Politics Paper 3

Constitutional Vagueness (Yes)

Constitutional Vagueness (Yes)

• Flexibility: interpretation and application for changing times and circumstances. Vagueness has allowed for federal power to adapt to changing circumstances. (2018 - South Dakota vs Wayfair, states could tax online revenue)

• Avoiding Conflict: The vagueness of the constitution has allowed for opposing views to have their own views represented respectively. (2nd Amendment - has led to some regulation, some freedom)

• Individual Rights: Bill of Rights has allowed for unforeseen new protections to be included. (Obergefell vs Hodges)

Constitutional Vagueness (No)

• Fails to Regulate Political Practice: due to strong constitutional provisions, politicians may reject newly established practices (Obergefell vs Hodges)

• Expansion of the Supreme Court: the vagueness of the Constitution has led to the increasing power of the court. With a more clear constitution, there would be less bias and judicial activism.

• Conflict: the vagueness of the constitution has led to increasing conflict with each side claiming they are right. (Affordable Care Act and Federalism, the 2nd Amendment)

There is a Separation of Powers (Yes)

• Constitutional Provisions: Article 1 outlines legislative power for Congress, Article 2 for the President, and Article 3 for the Supreme.

• Checks and Balances: the constitution has allowed for significant checks and balances and restricted branch power. Presidential veto (Biden debt relief).

• Court Decisions: The Supreme Court, through judicial review, guarantees that the President does not overreach their power. (Clinton vs New York - can’t veto specific items of the budget)

There is a Separation of Powers (No)

• Executive Overreach: acting beyond the scope imagined for the president. (Obama’s use of executive orders for immigration reform, Trump emergency funds for wall)

• Legislative Dysfunction: legislature is intended to be an equal and effective body. Gridlock and partisanship has led to continual executive domination. Judicial nominees.

• Judicial Activism: overreach of the Supreme Court. Legislating from the bench. (Roe V Wade, Obergefell v Hodges)

Bipartisanship (Yes)

• Passing of Bipartisan Legislation: huge legislation is being passed with both sides support. (Congress passed a $900bn Covid relief package)

• Caucuses: have seen bipartisanship support for legislation in the name of their causes. The Black Caucus.

• Structure and Elections: due to the frequency of elections in America, one party does not tend to dominate both houses for long. This means that bipartisan work is essential to have bills passed.

Bipartisanship (No)

• Partisan Gridlock: major obstacles to bipartisanship. Failed bills due to partisan bickering and staunch views. (No republicans voted for the Affordable Care Act under Obama)

• Ideological Partisanship: the emergence of far-right ‘MAGA’ republicans has seen staunch take-up of views. Speaker Mitch McConnel voted against equal marriage amendment, when his own wife is of another ethnicity.

• Supreme Court: the blocking of judges and increasingly politicised hearings process has led to a dysfunctional supreme court system. (Merrick Garland, Robert Bork)

Checks and Balances (Yes)

• Impeachment Process: bring proceedings against a president that is acting illegally or against wishes of country. (Trump’s impeachment 2019-20)

• Judicial Review: the Supreme Court sees the striking down of incompatible legislation with the constitution. (Nixon was removed of immunity in the Watergate scandal)

• Executive Branch Veto: this sees a check on the legislature, with the President able to veto legislation that they disagree with (Biden will veto the blocking of debt relief for students)

Checks and Balances (No)

• Partisan Polarization: the increased partisanship in the house has seen the destruction of C&Bs. Gridlock has led to ineffective governance. (The federal shutdown under Obama)

• Presidential Nominees: the Supreme Court is indirectly influenced by the executive via nomination. Each judge is ideologically aligned.

