arcade game, follows behind Pac-Man. He is considered the leader of the ghosts. In the Pac-Man cartoon, Blinky (voiced by Chuck McCann) is slow-witted and cowardly with grammar problems. In Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures, Blinky (voiced by Ian James Corlett in the TV series and by Lucien Dodge in the video game) is the default leader of the Ghost Gang Family and tends to help the winning side.[citation needed] Blinky receives a speed boost after a number of pac-pellets have been cleared. This mode has been informally referred to as "Cruise Elroy".[6][8] He is sometimes known as Clyde, mainly in the Pac-Man World games.[citation needed]

text: Pinky[edit]

text: Speedy, known better as Pinky, is a pink ghost who, in the original arcade game, positions in front of Pac-Man. In the Pac-Man cartoon, Pinky (voiced by Chuck McCann) is depicted as male dimwitted shape shifter. In recent games, and Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures, Pinky (voiced by Ashleigh Ball in the TV series and by Julie Kliewer in the video game and sequel) is depicted as a female with a crush on Pac-Man, which often puts her at odds with Cylindria.

text: Inky[edit]

text: Bashful, or, Inky is a baby blue ghost who, in the original arcade game, has a fickle mood. He can be unpredictable. Sometimes he chases Pac-Man aggressively like Blinky; other times he jumps ahead of Pac-Man as Pinky would. He might even wander off like Clyde on occasion. In the Pac-Man cartoon, Inky (voiced by Barry Gordon) is depicted as dim and loony. In Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures, Inky (voiced by Lee Tockar in the TV series and by Bryce Papenbrook in the video game) is the youngest member. Though the smartest, he lacks focus most of the time. In Pac-Man, Inky likes to appear in front of Pac-Man's face.

text: Clyde[edit]

text: Clyde, whose original name is listed as Pokey, is an orange ghost who, in the original arcade game, acts stupid. He will chase after Pac-Man in Blinky's manner, but will wander off to his home corner when he gets too close. In Ms. Pac-Man, this ghost is named Sue, and in Jr. Pac-Man, this ghost is named Tim. In the animated series, Clyde (voiced by Neil Ross) is the leader of the group. In recent games and Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures, Clyde (voiced by Brian Drummond in the TV series and by Orion Acaba in the video game) is depicted as a large ghost who is simple, but not unintelligent and has an appetite equal to Pac-Man's. He lacks the devious natures of his brothers and sister and is considerate towards others. He is sometimes known as Blinky, mainly in the Pac-Man World games.[citation needed]

text: Other Ghosts[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: With the release of further Pac-Man games, more ghosts have been added.

