EOTT - Con and Fed Flashcards

Question

What are the principles of the US Constitution? Checks and balances: Checks by Congress of the Supreme Court/federal courts

Answer 1

Propose Constitutional amendments -proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (2015) Refuse to approve appointments-Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, (2016) Garland is now US Attorney-General under President Biden.

Answer 2

Declare law unconstitutional-Defence of Marriage Act (1996) in 2013

Answer 3

Declare actions unconstitutional-Declared unconstitutional President Trump’s claims that he did not have to comply with a subpoena from as New York district attorney seeking information on Trump’s personal and business financial dealings (2020)

Answer 4

Propose Constitutional amendments -proposed Federal Marriage Amendment (2015) Refuse to approve appointments-Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court, (2016) Garland is now US Attorney-General under President Biden.

Answer 5

Bipartisanship is when two opposing parties work together to achieve one policy or initiative. The Constitution allows for different groups to control different branches, but forces them to work together. While the word ‘bipartisanship’ does not appear in the Constitution, the concept is evident in a number of ways. 1. The staggered election cycle with the House of Representatives elected every 2 years, the president every 4 years and the Senate every 6 years (although one-third of senators are re-elected every 2 years), means a different party could control each branch of government and forces representatives to be frequently accountable to their constituents. 2. Supermajorities are required in some circumstances, such as for constitutional amendments and to override the presidential veto; this requires party cooperation. 3. The checks and balances written in the Constitution mean that in order to achieve anything, the different branches of government must work together.

Answer 6

Limited government is a government which is subject to limitations on its actions and powers. 1. Like ‘federalism’, the phrase ‘limited government’ does not appear in the Constitution. Throughout the constitution, however, there are requirements which stop the government from acting how it wishes – they limit what the government can do. 2. The most obvious limits on the federal government are the systems of separation of powers and checks and balances, which limits the actions that each branch can take. In addition, the Bill of Rights (1st-10th Amendments) was ratified in 1791 to protect the basic freedoms of citizens, including other freedoms that might not be explicitly laid out in the constitution (in the 9th Amendment).

Answer 7

1. The interpretation of the Constitution in the years following its ratification established the increasing federal government supremacy over the states 2. The relationship between federal government and state governments has changed over time 3. Federalism today

Answer 8

(i) Fletcher v Peck (1810) established precedent allowing the Supreme Court (federal government) to strike down state laws. (ii) McCulloch v Maryland (1819) established precedent that states could not prevent federal government from using its constitutional powers. (iii) Gibbons v Ogden (1824) established that Congress could control trade between the states, using the ‘commerce clause’ of the Constitution.

Answer 9

Dual federalism (1787-1930s) Cooperative federalism (1930s-1960s) New federalism (1960s onwards) Under Obama Under Trump

Answer 10

(1787-1930s) State and federal governments exercised a roughly equal amount of power but in completely separate areas. While a federal government did challenge states at times, the emphasis during this period was on states running their own domestic affairs.

Answer 11

(1930s-1960s) The division between state and federal responsibility became blurred. Federal government grew larger in response to events such as the Great Depression and the Second World War, taking on some policy areas previously controlled by states.

Answer 12

(1960s onwards) Attempts (largely unsuccessful) to try and return some of the powers taken by federal government to the states. (iv) Examples such as the legal status of marijuana (illegal in Federal law, but legal in 8 states including California for recreational use) demonstrate the blurred lines between state and federal power today; both retain some power but both equally have influence (if not actual power) over the other.

Answer 13

The Obama administration often blurred the lines between the responsibilities of states and federal government. However, like new federalism, there are areas where the administration built within this a protection for individual states’ rights, e.g. - Obamacare made it mandatory for states to provide ‘healthcare exchanges’, from which citizens could purchase healthcare insurance. However, the details on how these exchanges were to be set up and run were largely left for each state to decide. Additionally, the federal government would cover most of the additional cost of this expansion, therefore not burdening the states with this cost. - Re-authorisation of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) (2009) - The expansion of Medicaid (health insurance for the poor) - The Recovery Act was a $787 billion stimulus package following the 2008 recession. One-third of this was given to state governments, more than any previous such bill. - The Supreme Court protect states’ power in some areas (gun control) and federal government power in others (Obamacare, gay marriage).

Answer 14

Republican presidents have traditionally sought to shrink the size and scope of the federal government. Although Trump generally agreed with that policy, there were times when he attempted to make the states subservient to the federal government, but mostly in ways that specifically increased the power of the president e.g. - Tried to end lockdowns during the Covid-19 pandemic - policies towards illegal immigrants and ‘sanctuary cities’ - use the national guard and federal troops during the ‘Black Lives Matter’ protests of May-June 2020, following the murder of George Floyd by a Minnesota police officer.

Answer 15

- Federal government controls foreign policy, including war and treaties. - The use of the ‘commerce clause’ in the Constitution has allowed federal government greater control over the states in domestic policy. - The Supreme Court has power to change or uphold state laws. - The nature of US federalism has led to an incredibly complex legal and tax system, with punishments, taxes and public policy varying considerably between states. - The size of the USA, geographically and in terms of population, means that states retain considerable control over the daily lives of citizens.

Answer 16

1. The extent of democracy within the US Constitution 2. Impact on the US government today 3. Is the US still federal today?

