Order Code RS21998
Updated July 3, 2008
The European Parliament
Kristin Archick
Specialist in European Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Summary
The 785-member, directly elected European Parliament (EP) is a key institution of
the 27-member European Union (EU). Once limited to being a consultative assembly,
the EP has accumulated more power over time. Currently, it plays a role in the EU’s
legislative and budgeting processes, and exercises general supervision over other EU
bodies. Ties between the EP and the U.S. Congress are long-standing, and EP-
Congressional exchanges are expected to continue in the second session of the 110th
Congress. This report will be updated as events warrant. Also see CRS Report
RS21372, The European Union: Questions and Answers, by Kristin Archick.
Role of the European Parliament
The 785-member, directly elected European Parliament is a key institution of the
European Union. The EU is a treaty-based, institutional framework that defines and
manages economic and political cooperation among its 27 member states (Austria,
Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France,
Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the
Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the
United Kingdom). Once limited to being a consultative assembly, the EP has
accumulated more power over time. Currently, it plays a role in the EU’s legislative and
budgeting processes, and exercises general supervision over the work of the two other
main EU bodies, the Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) and the
European Commission. However, the EP is not a legislative body in the traditional sense.
The EP cannot initiate legislation; that right rests solely with the Commission, which
functions as the EU’s executive and guarantor of the EU treaties. The Council, the EU’s
main decision-making body composed of ministers from the national governments, enacts
legislation based on Commission proposals, after it consults with the Parliament.
Legislative Process. The role of the European Parliament in the legislative
process has expanded steadily over time as the scope of EU policy has grown. As more
decisions within the Council of Ministers have become subject to qualified majority
voting rather than unanimity to allow for greater speed and efficiency of decision-making,
the Parliament has come to be viewed as an increasingly important democratic

---

CRS-2
counterweight at the European level to the Commission and Council. The Amsterdam
Treaty of 1997, which entered into force in May 1999, extended the “co-decision
procedure” to many additional policy areas (ranging from the environment to social
policy). In the “co-decision procedure,” the EP and the Council share legislative power
and must both approve a Commission proposal for it to become EU law. Reportedly, the
EP currently has a say in about 80% of the legislation passed in the EU.1 Tax matters and
foreign policy, however, are among the areas to which the “co-decision procedure” does
not apply (the Parliament may give a non-binding opinion).
In December 2007, EU leaders
The “Co-decision Procedure”
signed a new reform treaty — the
The EU’s “co-decision procedure” can be
Lisbon Treaty — that would roughly
summarized as follows: (1) if Parliament and the
Council of Ministers agree on a Commission proposal,
double the Parliament’s right of “co-
it is approved; (2) if they disagree, the Council forms a
decision” to 80 policy areas,
common position; the EP can then either accept the
including agriculture and home
Council’s common position, or reject or amend it, by an
affairs issues, such as asylum and
absolute majority of its members; (3) if the Council
immigration. The future of the
cannot accept the EP’s amendments, a conciliation
meeting is convened, after which the EP and the Council
Lisbon Treaty, however, has been
approve an agreement if one can be reached. If they are
thrown into doubt following its
unable to agree, the proposal is not adopted.
rejection by Irish voters in June
2008. EU leaders continue to hope
that the new Lisbon Treaty will be ratified and enter into force before the next EP
elections in the spring of 2009.2
Budget. The EP and the Council exercise joint powers in determining the EU’s
annual budget of roughly $165 billion. The budgetary procedure begins with the
Commission proposing a preliminary draft budget to the Council. The Council prepares
another draft, which the EP may approve or modify in its first reading. On “compulsory”
expenditures — mainly agriculture — the Council currently has the final say, but the EP
has the last word on “non-compulsory” expenditures such as structural funds and
development aid. The Council may amend the EP’s draft and send it back to the EP for
a second reading. The EP can re-amend these Council changes, and must then adopt or
reject the budget. The new Lisbon Treaty, if ratified, would eliminate the distinction
between “compulsory” and “non-compulsory” expenditures, and would thus give the EP
more control over agricultural spending. The EP’s budgetary power is considerably
greater than that exercised by most parliaments in EU member states.
Other Responsibilities. The Parliament also plays a supervisory role over the
European Commission and the Council of Ministers. The EP votes on the Commission’s
program and monitors the management of EU policies, in particular through oral and
written questions to the Commission and the Council. The EP has the right to dismiss the
entire Commission through a vote of censure. Although the EP has never exercised this
power, in March 1999, the Commission opted to resign rather than face a formal censure
by the EP over alleged corruption charges.
1 “Why Citizens Should Care About Who Is in the Parliament,” EuroNews, June 9, 2004.
2 For more information, see CRS Report RS21618, The European Union’s Reform Process: The
Lisbon Treaty, by Kristin Archick.