text:
Kinky – a appeared in Pac-Man Arrangement. He is also called Kinzo. Kinky is the scientist of the Ghosts who has the ability to combine with other Ghosts. When he combines with Clyde (note: in Pac-Man Arrangement, Clyde was the red ghost and Blinky was orange), Kinky becomes a bull-like ghost named Urchin that can charge after Pac-Man. When he combines with Inky, Kinky's glasses appear on Inky's body and grant this new combined ghost (named Stylist) the ability to split in two. Stylist's reflection will mirror Stylist's movements on the other half of the map (about the vertical axis). When Kinky combines with Pinky, the resulting ghost is rabbit-like and named Romp. Romp can hop to any part of the map, usually very close to Pac-Man's position. The combination of Kinky and Blinky (who is orange in Pac-Man Arrangement) results in Crybaby, a chubbier version of Blinky who adds 20-point Pac-Dots to the maze.
Orson / Toc-Man – a greenish-gray intellectual Ghost who initially appears as the main antagonist of Pac-Man World under the alias of Toc-Man. In Pac-Man World 3, Orson has reformed and is now an ally of Pac-Man.
Spooky – a dark gray Ghost in gray armor that is the King of the Ghosts in ancient times until he was sealed under Pac-Ville's largest tree by Sir Pac-A-Lot.
Funky – a jumping green Ghost that debuted in the game Pac-Mania. He has an interest in Sue.
Spunky – a jumping iron gray Ghost that debuted in Pac-Mania. She is a counterpart of Funky.
Sue – is the female counterpart of Clyde in Ms. Pac-Man, entirely identical to him. In the Pac-Man series, Sue (voiced by Susan Silo) is featured as Clyde's second-in-command. She also appears in Pac-Mania colored purple with mascara and eyeshadow, greatly resembling her cartoon counterpart.
Tim – is an orange Ghost that appeared exclusively as Clyde's replacement in Jr. Pac-Man.
Yum-Yum – a female red Ghost that debuted in Jr. Pac-Man. She is a relative of Blinky and has a romantic relationship with Jr. Pac-Man. Yum-Yum appears exclusively in Jr. Pac-Man's cutscenes.
Lord Betrayus (full name: Betrayus Sneakerus Spheros) – a white ghost that is the supreme ruler of the Netherworld and of all Ghosts and Monsters and acts as the main antagonist of Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures. His primary goal is to steal the power berries and take over Pac-World and rule it with an iron fist. He is currently voiced by Samuel Vincent.
Butt-ler – Betrayus' long suffering personal servant and butler who appears in Pac-Man and the Ghostly Adventures. He is a purple-gray ghost with a butt-shaped head, topped with a dapper black hat. He's always loyal to his master. He will take some small satisfaction seeing Betrayus fall flat on his face.
Dr. Buttocks – The Netherworld's greatest mad scientist and Butt-ler's twin brother who also has a butt-shaped head, but is light blue, has a cybernetic right hand, wears glasses and speaks with a German accent. He specializes in monster experimentation in hopes of achieving Pac-World domination. He sometimes suspects that the Ghost Gang are working with Pac-Man, but has had no luck convincing Betrayus of this since he usually blames him or his brother for his failures and sometimes tortures him for fun. He wants all of the workers to get out of his way. He sometimes hates his twin brother, Butt-ler.

tag: ul

text: Voice actors[edit]

text: American[edit]

text: Japanese[edit]

text: In other media[edit]

text: This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text:
In the Tiny Toon Adventures episode "Gang Busters", Buster Bunny and Plucky Duck play Pac-Man using their eyeballs as the characters. Buster plays as the ghosts.
The Ghosts appear in The Simpsons episode "Homer and Ned's Hail Mary Pass", where they are seen at Pac-Man's wedding. They also appear in the episode "I Married Marge", where Mr. Burns was playing Ms. Pac-Man and laughs when he eats the ghosts.
The Ghosts appear in the Futurama episode "Anthology of Interest II".
The Ghosts appear in the South Park trilogy "Imaginationland".
The Ghosts appear in the Family Guy episode "Stuck Together, Torn Apart".
The Ghosts appear in the Annoying Orange episodes "Pac-Mania" and "TV OF TERROR".
In the Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends episode "Duchess of Wails"' Duchess calls Mac and Bloo "Blinky and Clyde" in one scene.
Blinky, Inky, Pinky, and Clyde appear in Wreck-It Ralph. While Blinky, Inky, and Pinky appear in Game Central Station, Clyde (voiced by Kevin Deters) is shown to be the head of Bad-Anon (a support group for video game villains) where the members have been meeting in the Pac-Man game once a week. When Wreck-It Ralph comments on how he does not want to be a villain anymore, Clyde is among the villains that react to this. When Ralph states he gets no respect from the others characters, Clyde understands how he feels but says that he will have to accept who he is.
The Ghosts appear in the MAD segments "Diary of a Wimpy Kid Icarus", where they were shown chasing Pac-Man, and "ParaMorgan", where they were shown with other popular fictional ghosts.
The Ghosts appear in secret levels in Wolfenstein 3D.
The Ghosts appeared in Abobo's Big Adventure as enemies on Contra Bobo. When Abobo hits them, they will turn blue and when Abobo hit scared ghosts, they will die with their eyes run offscreen.
The Ghosts appear in Super Smash Bros. for Nintendo 3DS and Wii U. Pac-Man uses them for his Smash attacks and they can also be summoned through an Assist Trophy. The Ghosts also wander in the Pac-Maze stage found in the 3DS version. They deal damage upon contact with other fighters and can be eaten by those who got a Power Pellet.
In Pixels, four Mini-Cooper cars played as the ghosts against a large pixelated vision of Pac-Man, created by aliens. They are the same colors as the ghosts and have license plates with their names. They are used by the main characters and the creator of Pac-Man.


