Please read the student answer and give in 150 words your thought about the topics, please at least 2 references. Don't critic; just give your knowledge about the topic. This was the question:The authors of The American Congress state, "In recent decades, Congressional committees have lost much of the autonomy they had acquired in the middle of the twentieth century. A more assertive membership, increasingly polarized parties, stronger party leadership, and new checks on committee leadership, among other factors, reduced the level of independence once held by committees and their leaders." Discuss the merits of having greater or lesser independence for Congressional committees.Week 4 Forum Question:This is the answer from the student As the authors of The American Congress state, "In recent decades, Congressional committees have lost much of the autonomy they had acquired in the middle of the twentieth century. A more assertive membership, increasingly polarized parties, stronger party leadership, and new checks on committee leadership, among other factors, reduced the level of independence once held by committees and their leaders (1)." The committee system is one of the most visible and enduring features of Congress, according to the authors of The American Congress (1). Some of the most important legislation comes from these committees, and on the flip side, when legislation dies it usually does so in committee. The question raised for this week's discussion is weighing the pros and cons of having more or less independence in these Congressional committees. Without even picking up the book it would be easy to say that having less independence within the committees is better because it allows different people to have a say in things (as in with the new checks on leadership). However, it could also be argued that the loss of independence goes against the original purpose of the committees.The modern congressional committees have two formal functions, which are to collect information through hearings and investigations and draft and report legislation (1). The House and Senate have developed several different types of committees to perform the functions. There are standing committees, Ad hoc committees, conference committees, joint committees, and special committees. Each of these committees performs different tasks within the Congress.As stated in The American Congress, the Constitution makes no provision for committees, but they came about anyway early in congressional history. Throughout time the committees have changed and the Senate and House have often adopted rules to modify committees, both in size and function (1).In the classic distributive view of congressional committees the legislators seek to distribute the benefits of public policies to their districts and states. From this perspective the committees serve the interests of individual legislators and their home constituencies, allowing them to focus on the matters that mean the most to them. According to The American Congress, each committee operates in a community of executive branch agencies and interest groups with similar interests. There is a good chance that the greater public may suffer because of this. Committee memberships are often stacked in the majority parties favor (2). Changes in the policy agenda have been to blame for the majority of the loss of autonomy in the congressional committees. The weakened autonomy in the committee has also been reflected in the record of floor-amending activity since the mid-1950's. While it could be viewed as a negative that the committees have lost autonomy, I have not read anything that makes me think this way. Learning about the power that these committees have has made it clear that there needs to be more of a "stronghold." I strongly believe that checks on their leadership and more assertive memberships will make for more functional committees that will do better for the overall good of the people. I think there are enough groups in politics that are out for their own agendas, and any little thing that can be done to curb that appears to be a good thing to me.