---

CRS-3
Since 1995, the EP has held U.S. Senate-style confirmation hearings for newly
appointed Commissioners, who are chosen by the member states for five-year terms. The
EP has the power to accept or reject a newly proposed Commission as a whole, rather than
individual nominees. In October 2004, some Members of the European Parliament
(MEPs) threatened to veto the incoming Commission headed by President-designate José
Manuel Barroso because of a controversy over its proposed composition. Many left-
leaning MEPs objected to the choice of a conservative Italian for the position of Justice
and Home Affairs Commissioner because of his views on homosexuality and women’s
rights. They also opposed several other nominated Commissioners, and demanded either
a re-shuffling of Commission posts or new appointments. Barroso withdrew his proposed
team in order to avoid rejection by the EP, and revamped it to ensure parliamentary
approval; Barroso’s task was eased when the Italian nominee subsequently stepped down.
Some observers cite this unprecedented stand by the EP as a sign of its growing political
clout and influence.3 Parliament approved the reorganized Commission on November 18,
2004; the new Commission took office on November 22, three weeks after it was
originally scheduled to have started work.
Among its other responsibilities, the EP must approve the accession of new EU
member states and the conclusion of all official agreements with third parties, such as
association and trade agreements with non-member states. If the Parliament does not
consent, such agreements cannot enter into force.
Organization of the European Parliament
Members of the European Parliament serve five-year terms and have been directly
elected since 1979.4 The number of MEPs in each member state is based on population
size. The most recent EP elections were held in June 2004, and were the first since the
EU’s enlargement from 15 to 25 members on May 1, 2004. Voter turnout, however, was
the lowest ever at roughly 45%. Average turnout in the ten newest members was only
29%, compared to 49% in the EU’s older 15 members.5 Bulgaria and Romania, which
joined the EU on January 1, 2007, will be represented in the EP by members seconded
from their national parliaments until the next EP election in 2009.
Political Groups. The EP currently has eight political groups, which are based on
ideology rather than nationality or political party, plus some “non-attached” or
independent members. No single group in the EP has an overall majority and each must
compromise to secure changes to legislation. In the June 2004 election, the center-right
European People’s Party and European Democrats (EPP-ED) retained its position as the
largest political group. The Party of European Socialists (PES) came in second.
Euroskeptic candidates made significant gains in some countries, such as the United
Kingdom, and formed a new Independence/Democracy group (ID). The ID is composed
of both moderates, who support greater transparency and control over the EU
bureaucracy, and radicals, who advocate withdrawal from the EU. In January 2007, far-
right MEPs gained enough support to form a new Identity, Tradition, and Sovereignty
3 George Parker, “Euphoric Mood in Strasbourg,” Financial Times, October 28, 2004.
4 Prior to direct elections, MEPs were appointed by their national parliaments.
5 “Apathy Rules Among Newest Member States,” Financial Times, June 15, 2004.