document_title: Paint Your Wagon (film)

question_text: actor who sang i talk to the trees in the movie musical paint your wagon

text: Paint Your Wagon (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: This article's plot summary may be too long or excessively detailed. Please help improve it by removing unnecessary details and making it more concise. (September 2014) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: When a wagon crashes into a ravine, prospector Ben Rumson finds two adult male occupants, brothers, one of whom is dead and the other of whom has a broken arm and leg. As the first man is about to be buried, gold dust is discovered at the grave site. Ben stakes a claim on the land and adopts the surviving brother as his "Pardner" while he recuperates.

text: Pardner is initially innocent and romantic, illustrated by him singing a pining love song about a girl named Elisa ("I Still See Elisa"), who he later sheepishly confesses exists only in his imagination. Pardner is a farmer who hopes to make enough in the gold rush to buy some land, and is openly suspicious of the drunken and seemingly amoral Ben. Ben claims that while he is willing to fight, steal, and cheat at cards, his system of ethics does not allow him to betray a partner. Ben will share the spoils of prospecting on the condition that Pardner takes care of him in his moments of drunkenness and melancholy.

text: After the discovery of gold, "No Name City" springs up as a tent city with the miners alternating between wild parties ("Hand Me Down That Can o' Beans") and bouts of melancholy ("They Call the Wind Maria"). The men become increasingly frustrated with the lack of female companionship, so the arrival of a Mormon, Jacob Woodling, with two wives is enough to catch the attention of the entire town. The miners claim it is unfair for the Mormon to have two wives when they have none. They persuade him to sell one of his wives to the highest bidder. Elizabeth, Jacob's younger and more rebellious wife, agrees to be sold based on the reasoning that whatever she gets, it can't be as bad as what she currently has.

text: A drunken Ben winds up with the highest bid for Elizabeth. Ben is readied for the wedding by the other miners ("Whoop-Ti-Ay"), and is married to Elizabeth under "mining law," with Ben being granted exclusive rights to "all her mineral resources." Elizabeth, not content to be passively treated as property, threatens to shoot Ben on their wedding night if she is not treated with respect. While she believes Ben is not the type to truly settle down, this is acceptable if he builds a proper wooden cabin to provide her with some security for when he inevitably leaves. Ben is impressed by Elizabeth's determination. He enlists the miners to keep this promise, and Elizabeth rejoices in having a proper home ("A Million Miles Away Behind the Door").

text: Sensing the other miners becoming obsessed with her, Ben is consumed by jealousy and paranoia. News comes of the pending arrival of "six French tarts" to a neighboring town and a plan is hatched to kidnap the women and bring them to "No Name City" ("There's a Coach Comin' In"), thus providing the other miners with female companionship. The town will prosper with additional sources of income as other miners from outlying regions will likely be willing to spend their money in No Name City if it means a chance to visit prostitutes. Ben heads up the mission and leaves Elizabeth in the care of Pardner. The two fall in love ("I Talk to the Trees"), whereupon Elizabeth, saying she also still loves Ben, convinces them that "if a Mormon man can have two wives, why can't a woman have two husbands?"

text: As the town booms, the arrangement with Ben, Pardner, and Elizabeth works well for a while. But soon the town becomes large enough that more civilized people from the East begin to settle there. A parson begins to make a determined effort to persuade the people of No Name City to give up their evil ways, warning the townsfolk that they will be swallowed up by God's wrath if they do not repent ("The Gospel of No Name City"). Meanwhile, a group of new settlers is rescued from the snow, and the strait-laced family is invited to spend the winter with Elizabeth and Pardner, who is assumed to be her only husband.