• Loopholes: due to constitutional vagueness surrounding checks and balances, the executive is often able to remove themselves. (2014 executive orders by Obama for immigration reform)

Federalism (Yes)

• US Constitution: outlines certain state powers that cannot be infringed upon by the federal government. (10th Amendment, all non-explicitly state Federal Powers are state powers)

• Powers denied to Congress: the interstate commerce clause sees states regulate their internal business policy. 2nd amendment, no gun regulations. (US v Lopez, the halting of gun free zones in the US)

• Amendment Process: upholds the protection of small states such as Wyoming and Alaska. (13/50 states needed to reject amendment - Flag Protection Bill)

Federalism (No)

• Federal Mandates: federal laws in acts of Congress which impose national standards on states. The Affordable Care Act 2010 which meant all citizens had to have health insurance, limiting health care choices.

• Fiscal Power of the Government: 16th amendment allowing federal income tax, states are increasingly reliant on federal funding. 1/4 of their funding. Conditions imposed on this money - North Carolina department of education.

• Interstate Commerce Clause: Article 1, Section 8 sees federal government regulate all trade outside of state. Congress regulate home grown marijuana. Justifies a range of federal laws, especially forcing motel owners to have to allow black customers.

Amendment Process (No)

• Outdated Aspects Remain: necessary change is not achieved and outdated aspects remain intact, such as the Electoral College.

• Undemocratic: does not adhere to majoritarian democracy. Only 13/50 states are needed to reject legislation. Flag Protection bill, Alaska and Wyoming.

• No New Ideas: the supermajority needed to pass legislation has led to the difficulty of providing new modern laws. For example, the continual failing of the Equal Rights Amendment for women.

Amendment Process (Yes)

• Ensures Key Principles: the supermajority needed ensures that key principles essential to US democracy are kept intact. Elections every four years, stops knee-jerk reactions from legislatures.

• Upholds Federalism: 10th amendment determines federalism. Ensures smaller states have representation. Equal representation in electing the president.

• Prevents Abuses of Power: stops individuals from one party making large legislation that would effect everyone. George Bush’s one line veto was blocked by the supreme court.

Limited Government (Yes)

• The constitution outlines the framework of a limited government in the US. Powers and limitations of each individual branch. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any laws or actions that violate its provisions can be struck down by the courts.

• Bill of Rights: ensures that individual freedoms are upheld an not infringed upon by the federal government. (The federal government has not been able to infringe on 2nd Amendment - District of Columbia v Heller) (Lawrence v. Texas (2003) striking down laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual activity)

• Federalism and State Autonomy: respective needs of population. (During Covid-19, the federal government provided resources and guidance whilst individual states took charge in implementing lockdowns and mask mandates)

Limited Government (No)

• Expanding Role of the Government: through increased regulation in business, healthcare - setting requirements. (Medicare, Medicaid)

• National Security and Surveillance: the Patriot Act which saw collection of phone and internet data. This has seen the infringement on individual civil liberties.

• Executive Power: Presidents have increasingly relied on executive orders to bypass congress and expand the power of the president. This undermines the system of checks and balances. (2014 - Obama for Immigration)

Elections in the US are Democratic

• Equal voting rights: The Voting Rights Act of 1965 eliminated discriminatory practice in disqualifying racial groups from accessing the ballot box. (66% turnout for 2020 election)

• The electoral college has allowed for the equal representation of small states, which upholds federalism. Alaska and Wyoming are given equal opportunity to choose a presidential candidate.

• The frequency of US elections has meant that the government is ensured to be accountable and highly representative. Midterm elections have allowed for major checks against presidential administrations and ensure that representatives are accountable to their constituents.

Elections in the US are Democratic (No)

• The electoral college is an outdated system that does not adhere to the wishes of a majoritarian democracy. Frequently, presidents are elected without the majority of the popular vote. (Bush and Trump)

• The influence of money: The US Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections. This has consistently allowed representatives to be accountable to companies rather than citizens. (Super PACs, outside spending on the 2020 elections exceeded $4.5 billion.)

• Gerrymandering: manipulation of district boundaries so that a particular party can win. Voters are not given the ability to elect a representative that reflects their area. (16 states had extreme partisan gerrymanders in place for the 2020 election)

Midterms are Important (Yes)

• Balance of power: Midterm elections in the US are important because they can shift the balance of power in Congress. In midterm elections, all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and one-third of the seats in the Senate are up for election. If one political party gains a majority in either chamber, they can pass legislation and influence the policy agenda. (Democrats control Senate, Republicans control House)

• Voter engagement: Midterm elections in the US are important because they can increase voter engagement and participation. In the 2018 midterm elections was the highest it has been in 50 years, with 53.4% of eligible voters participating.