Answer 17

Before judging the extent of democracy within the Constitution, it is important to understand different types of democracy, i.e. * Liberal democracy – in which protection of rights, is of paramount importance. * Representative democracy – in which people elect officials to represent them (NB as representatives not delegates - Burkean democracy).

Answer 18

* Key rights are protected by the Constitution for all citizens – the 1st Amendment alone protects free speech, press, assembly and religion. * The Constitution sets out the rules for elections, the frequent election cycle of every 2 years allows for a high level of accountability. * The separation of powers should protect rights and prevent tyranny of the government – the Supreme Court has struck down state and federal law to protect gay rights.

Answer 19

* The requirement for supermajorities can lead to tyranny of majority – women and minority groups have all had rights restricted. * The protection of rights for minorities has largely been left to the Supreme Court but it has no power of enforcement. The Court ruled against segregation in schools in 1954, yet Mississippi was still receiving similar rulings in 2016. * Leaving election practices in the hands of states has led to wide variation. While nearly half of Americans live in districts using paper ballots, one-quarter use electronic voting, which has led to claims of election fraud.

Answer 20

* The House of Representatives is elected directly by citizens of each state. * The House of Representatives is elected roughly in proportion to population, equalising representation. * The frequent election cycle means that congressmen have to pay close attention to their voters. The House of Representatives is wholly re-elected every 2 years, and senators serve 6 years with one-third of the Senate re-elected every 2 years. * Amendments have upheld representative democracy; Senators are now elected, while woman and those aged 18 or over can vote.

Answer 21

* Senators were unelected until 1913. * Having two senators per state means representation varies by state population – Wyoming has two senators for approximately half a million people; California has two senators for approximately 40 million people. * Having at least one House of Representatives member per state means the level of representation also varies - in the 2010 census the average Montana district had approximately 1 million people in it; the average Rhode Island district had approximately half a million. * The Electoral College distorts the Presidential elections – the election winners in 2000 and 2016 did not reflect the popular vote.

Answer 22

(i) The US Constitution not only outlines how government should work, but places considerable constraints on it too. It is important to recognise that this is not about strengths and weaknesses, but about government. There must be evidence from recent years that supports each impact. Most ‘impacts’ will be assessed as positive impacts or negative impacts. In assessing the impact ‘today’, the circumstances of government are key. If federal government is controlled by one party, if there has been a national disaster, or if a president has just been elected, often federal government if more effective. In times of divided government, in times of low approval ratings, or in the later years of a presidency, the impact of the Constitution is often more negative.

Answer 23

* Each branch of government is given explicit powers which cannot be removed, ensuring each branch remains relevant, even if there is divided government (i.e. when one of either the president, the House of Representatives or the Senate is controlled by a different party to the others). * Frequent elections forces representatives to listen to their constituents, ensuring legitimacy of government. * The acceptance of judicial review means that disagreements can be settled in the Supreme Court. Bill of Rights. * The necessity for branches to work together through checks and balances means that majority interests are usually upheld, which should increase support for government. * Statues rights support diversity in state laws and practices.

Answer 24

* Separation of powers and checks and balances can lead to gridlock, meaning government is not governing. * Federalism means that sovereignty is shared and can reduce the power of federal government * Protection of rights is often sacrificed for the sake of national security. * Federal government has increasingly come to dominate the States in recent year. * The vagueness of the Constitution has meant ‘loopholes’ have been exploited, such as executive orders, allowing for the dominance of one branch over another.

Answer 25

(i) Each state is able to decide upon and enforce a wide variety of laws. For example, the recreational use of marijuana is legal in nine states. 32 states have the death penalty. Taxes vary. (ii) The Supreme Court has ruled in favour of states against federal government. For example, Texas v US [2016] overturning DAPA and Dobb v Jackson (2022) over abortion rights. (iii) Elections are run according to state rules. For example, the testing of online voting in West Virginia. (iv) Political parties remain ‘broad churches’ as both Democrats and Republicans have dramatically different ideologies across the country. For example, the ‘Freedom Caucus’ within the Republican Party is considerably further right than members such as Susan Collins. (v) The State courts have successfully used the Supreme Court to challenge for ‘States Rights’ e.g. over abortion and immigration. Conclusion In many ways the USA does remain federal today. However, the nature of federal-state relationships and changes over time suggests that the answer is not simply ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Rather, it depends on the issue, the governments and the national circumstances.

Answer 26

(i) The growth of federal government seems to increasingly encroach upon state ‘reserved powers’. In Kentucky, for example, a clerk was imprisoned for refusing to issue same-sex marriage licenses after it was legalised. (ii) The Electoral College and House of Representatives place great importance on a few states. For example, California is worth 55 Electoral College Votes, Texas 38 and Florida 29, so these states are heavily targeted by candidates, often at the expense of the seven states worth just three votes each. (iii) Only the federal government has the resources to deal with terrorist attracts, market crashes and natural disasters. For example, it is projected that Hurricane Harvey and Irma may have caused upwards of $200bn of damage. (iv) The Supreme Court has also ruled in favour of federal government, further centralising political power. In upholding Obamacare in the NFIB v Sebelius case, for example, the federal government seems now to have vast power over healthcare. Conclusion In many ways the USA does remain federal today. However, the nature of federal-state relationships and changes over time suggests that the answer is not simply ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Rather, it depends on the issue, the governments and the national circumstances.

EOTT - Con and Fed Flashcards

(50 cards)