text: Ben is left to fend for himself in town ("Wand'rin' Star"). In revenge, he introduces one of the family, naive young Horton Fenty, to the pleasures of Rotten Luck Willie's saloon and cat house. This leads to Elizabeth dismissing both Ben and Pardner from the log cabin. Pardner takes to gambling in Willie's ("Gold Fever"). As the gold begins to play out, Ben and a group of miners discover that gold dust is dropping through the floor boards of many of the saloons. They tunnel under all the businesses to get at the gold ("The Best Things in Life Are Dirty"). This brings the story to its climax when, during a bull-and-bear fight, the streets collapse into the tunnels dug by Ben and the others and the town is destroyed. A reprise of "The Gospel of No Name City" plays as the town is literally swallowed by the earth.

text: It is time for Ben to move on to the next gold field. As Ben departs, he comments that he never knew Pardner's real name, which Pardner then reveals: Sylvester Newel. Elizabeth and Pardner reconcile and plan to stay.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
Lee Marvin as Ben Rumson
Clint Eastwood as Sylvester Newel/Pardner
Jean Seberg as Elizabeth
Harve Presnell as Rotten Luck Willie
Ray Walston as Mad Jack Duncan
Alan Dexter as The Parson
Tom Ligon as Horton Fenty
Robert Easton as Atwell
H.B. Haggerty as Steve Bull
Eddie Little Sky as Native American
Roy Jenson as Hennessey

text: Musical numbers[edit]

text: All songs written by Lerner and Loewe unless otherwise noted.

text:
"I'm on My Way" – Chorus
"I Still See Elisa" – Pardner
"The First Thing You Know" (Lerner/Previn) – Ben
"Hand Me Down That Can o' Beans" – Chorus including the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band
"They Call the Wind Maria" – Rotten Luck Willie, Chorus
"Whoop-Ti-Ay!" – Chorus
"A Million Miles Away Behind the Door" (Lerner/Previn) – Elizabeth
"I Talk to the Trees" – Pardner
"There's a Coach Comin' In" – Rotten Luck Willie, Chorus
"The Gospel of No Name City" (Lerner/Previn) – Parson
"Best Things" (Lerner/Previn) – Ben, Mad Jack, Pardner
"Wand'rin' Star" – Ben, Chorus
"Gold Fever" (Lerner/Previn) – Pardner, Chorus
"Finale (I'm on My Way)" – Ben, Mad Jack, Chorus

text: Differences between stage and film versions[edit]

text: Chayefsky provided a significantly changed storyline from the stage musical version. In the film "Rumson City" is simply called "No Name City," and Ben Rumson has no daughter. In the stage show, "Elisa" is Ben's departed wife, but in the film, she is Pardner's fantasy. The character "Julio" is replaced by "Pardner", now an American and Ben's partner in the gold claim. Additionally, in the film it is Pardner who falls in love with Elizabeth, Ben's wife under mining law, rather than the stage musical character Edgar Crocker. The temporary solution to the love triangle among Ben, Pardner and Elizabeth appears only in the film as well. In the stage version, Ben Rumson dies at the end; in the film he survives.

text: Production[edit]

text: Lee Marvin accepted the lead role instead of appearing in The Wild Bunch.[2] He received $1 million while Eastwood was paid $750,000.[2][5] Faye Dunaway turned down the role of Elizabeth before Seberg was cast.[6] Diana Rigg and Julie Andrews were also considered for the role.[2] Eastwood and Marvin did their own singing while Seberg's songs were dubbed. The early incarnation of the Nitty Gritty Dirt Band had a cameo in the song "Hand Me Down That Can o' Beans". Some songs from the original musical were dropped and some were added by Alan Jay Lerner and André Previn, while others were used in different contexts.

text: Paint Your Wagon was shot near Baker City, Oregon with filming beginning in May 1968 and ending in October.[2] Other locations include Big Bear Lake, California and San Bernardino National Forest; the interiors were filmed at Paramount Studios with Joshua Logan directing. The film's initial budget was $10 million, before it eventually doubled to $20 million. A daily expense of $80,000 was incurred to transport cast and crew to the filming location, as the closest hotel was nearly 60 miles away. The elaborate camp used in the film cost $2.4 million to build.[2]

text: The film was released at a time when movie musicals were going out of fashion, especially with younger audiences. Its overblown budget and nearly 3-hour length became notorious in the press. Eastwood was frustrated by the long delays in the making of the film, later saying that the experience strengthened his resolve to become a director. According to Robert Osborne, Marvin drank heavily during the filming, which may have enhanced his screen appearance, but led to delays and many retakes.