• Shaping Policy: signals policy approval or disapproval which indicates to the federal government that policy needs to change. (2010 discontent with the Obama Affordable Care Act) (Biden has received both support through the senate and a knock to his house)

Midterms are Important (No)

• Compared to presidential elections, midterm elections have a significantly lower turnout. (2014 midterm elections was just 41.9%, compared to 61.4% in the 2016 presidential election)

• Partisan Gridlock: midterm elections significantly damage the effective governance of the US. If a rival party takes control of the House and Senate, the President is often unable to deliver their policy. (Shutdown in Obama administration)

• Limited impact on the Presidency: the president still retains policy autonomy and can limit the effect of shifted power dynamics through executive orders and vetoing legislation. (2014, Obama used executive orders to pass his immigration reforms)

US Legislative Process is Strong (Yes)

• Checks and balances: The system of checks and balances in the US political system ensures fairness. Biden administration has faced resistance from Congress and the courts on key policy initiatives. (2021, a federal judge ruled that the Biden administration could not pause new oil and gas leases on federal land without approval from Congress)

• Legislative action: Despite the challenges of gridlock and partisanship, Congress has been able to pass significant legislation on some key issues. (March 2021, Congress passed the American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion COVID relief)

• Oversight: One of the key functions of Congress is oversight of the executive branch, and lawmakers have been active in investigating the actions of the Trump administration and the Biden administration. (May 2021, the House Oversight Committee announced an investigation into the Trump administration's seizure of phone records from Democratic lawmakers and journalists)

US Legislative Process is Strong (No)

• Gridlock: The US legislative process has been plagued by gridlock in recent years, with lawmakers struggling to pass major legislation on key issues. (March 2021, President Biden's $1.9 trillion COVID relief package passed without a single Republican vote in either the House or Senate, highlighting the deep partisan divide in Congress)

• Influence of money: The influence of money on the US political system was highlighted in the 2020 election cycle, when the top 100 individual donors gave a combined $1.2 billion to candidates and political groups.

• Lack of diversity: Despite recent gains, women and people of colour remain underrepresented in Congress. In the current Congress, just over a quarter of lawmakers are women, while only 14% are people of colour.

Congress has Effective Checks on the President (Yes)

• Congressional oversight: Congress has the power to conduct oversight of the executive branch, including the power to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by executive officials. (2020, the House of Representatives conducted multiple oversight hearings on the Trump administration's response to the COVID-19 pandemic)

• The power of the purse: Congress has the power to control government spending, which can be a powerful check on the executive branch. For example, Congress can refuse to fund executive branch initiatives or can use the appropriations process to attach conditions to funding. (2019 Trump administration's use of military funds for the construction of a border wall)

• Impeachment: Congress has the power to impeach and remove the President and other executive officials from office for "high crimes and misdemeanors." While impeachment is a rare occurrence, it can be a powerful check on executive power. (Trump 2019-20)

Congress has Effective Checks on the President (3)

• Partisan polarization: Congress is often deeply divided along partisan lines, which can make it difficult for lawmakers to agree on and implement effective checks on the executive branch. (2019, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives voted to impeach President Trump, but the Republican-controlled Senate voted to acquit him)

• Impeachment: doesn’t work, an ineffective check on the executive. Impeachment requires a significant level of evidence and political will within Congress to proceed. President may fight back with signing statements that condemn bills passed by congress.

• Executive orders: The President has the power to issue executive orders, which have the force of law and can bypass the legislative process. While executive orders are subject to judicial review, they can be difficult for Congress to overturn or modify. (President Trump used executive orders - travel ban and the withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement)

Congress Limits the Supreme Court (Yes)

• Confirmation process: Congress has the power to confirm Supreme Court nominees, which can give it some influence over the direction of the Court. For example, in 1987, President Reagan's nominee to the Court, Robert Bork, was rejected by the Senate due to concerns about his judicial philosophy.

