Data Focus: This measure shows whether bills are developed through the traditional committee process, which allows for more input from rank-and-file members, rather than a process primarily controlled by party leaders.

Data Findings: Committees in the House and Senate have been very active in reporting bills. House committees reported 643 bills in the 115th Congress, the highest among any years in the index. Senate committees reported 401 bills, the third-highest among the index’s comparative years, and much higher than the lull seen during the 111th through 113th congresses.

Data Focus: When bills are considered on the floor, members of both parties should have the opportunity to offer amendments. This is especially important for the minority party, which sometimes resorts to procedural tactics to stall bills when cut out of the amendment process.

Data Findings: The Senate has considered the lowest number of amendments—258 between January 2017 and the end of June 2018—of any of the years tracked in the index. The distribution of amendments between the majority and minority has been out of step with recent norms as well. In the past, amendments tended to have been split evenly between majority and minority, or perhaps a 60-40 split in favor of the majority. Since January 2017, however, 68 percent of amendments considered were sponsored by the majority Republicans and just 32 percent came from the minority Democrats.

Data Focus: The amendment process in the House is typically governed by predetermined rules specific to each bill: open rules allows all members to offer amendments on the floor; closed rules allows none; structured rules allows only those specified by the Rules Committee.

Data Findings: Members of the House were unable to offer amendments to most of the bills that came to the floor this Congress. Since January 2017, 55 percent of rules were closed, meaning no amendments could be offered. This percentage of closed rules marks the highest level in the index.

However, 45 percent of rules were structured, meaning amendments pre-approved by the majority-controlled Rules Committee could be offered. When structured rules were in place, 47 percent of amendments were offered by Democrats, the minority, 39 percent were offered by Republicans, the majority, and 14 percent were offered on a bipartisan basis.

Zero rules were open. Only one other Congress in the index, the 111th, had zero open rules at this point during the two-year period. Members had more opportunities to offer amendments during the 111th Congress, however, with structured rules in effect 72 percent of the time.

Data Focus: Authorizing committees in Congress should routinely review government programs and renew, adjust, or eliminate their authorizations for funding. To measure how diligently committees are conducting this oversight, the index identifies programs receiving appropriations for which the underlying authorization has expired. This measure is likely only to be updated on an annual basis.

Data Findings: Spending on programs with expired authorizations has grown as a percent of over overall spending. From FY 2014 through FY 2016, funding for programs with expired authorizations made up one quarter or more of all discretionary spending. This finding suggests that the number of federal programs that have not been reviewed and reauthorized by congressional committees has grown since 1995, when these programs made up about 17 percent of spending.