text: Release[edit]

text: Paint Your Wagon was released in United States theaters in October 1969. The film became Paramount's sixth largest success up to that point (and the sixth highest-grossing film of 1969) when it earned $31.6 million over its release, although the earnings never offset the cost of production and marketing.[7]

text: Reception[edit]

text: Critical reception was mostly negative. Paint Your Wagon currently maintains a 27% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, although it was more popular with audiences with a score of 68%.[8]

text: In the UK, Paint Your Wagon had a 79-week 70mm roadshow run at The Astoria Theatre, London and Marvin's deep-voiced rendition of "Wand'rin' Star," accompanied by the film's choir, became a number one hit.[9] His voice was described by Jean Seberg as "like rain gurgling down a rusty pipe". Interviewed on NPR, Marvin said that the song was a hit in Australia, and someone there described it as, "The first 33⅓ recorded at 45."


document_title: Bobo doll experiment

question_text: where did the bobo doll experiment take place

text: Bobo doll experiment

text: Experiment in 1961[edit]

text: This section relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this section by adding secondary or tertiary sources. (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. Please help by spinning off or relocating any relevant information, and removing excessive detail that may be against Wikipedia's inclusion policy. (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Method[edit]

text: The participants in this experiment were 36 boys and 36 girls from the Stanford University nursery school, all between the ages of 37 months and 69 months with a mean age of 52 months (here and following, Bandura, Ross & Ross 1961). The children were organized into 4 groups and a control group. The 4 groups exposed to the aggressive model and non-aggressive model belonged to the experimental group. 24 children were exposed to an aggressive model and 24 children were exposed to a non-aggressive model. The two groups were then divided into males and females, which ensured that half of the children were exposed to models of their own sex and the other half were exposed to models of the opposite sex. The remaining 24 children were part of a control group.

text: For the experiment, each child was exposed to the scenario individually, so as not to be influenced or distracted by classmates. The first part of the experiment involved bringing a child and the adult model into a playroom. In the playroom, the child was seated in one corner filled with highly appealing activities such as stickers and stamps. The adult model was seated in another corner containing a toy set, a mallet, and an inflatable Bobo doll. Before leaving the room, the experimenter explained to the child that the toys in the adult corner were only for the adult to play with.

text: During the aggressive model scenario, the adult would begin by playing with the toys for approximately one minute. After this time the adult would start to show aggression towards the Bobo doll. Examples of this included hitting/punching the Bobo doll and using the toy mallet to hit the Bobo doll in the face. The aggressive model would also verbally assault the Bobo doll yelling "Sock him," "Hit him down," "Kick him," "Throw him in the air," or "Pow". After a period of about 10 minutes, the experimenter came back into the room, dismissed the adult model, and took the child into another playroom. The non-aggressive adult model simply played with the other toys for the entire 10-minute period. In this situation, the Bobo doll was completely ignored by the model, then the child was taken out of the room.

text: The next stage of the experiment, took place with the child and experimenter in another room filled with interesting toys such as trucks, dolls, and a spinning top. The child was invited to play with them. After about 2 minutes the experimenter decides that the child is no longer allowed to play with the toys, explaining that she is reserving those toys for the other children. This was done to build up frustration in the child. The experimenter said that the child could instead play with the toys in the experimental room (this included both aggressive and non-aggressive toys). In the experimental room the child was allowed to play for the duration of 20 minutes while the experimenter evaluated the child's play.