• Control over the Court's jurisdiction: Congress has the power to regulate the jurisdiction of the federal courts, including the Supreme Court. (2019, several Democratic lawmakers introduced a bill that would expand the size of the Supreme Court from nine to thirteen justices)

• Overturning a decision. Congress can reverse or amend a Court ruling. Oregon v Mitchell overturned the 26th amendment which allowed 18 year olds to vote.

Congress Limits the Supreme Court (No)

• Lifetime tenure: Supreme Court justices serve for life, which makes them relatively insulated from political pressure and gives them considerable independence in shaping the law. (Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg served on the Court for 27 years before her death in 2020)

• Judicial review: The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review, which allows it to strike down laws that it deems unconstitutional. This power gives the Court significant influence over the actions of Congress and other branches of government. (2012, the Supreme Court struck down parts of the Affordable Care Act, which was a significant legislative achievement of the Obama administration)

• Partisan polarization: Congress has become increasingly polarized along partisan lines, which can make it difficult for lawmakers to reach consensus on judicial nominations and other issues related to the Court. For example, in recent years, several Supreme Court nominees have faced contentious confirmation battles in the Senate, with Democrats and Republicans often deeply divided over the nominee's qualifications and ideology.

Congress is Gaining More Power (Yes)

• Increased oversight: In recent years, Congress has ramped up its oversight of the executive branch, holding numerous hearings and investigations into issues like Russian interference in the 2016 election and the Trump administration's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. This increased oversight can be seen as a sign that Congress is asserting itself more strongly in its role as a check on the executive branch

• Reassertion of institutional power: In recent years, some lawmakers have pushed back against what they see as executive overreach, arguing that Congress needs to reassert its institutional power. (2021, a group of bipartisan senators introduced a bill that would require the president to seek congressional approval before taking certain military actions)

• Legislative achievements: In recent years, Congress has passed several significant pieces of legislation, including the American Rescue Plan (which provided economic relief in response to the COVID-19 pandemic) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (which provides funding for a range of infrastructure projects).

Congress is Gaining More Power (No)

• Partisan polarization: Congress has become increasingly polarized along partisan lines, which can make it difficult for lawmakers to pass significant legislation and exercise meaningful oversight over the executive branch. (Congress has struggled to pass major pieces of legislation on issues like healthcare and immigration - gun control)

• Executive power: Despite some pushback from Congress, the executive branch has continued to exert significant power and influence over policy. (Biden used executive orders to advance his policy agenda on issues like climate change and immigration, bypassing Congress in the process)

• Judicial power: The Supreme Court has played an increasingly powerful role in shaping policy in recent years, particularly on issues like healthcare and voting rights. This can limit Congress's ability to pass legislation on these issues and can make it more difficult for Congress to check the power of the executive branch. (2013, the Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, which had been a cornerstone of federal voting rights protections for decade)

Congress is Representative (Yes)

• Separate Elections for President and Congress: separation of powers sees high level congressional representation. Maximizes voter choice. Separation of powers ensures that Congress is accountable to the public, not the president. (Susan Collins of Maine represents modern view - regularly votes against party)

• Complementary Representation: both chambers are elected. Providing both delegates and trustees, congress can maximize representation. Congresspeople react to legislation in the short term, whilst Senators view it in a longer term. (Flag protection - House supported, Senate rejected)

• Frequent Elections: an election every two years, which guarantees that congress is accountable to the public. Have to adhere to their wishes or they face removal.

Congress is Representative (No)

• FPTP and Gerrymandering: heavily undermine representation. 16/50 states had significant gerrymandering. Politicians intend to maximize their power through this.

