The Constitutional framework of US govt

Question 1

E+A 3 ways the US constitution reflects the separation and division of powers

Answer 1

1. the Constitution contains lots of checks and balances thus ensuring that no one branch is too powerful.
   presidential veto, the advice and consent powers of the Senate.
   the veto is being used less frequently while the threat of it is arguably more significant, and the politicisation of Senate confirmation powers.
2. separation of personnel, e.g. the president and cabinet cannot also serve simultaneously in Congress.
   Sessions resigning as a senator before he
   could become attorney general.
   This principle is partly broken by the vice president also acting as senate president and on occasion having the casting vote, e.g.
   Pence and DeVos’ confirmation vote as education secretary.
3. federalism and how power in the USA is divided between federal and state governments.
   defence (national) and education (states), and also the Tenth Amendment.
   the growing power acquired by the federal
   government since the New Deal, arguably upsetting the balance, and also the potential for confusion/blurred responsibilities as seen by the mixed messaging over masks and lockdowns during the
   Covid-19 pandemic.

Question 2

E+A 3 ways that congress can check the president

Answer 2

1. power of the purse
   limit a president’s scope for action, e.g. closing down Guantanamo Bay or building a border wall (AO1).
   presidents often try to get around this, e.g. by transferring funds from other budgets, and how it can result in gridlock and shutdowns when a budget cannot be agreed.
2. Senate’s exclusive ‘advice and consent’ powers to interrogate and then vote on presidential nominees for cabinet and the courts.
   Bork’s rejection, or the close run votes on Kavanaugh and Mnuchin (transport secretary)
   In reality, Senate rejections of presidential picks are relatively rare, Towers 1989 for sec of defence for alcohol abuse being the last cabinet-level example, but the threat of rejection and failure can be equally as powerful, e.g. Miers and Puzder
   Increasingly, partisanship not competence has come to the fore.
3. Impeachment, the ‘nuclear option’.
   Johnson, Clinton and Trump, and (almost) Nixon, but also the high thresholds required. Emphasise how no impeachment trial has yet been successful, and, arguably, motives behind both Clinton and Trump’s trials were as much about party politics as presidential ethics. How partisan the Senate vote was regarding Trump. It could be legitimately queried whether nowadays it is an
   effective check on presidents or just political muckraking.

Question 3

E+A 3 ways that the individual rights are protected by the US constitution

Answer 3

individual rights are predominantly protected by amendments to the Constitution, such as the Bill of Rights, rather than the original document, which was much more concerned with the structure of government.

1. relevant aspects of the Bill of Rights such as the First Amendment (freedom of speech, etc.) and the Fifth Amendment (right to a fair trial), and explain how these are still relevant today with debates surrounding election campaigns fec vs citizens united.
   First Amendment, for example, is not absolute and Americans are not entitled to unlimited free speech, e.g. the Espionage Act and anti-terror measures.
2. rights are entrenched in the US Constitution and cannot be easily removed, given the difficulty of formal amendment due to the
   high threshold required for constitutional amendments
   rights can be informally extended and reinterpreted by the Supreme Court, eg Columbia v Heller.
   inalienable rights are only selectively present in the Constitution, e.g. for gun owners but neither women nor children.
3. Supreme Court’s role in upholding individual rights via judicial review and landmark cases. Roe v Wade or Obergefell v Hodges under 14th amendment.
   How judicial review is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution but, following Marbury v Madison, has become established in the Constitution. Y
   the Court can change its interpretations over time, for example with segregation and abortion, therefore it does not always protect individual rights all of the time.

Question 4

E+A 3 ways that structural theory could be used to compare the US and UK constitutions

Answer 4

1. US has a codified constitution while the UK’s is uncodified.
   a single source/document with amendments versus a range of sources and
   documents like the Magna Carta including statute law like HRA and works of authority like Erskine May.
   Superficially this makes the US Constitution easier to understand, as powers etc. are clearly set our, while the British Constitution is less clear-cut. But this is perhaps less true in reality still debates surrounding us like gun rights or women.
2. fusion versus separation of powers, the prime minister also being leader of the legislature and in overall control of all aspects of policy, while in the US policy-making is split between Congress and the White House, e.g. the president is commander-in-chief but only Congress can declare war.
   Dangers of gridlock in the USA and of elective dictatorship in the UK.
3. unitary and federal structures in each
   constitution,
   the Tenth Amendment in the USA and Westminster parliamentary sovereignty in the UK.
   devolution has made the UK less unitary, and US federalism has been somewhat eroded by the growth of federal government powers over the decades like ND, and how it can lead to confusion over roles and responsibilities, e.g. as seen in responses to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Question 5

E+A 3 ways that cultural theory could be used to study the role of federalism and devolution the UK and US

Answer 5

1. the USA has a constitutionally federal structure,
   e.g. the Tenth Amendment, while the UK with its parliamentary sovereignty is much more unitary, and here you could mention the Act of Union 1707.
   led to different policies across US states, such as the death penalty, while there is historically less variation in the UK in such areas.
2. historic/cultural differences between devolution and federalism,
   devolution representing delegated powers, rather than federalism that involves alienated powers,
   therefore devolution legislation could in theory be repealed by an Act of Parliament (
   could explain how this historic distinction and contrast between the UK and USA is becoming less clear in recent years, as devolution has expanded in the UK since regional assemblies have accumulated more powers (e.g. variation of income tax), while the power of federal government in the USA has expanded
   since the 1930s, e.g. in terms of funding where states are often dependent on federal funds for locally delivered programs such as Medicare.
3. the historic differences between the symmetrical federalism of the USA, i.e. all of the USA is equally federal in nature, while in the UK devolution has been applied
   asymmetrically since it does not cover England.
   reflects the origins of US federalism in that the USA emerged out of 13 separate and distinct colonies, while in the UK, devolution has been strongly linked historically to efforts to retain the Union, especially in the wake of growing
   demands for full independence, especially from Scotland. Also, the relative size and dominance of England within the UK would mean an English parliament would dwarf the other regional assemblies. England also
   traditionally lacks a strong, distinct culture, unlike the other regions. By contrast, no one US state dominates in the same manner.

Question 6

E+A 3 ways that rational theory could be used to study the UK parliament and the US congress

Answer 6

1. both legislatures contain representatives for distinction geographical areas (constituencies, entire states and House districts), such as Texas or Chichester.
   logically means that MPs/congressional members will seek to defend/promote their local area in order to remain elected.in the USA this often takes the form of pork-barrelling or securing relevant committee assignments. In the UK, it might be asking questions of the government specific to one’s constituency. It might even mean voting or lobbying against one’s own party on locally sensitive issues, such as HS2 or a third runway for Heathrow.
2. significance of third parties, noting they are almost non-existent in Congress but far more common in Westminster, i.e. the Liberal Democrats, nationalist parties
   etc.
   this means that it is much more rational for politicians in the USA to run for office as a candidate for one of the two main parties if they want to stand a chance of winning. This contrasts with the UK, where, for example, in Northern Ireland none of its MPs come from
   the Labour or Conservative ranks.
3. role of committees
   greater importance in Congress, especially
   when it comes to drawing up legislation, makes them particularly attractive to members who logically therefore want to secure a place on key committees, such as Appropriations or House Rules, in order to
   advance their career. This is less true for the UK where rationally, ambitious politicians have more usually sought promotion by getting on to the front bench
   how Westminster is changing somewhat in this regard, with the enhanced role of select committees making them increasingly attractive as alternative places of power, while in the US, the power of committees has
   declined somewhat in recent decades, especially with the introduction of term limits for committee chairs.