---

CRS-4
group (ITS); its platform included limiting immigration and resisting EU integration.
Some MEPs expressed dismay at the formation of this new group, which they viewed as
neo-fascist, and succeeded in blocking ITS members from assuming leadership posts in
the EP. In November 2007, the ITS collapsed when its Romanian MEPs quit following
disparaging remarks by Italian ITS member Alessandra Mussolini (the granddaughter of
the World War II-era Italian dictator Benito Mussolini); Mussolini reportedly described
Romanians as “habitual lawbreakers” after Italy expelled dozens of Romanian migrants
suspected of criminal offenses.6
Political Groups and Seats in the European Parliament, 2004-2009 (785 seats total)
European People’s Party-European Democrats (EPP-ED; center-right)
289
Party of European Socialists (PES; center-left/socialists)
215
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE; liberals)
101
Union for Europe of the Nations (UEN; nationalists)
44
Greens/European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA; greens and regionalists)
42
European United Left/Nordic Green Left (EUL/NGL; far-left and former communists)
41
Independence/Democracy (ID; euroskeptics)
24
Non-attached members
29
The EP President. Hans-Gert Pöttering, a German MEP in the EPP-ED group,
was elected EP President in January 2007. He replaces Josep Borrell, a Spanish MEP in
the PES group. Pöttering was elected with an absolute majority of over 65% of the votes
cast as a result of a 2004 power-sharing deal between the EPP-ED and the PES. Pöttering
will serve as EP President until the next EP election in the spring of 2009. Pöttering has
announced three broad priorities for his presidency: to promote a “Europe of citizens,”
thereby increasing the EU’s transparency and democratic legitimacy; to pursue EU
institutional reforms; and to strengthen intercultural dialogue, especially with the
countries of the Arab and Islamic world.7
Committees. The EP has 20 standing committees. These committees are key
actors in the adoption of EU legislation. Each committee appoints a chairman, three vice-
chairmen, and has a secretariat. The appropriate committee (e.g., the Committee on the
Environment, Public Health, and Food Safety would deal with legislation on pollution)
appoints a Member as “rapporteur” to draft a report on the Commission proposal under
consideration. The rapporteur submits a draft report to the committee for discussion,
which is then voted on and possibly amended. The committee’s report is then considered
in plenary, amended, and put to a vote. The EP thus adopts its position on the issue. In
terms of their importance and strength, EP committees rival those in the U.S. Congress
and surpass the role of committees in most national European legislatures. Ad hoc
committees may also be established to investigate or oversee specific issues.
6 “EU Far Right Falls Over Mussolini’s Romania Remarks,” Reuters, November 14, 2007.
7 Raphael Minder, “Parliament Presidency Depends on Parties’ Deal,” Financial Times, July 17,
2004; “Hans-Gert Pöttering Wins Election Hands Down in One Round,” Europolitics, January
17, 2007.

---

CRS-5
Location. Strasbourg, France is the official seat of the EP; plenary sessions are
held there for one week a month. For two weeks a month, the EP’s standing committees
meet 300 miles to the northwest in Brussels, Belgium, where the European Commission
and the Council of Ministers are located. Generally, there is also one “part plenary”
session (two days) in Brussels each month. One week is set aside for meetings of the
political groups, which are usually held in Brussels. MEPs must have offices and
lodgings in both cities. Meanwhile, the EP’s Secretariat is based in Luxembourg, about
mid-way between Strasbourg and Brussels. Most EP staff, however, live in Brussels and
either commute to France or communicate via telephone or e-mail during full plenary
sessions. The costs of having three addresses are high in terms of both time and money,
and continues to be a contentious issue (see below).
Languages. Simultaneous interpretation of all parliamentary and committee
debates is provided in the EU’s 23 official languages. All parliamentary documents are
translated into and published in these languages.
Challenges
The European Parliament faces several challenges. Chief among these is the issue
of the EP’s legitimacy, despite being a directly elected body. Skeptics contend that the
Parliament is a largely ineffective actor impeded by an overly complex legislative process,
a high MEP turnover rate and absenteeism, and limited public interest and understanding.
To them, it symbolizes the democratic deficit and lack of transparency within the EU. On
the other hand, EP champions suggest that “co-decision” has enhanced the Parliament’s
influence, and as the only directly elected EU institution, the EP increasingly plays an
important checks-and-balances role, as seen for example by its recent insistence on
changes in the composition of the incoming Commission. Moreover, supporters claim
that the EP’s influence is growing even in strictly consultative areas such as the EU’s
common foreign policy where the “co-decision procedure” does not apply. They assert
that the EP has become a forum for debate on international issues, and uses its power of
assent on cooperation accords with third parties, as well as Parliamentary resolutions, to
promote human rights. Yet critics argue that EP views on international relations — such
as EP opposition to lifting the EU arms embargo on China — may have little effect
because foreign policy decisions rest with the member states.
Closely related to the question of the EP’s legitimacy is the issue of whether MEPs
reflect national or European interests. The Parliament claims to represent the people of
Europe, while the Council speaks for the governments. But some observers contend that
MEPs often promote parochial national interests. Past examples include Italian and
Spanish MEPs defending olive growers, and British and Irish MEPs joining forces to
oppose tax harmonization measures. And many MEPs campaign for the Parliament on
national rather than European issues. Others argue that voting behavior in the EP
indicates that ideology holds greater influence than nationality, with MEPs voting with
their party groups almost 90% of the time.8
8 See Simon Hix, Abdul Noury, and Gerard Roland, How MEPs Vote (Brighton, U.K.: Economic
and Social Research Council), November 2002.