• Social Representation: Not reflective of modern America. (38% of population, 19/10% in Congress/Senate)

• Influence of Pressure Groups: influenced by pressure groups which distorts the wishes of the public. In some cases, politicians respond to the disproportionate demands of pressure groups. Elite theory - richer groups dominate. (NRA)

The President is too Powerful (Yes)

• Executive Orders: the president can bypass congress through his use of executive orders. (President Obama, DACA - immigration) and ability to veto congressional legislation (debt relief for Biden)

• Foreign Policy: in foreign policy, the president is almost unrestricted. The constitution guarantees the President autonomy over foreign policy. Commander and chief role gives the president power over the military. (Executive agreements)

• Role as Head of Government: President has total control over the executive branch. Ultimate decision-maker. (Control over 15 Cabinet departments, EXOP) (Barack Obama created the White House Council on Native American Affairs - Trump’s harmful decisions against them)

The President is too Powerful (No)

• Separation of Powers: the President is subject to the framework of separation of powers. Judicial Review from the Supreme Court (overturned Line Veto Item in 2006)

• Impeachment: the President is held accountable by Congress through impeachment. This sees the president effectively scrutinised and often has them come out weaker. (Trump 2019-20)

• Foreign Policy: as for Foreign Policy, the president is still beholden to the Senate who have to ratify treaties. The constitution arguably gives Congress the power to declare war. (2003 - Bush had to go to Congress to get approval to invade Iraq)

The Role of Head of State (Yes)

• Symbolic representation and fostering national unity. State visits and diplomatic ceremonies: As Head of State, the President represents the country on the global stage during state visits and diplomatic ceremonies. National commemorations and speeches. (President Joe Biden visited the site of the Tulsa Race Massacre on its 100th anniversary in June 2021)

• International diplomacy and shaping foreign policy. Negotiating treaties and international agreements: The President, as Head of State, has the authority to negotiate and sign treaties with other countries. These treaties can have significant implications for international relations, addressing issues such as arms control, trade, and climate change. (2021, President Biden participated in the G7 summit)

• Media Attention: in the aftermath of 9/11, Bush symbolized national unity. This allows the President to deliver a nationwide message, which sees them have a greater influence over public opinion.

The Role of Head of State (No)

• National Events and the Media: the President can harness the power of the media to help them spread their policy and messages. Following the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama emotionally appealed to the country in the desire for gun controls. 9/11

• Executive Orders: have allowed the US President to bypass congressional checks. Obama’s executive orders for 2014 Immigration DACA.

• Powers of Persuasion and Signing Statements: use their position to attract media and congressional attention. President Obama had a conciliatory, American Health Care Act in March 2017, Trump threatened their removal in the 2018 midterms.

Informal Powers are Most Important (Yes)

• Executive Orders: have allowed the US President to bypass congressional checks. Obama’s executive orders for 2014 Immigration DACA.

• Powers of Persuasion and Signing Statements: use their position to attract media and congressional attention. President Obama had a conciliatory, American Health Care Act in March 2017, Trump threatened their removal in the 2018 midterms.

• National Events and the Media: the President can harness the power of the media to help them spread their policy and messages. Following the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama emotionally appealed to the country in the desire for gun controls. 9/11

The Informal Powers are Most Important (No)

• The Role as Head of Government: head of the executive branch. In charge of policy-making. Article III, Section 1. Can utilise EXOP, such as FEMA. (3000 appointments to federal posts, to ‘serve at the president’s pleasure)

• Role as Head of State: Symbolic representation and fostering national unity. As Head of State, the President represents the country on the global stage during state visits and diplomatic ceremonies. National commemorations and speeches. (President Joe Biden visited the site of the Tulsa Race Massacre on its 100th anniversary in June 2021) International diplomacy and shaping foreign policy (Biden G7 summit 2021)

• Informal Powers are Contingent: the informal powers usually depend on the individual charisma of the President. Trump’s aggressive style of leadership alienated many democrats and removed the potential for bipartisan work, making him less effective. (Especially weakening his effectiveness due to January 6)

Electoral Mandate (Yes)

• Legitimacy: significant legitimate authority. Substantial margins - strengthens their ability to make shape policy and make executive decisions. (Biden’s electoral win of 306 votes to trumps 232 - winning the popular vote by over 7 million votes - American Jobs Plan)

• Influences Legislative Co-operation: sway members of congress as the president has legitimacy. (2008, Obama 365 electoral votes and carrying a wave of optimism and hope. (Saw Obama pass the Affordable Care Act with his large majority in the House and Senate)

• Public Opinion: a president with a large electoral win receives much more positive attention from the public. (Bush’s failure to win the popular vote in 2000 saw many disillusioned with his institution - making him considerably weaker)

Electoral Mandate (No)

• Executive Orders: have allowed the US President to bypass congressional checks. Obama’s executive orders for 2014 Immigration DACA.