text: The first measure recorded was based on physical aggression such as punching, kicking, sitting on the Bobo doll, hitting it with a mallet, and tossing it around the room. Verbal aggression was the second measure recorded. The judges counted each time the children imitated the aggressive adult model and recorded their results. The third measure was the number of times the mallet was used to display other forms of aggression than hitting the doll. The final measure included modes of aggression shown by the child that were not direct imitation of the role-model's behavior.[2]

text: Results[edit]

text: Bandura found that the children exposed to the aggressive model were more likely to act in physically aggressive ways than those who were not exposed to the aggressive model. For those children exposed to the aggressive model, the number of imitative physical aggressions exhibited by the boys was 38.2 and 12.7 for the girls.[3] The results concerning gender differences strongly supported Bandura's prediction that children are more influenced by same-sex models. Results also showed that boys exhibited more aggression when exposed to aggressive male models than boys exposed to aggressive female models. When exposed to aggressive male models, the number of aggressive instances exhibited by boys averaged 104 compared to 48.4 aggressive instances exhibited by boys who were exposed to aggressive female models. While the results for the girls show similar findings, the results were less drastic. When exposed to aggressive female models, the number of aggressive instances exhibited by girls averaged 57.7 compared to 36.3 aggressive instances exhibited by girls who were exposed to aggressive male models.

text: Bandura also found that the children exposed to the aggressive model were more likely to act in verbally aggressive ways than those who were not exposed to the aggressive model. The number of imitative verbal aggressions exhibited by the boys was 17 times and 15.7 times by the girls.[3] In addition, the results indicated that the boys and girls who observed the non-aggressive model exhibited far less non-imitative mallet aggression than in the control group, which had no model. Lastly, the evidence strongly supports that males tend to be more aggressive than females. When all instances of aggression are tallied, males exhibited 270 aggressive instances compared to 128 aggressive instances exhibited by females.[4]

text: Experiments in 1963[edit]

text: Differences between learning and performing[edit]

text: Albert Bandura followed up his 1961 study a few years later with another that again tested differences in children's learning/behavior or actual performance after seeing a model being rewarded, punished, or experiencing no consequences for aggressive behavior towards a Bobo doll (here and following, Bandura, Ross & Ross 1963) .

text: The procedure of the experiment was very similar to the one conducted in 1961. Children between the ages of 2.5 to 6 years watched a film of a mediated model punching and screaming aggressively at a Bobo doll. Depending on the experimental group, the film ended with a scene in which the model was rewarded with candies or punished with the warning, "Don't do it again". In the neutral condition the film ended right after the aggression scene toward the Bobo doll. Regardless of the experimental group the child was in, after watching the film the child stayed in a room with many toys and a Bobo doll. The experimenter found that the children often showed less similar behavior toward the model when they were shown the clip that ended with the punishment scene as compared to the other conditions. Also, boys showed more imitative aggression than girls toward the Bobo doll. That is the measure of the performance and it supports the results of the experiments in 1961.

text: Next, the experimenter asked the children to demonstrate what they had seen in the film. The experimenter did not find differences in the children's demonstrated behavior based on which of the three films the child watched. The results of the experiment shows that rewards or punishment don't influence learning or remembering information, they just influence if the behavior is performed or not. The differences between girls and boys imitating behavior got smaller.[5]

text: Are children influenced by film-mediated aggressive models?[edit]

text: For many years, media violence has created many discussions concerning the influence over children and their aggressive behavior. In the 1963 study, Albert Bandura used children between the ages 3 and 6 to test the extent to which film-mediated aggressive models influenced imitative behavior.

text: For the experiment, 32 girls and 32 boys were divided into 3 groups and 1 control group. Group 1 watched a live model become aggressive towards the Bobo doll. Group 2 watched a film version of the human model become aggressive to the Bobo doll, and group 3 watched a cartoon version of a cat become aggressive towards the Bobo doll. Each child watched the aggressive acts individually. Following the exposure to the models all four groups of children were then individually placed in a room with an experimenter where they were exposed to a mildly frustrating situation to elicit aggression. Next the children were allowed to play freely in an adjoining room, which was full of toys, including the Bobo doll and the "weapons" that were used by the models. The researchers observed the children and noted any interaction with the Bobo doll.

text: Results showed that the children who had been exposed to the aggressive behavior, whether real-life, on film or cartoon, exhibited nearly twice as much aggressive behavior as the control group. It was also found that boys exhibited more overall aggression than girls. The results of this experiment have contributed to ongoing debates on media influences.