---

CRS-6
Another major concern is costs, which the EP has been under public pressure to
reduce. The fact that MEPs and their staffs shuttle among three cities leads to travel and
hotel bills that, in the past, have consumed roughly 15-20% of the EP’s budget. Yet the
suggestion that the EP should consolidate its operations in one city has met with
opposition in the host countries of France, Belgium, and Luxembourg, which fear losing
economic benefits and jobs. Strasbourg was chosen originally as the seat of the EP to
serve as a symbol of peace between France and Germany, and both countries argue it
should continue to do so. Construction of multi-million dollar buildings in Brussels and
Strasbourg in the late 1990s to accommodate the growth in MEPs following EU
enlargement also stirred controversy.
After many years and several failed attempts, MEPs succeeded in June 2005 in
reforming the Parliament’s salary and expense regime. Some MEPs had long complained
about pay disparities because they receive the same salary as members of their respective
national parliaments. For example, Italian MEPs currently earn roughly three times more
than their Spanish counterparts. Previous efforts to reform the pay system had foundered
on the concerns of some member states about the costs of the reforms. Under the new
deal, all MEPS will be paid the same amount in exchange for instituting a reimbursable
system for MEPs’ business and travel expenses; currently, MEPs receive a flat-rate travel
allowance that does not require receipts and contributes to the Parliament’s “gravy train”
image. The new expense regime will not be implemented, however, until 2009.
The European Parliament and the U.S. Congress
Ties between the EP and the U.S. Congress date back to 1972, when a U.S.
Congressional delegation first visited the EP in Brussels and Luxembourg. Since then,
Congressional-EP exchanges have taken place at least once a year, and have provided the
opportunity for sustained dialogue. The U.S. Congress-EP exchange is the oldest and
most prestigious of the EU’s interparliamentary delegations, which seek to develop and
maintain close ties with countries outside the EU.
In 1999, the EP and the U.S. Congress launched the Transatlantic Legislators’
Dialogue (TLD) as their official response to the U.S.-EU commitment in the 1995 New
Transatlantic Agenda to enhance parliamentary ties between the EU and the United States.
With the TLD, the two sides have committed to regular meetings twice a year to discuss
a wide range of topical political and economic issues. The EP TLD delegation is led by
a chairman, who is elected by the delegation’s members and has responsibilities equal to
those of a committee chair. The most recent TLD meeting took place in May 2008 in
Ljubljana, Slovenia, which held the EU’s rotating presidency in the first half of 2008.
Congress and the EP have also conducted video conferences on specific areas of mutual
concern (past video conferences have focused on the exchange of passenger data,
financial services, and U.S. restrictions of steel imports). Some MEPs have called for
making the TLD more “operational,” however, by creating a formal early warning system
to allow each side to weigh in on legislation-in-progress that could adversely affect their
interests.9
9 For more information, see the European Parliament’s website on the Transatlantic Legislators’
Dialogue [http://www.europarl.europa.eu/intcoop/tld/default_en.htm].

---