text: Theories supporting media effects[edit]

text: Two major theories that add to these ongoing debates on media influences are the General Aggression Model (GAM) and the effects of cultivation. Both of these theories explain the development of aggressive behavior and knowledge resulting from media’s effect on children.

text: GAM specifically focuses on how we develop aggressive attitudes from exposure to violent media depictions and how it relates to aggressive behavior. Violent video games have become prevalent in today’s society, which is another example of how exposure to violence can affect people's thoughts and actions. According to McGloin, Farrar & Fishlock (2015), “Triple whammy!”, using a realistic gun controller correlated with double or nearly double that of most other effect sizes reported in meta-analytic work exploring the link between violent games and cognitive aggression. Overall, we gain aggressive knowledge when exposed to realistic violent media, therefore, behaving more aggressively through actions and words.

text: The “Cultivation Theory” argues that the more a child engages in media, the more they will be affected by it. Therefore, the more violent content the child is engaging in, the larger the impact it will have on them. We live in a society that is extremely technologically advanced. Children have the opportunity to observe violent images and media through TV, film, online media, and video games. For example, “Mean World Syndrome” discusses how news channels are only showing the negative things that are happening in the world. This skews our minds to believe that the world is a more dangerous place because we are only seeing what the media shows us.

text: The Bobo Doll experiment is supported by both the GAM and the Cultivation Theory. The conclusion of this experiment supports the social learning theory, that when one observes another’s actions (the aggression model) they tend to behave in a similar way (an aggressive manner). In modern society, children observe and learn from the media, even when fictional. A child is more likely to replicate and learn from the character they see on screen when they identify with their personality traits (copycat violence) and if that character receives punishment or not.

text: Related experiments[edit]

text: This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: This section needs additional citations to secondary or tertiary sources such as review articles, monographs, or textbooks. Please add such references to provide context and establish the relevance of any primary research articles cited. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2015)

text: Further 'doll' experiments[edit]

text: Due to numerous criticisms, Bandura replaced the 'Bobo doll' with a live clown. The young woman beat up a live clown in the video shown to preschool children and in turn when the children were led into another room where they found a live clown, they imitated the action in the video they had just watched.[6][7][self-published source?][better source needed]

text: Other relevant experiments[edit]

text: This section contains an enumeration of examples, but lacks a general overview of its topic. You can help by adding an appropriate introductory section. Editing help is available. (July 2015)

text:
This section contains information of unclear or questionable importance or relevance to the article's subject matter. Please help improve this section by clarifying or removing superfluous information. If importance cannot be established, the section is likely to be moved to another article, pseudo-redirected, or removed.
Find sources: "Bobo doll experiment" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: The following a further set of experiments relevant to observational learning and social learning theory:[according to whom?][citation needed]

text:
1. In Stein & Friedrich (1972), The "Mister Rogers" study. Procedure: A group of preschoolers watched Mister Rogers every weekday for four consecutive weeks. Result: The children showed higher levels of task persistence compared to others who saw neutral or aggressive programs. There were increases in cooperation and verbalization of feelings in children from low socioeconomic levels.[8][unreliable source?][better source needed]
2. Loye, Gorney & Steele (1977) conducted an Experiment using 183 married males aged between 20 and 70 years old. Procedure: The participants were to watch one of five TV programs for 20 hours over a period of one week while their wives secretly observed and recorded their behavior. Result: Participants of violent programs showed significant increase in aggressive moods and "hurtful behavior" while participants who viewed pro-social programs were more passive and demonstrated a significant increase of "emotional arousal".
3. Black & Bevan (1992) had movie-goers fill out an aggression questionnaire before and after watching a movie. Procedure: Subjects were randomly selected as they went to view either a violent or a romantic film. They were asked to fill out pretest and posttest questionnaires on their emotional state. Result: Those who watched violent films were already aggressive before viewing the film but it was aggravated after the viewing while there was no change in those who viewed romantic films.
4. Anderson & Dill (2000) randomly assigned college students to play two games; Wolfenstein (a science fiction first-person shooter game) and Tetris. This study has sometimes been criticized for using poorly validated aggression measures, and exaggerating the consistency of its findings (Ferguson, 2009).
5. Bartholow & Anderson (2002) examined how playing violent video games affect levels of aggression in a laboratory. Procedure: A total of 22 men and 21 women were randomly assigned to play either a violent or non-violent video game for ten minutes. Then competed in a reaction time task. Punishment level set by opponents measured aggression. Results: The results supported the researchers hypothesis that playing the violent video game would result in more aggression than the non-violent game. In addition, results also pointed to a potential difference in aggressive style between men and women.

text: Synthesis[edit]

text:
[hide]This section has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)

This section needs expansion with: further content sourced from high quality secondary sources, to add to this unsourced material appearing heretofore only in the lede, that make clear the broad general conclusions that were drawn from the 1961-1965 studies, what long-term impact they have had, and how they relate to observational learning and social learning theory, integrating Bandura's books, currently omitted, in the discussion. You can help by adding to it. (July 2015)

This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

(Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: These experiments relate empirically to Bandura's social learning theory.[citation needed] This social science theory suggests that people learn through observing, imitating, and modeling; moreover, it specifically suggests that people learn not only by being rewarded or punished (as suggested by theories in behaviorism), but also by watching others being rewarded or punished (observational learning).[citation needed] The experiments are important because they sparked much further study related to observational learning. As well, the data offered further practical working hypotheses, e.g., regarding how children might be influenced from watching violent media.[citation needed]

text: Criticisms[edit]

text: Claims regarding inherent bias[edit]

text: According to Hart & Kritsonis (2006),[non-primary source needed][better source needed] the original Bandura experiments were biased or otherwise flawed in ways that weakened their validity. The issues these researchers perceived were:[unbalanced opinion?]?

text:
Selection bias. Bandura's subjects, all from the Stanford University nursery, were necessarily the children of Stanford students.[verification needed] Studying at a prestigious university like Stanford was a privilege reserved almost exclusively for whites in the 1960s; moreover, differences in economic status between white and black were vast at that time, so only whites in upper income brackets could send their children to a nursery. Thus, bias in the study subjects was present, with regard to race and socioeconomic background.
Temporal sequence. The 1963 study used data on the "real life aggression and control group conditions" from the 1961 study;[9] hence, it is possible that the maturing of subjects and influences external to the studies, occurring over the period between the studies, could have contributed to the 1963 observations, results, and conclusions.[verification needed]
Generalization of results. Even though Bandura and his colleague did not document subject ethnicity, they went on to make sweeping statements based on their results regarding aggression and violence in racial subgroups and communities with lower socioeconomic status.[verification needed]

text: Claims regarding motivation[edit]

text: Some scholars suggest the Bobo Doll studies are not studies of aggression at all, but rather that the children were motivated to imitate the adult in the belief the videos were instructions.[10][page needed][11] In other words, children were motivated by the desire to please adults or become adults rather than by genuine aggression. Furthermore, the same authors criticize the external validity of the study, noting that bobo dolls are designed to be hit.

text: Ethical claims[edit]

text: Challenges have been made regarding the ethics of the original studies. In a university-level introductory general psychology text, Bandura's study is branded as unethical and morally wrong, as the subjects were manipulated to respond in an aggressive manner. [12][page needed] They also state no surprise that long-term implications are apparent due to the methods imposed in this experiment as the subjects were taunted and were not allowed to play with the toys and thus incited agitation and dissatisfaction. Hence, they were trained to be aggressive.

text: Miscellaneous claims[edit]

text: Bar-on et al. (2001) described the frontal lobe of children under the age of 8 as underdeveloped, which contributed to their being unable to separate reality from fantasy; for instance, children up to the age of 12 may believe that "monsters" live in their closets or under the beds. They are also sometimes unable to distinguish dreams from reality.[13]

text: Furthermore, biological theorists argue that the social learning theory completely ignores individual's biological state by ignoring the uniqueness of an individual's DNA, brain development, and learning differences.[14]