• Powers of Persuasion and Signing Statements: use their position to attract media and congressional attention. President Obama had a conciliatory, American Health Care Act in March 2017, Trump threatened their removal in the 2018 midterms.

• National Events and the Media: the President can harness the power of the media to help them spread their policy and messages. Following the Sandy Hook shooting, Obama emotionally appealed to the country in the desire for gun controls. 9/11

Power of Persuasion (Yes)

• Legislative Success: effective communication persuades members of Congress, helps the president rally support for their policy proposals. (American Rescue Plan Act in 2021 - Biden’s lobbying despite a divided Congress, through powerful speeches)

• Public: Through effective communication strategies, presidents can mobilize public support for their agenda, sway public opinion on contentious issues, and set the national narrative. (Affordable Care Act - Obama presented American’s with hope, which persuaded many members of Congress to vote for his legislation)

• Diplomacy: the ability to effectively communicate and persuade foreign leaders and governments can help build alliances, resolve conflicts, and advance American interests on the global stage. (Obama’s personal persuasion saw the success of the Paris Agreement)

Powers of Persuasion (No)

• Informal Powers are Contingent: the informal powers usually depend on the individual charisma of the President. Trump’s aggressive style of leadership alienated many democrats and removed the potential for bipartisan work, making him less effective. (Especially weakening his effectiveness due to January 6)

• Executive Orders: have allowed the US President to bypass congressional checks. Obama’s executive orders for 2014 Immigration DACA.

• Electoral Mandate: Influences Legislative Co-operation, swaying members of congress as the president has legitimacy. (2008, Obama 365 electoral votes and carrying a wave of optimism and hope. (Saw Obama pass the Affordable Care Act with his large majority in the House and Senate)

Executive Orders (Yes)

• Swift Policy Implementation: executive orders do not require congressional approval. With a deeply divided congress, gridlock regularly occurs - president bypass congressional checks. (Biden's executive order on climate change shortly after getting into office - Paris agreement)

• Remedy Midterm Failures: after midterm elections, the president is often much weaker in legislative effectiveness. Such as Trump’s loss of both houses in the 2018 midterms. Executive orders alleviate the inaction and allow the president to be effective. (Obama’s immigration executive orders in 2014)

• President’s Priorities: executive orders allow the president to establish legislation that suit their legislative priorities. Shape narrative of their presidency. (Trump's executive order to implement the "zero tolerance" policy on immigration and family separations at the US-Mexico border illustrates how executive orders can reflect a president's policy priorities)

Executive Orders (No)

• Overturned: Congress, with 2/3 support, can overturn presidential executive orders. They can also be challenged in court (2006 - Bush’s one line veto item) Stops the durability and long-term impact of executive orders. (Partially overturned Trump’s travel ban)

• Public Perception: executive orders are perceived as undemocratic, causing public resistance. Many were disillusioned from Trump following his consistent use of executive orders, particularly when entering office. (220 executive orders)

• Lack of Enforcement: unlike congressional legislation, executive orders lack full legal standing and rely on cooperation and compliance of the executive branch. Derived from the president’s interpretation of law. The court’s ruling on Biden’s revoking of the Keystone XL piping.

National Events (Yes)

• Rally Public Support and Authority: the public look to the president for leadership and guidance. The president's ability to effectively respond to and manage these events can garner public trust and support, solidifying their authority and influence. (9/11 President George W. Bush's approval ratings soared)

• Presidential Action: after national events, the president is given the platform to make large sweeping reforms. A sense of urgency and demand for presidential action. (Sandy Hook shooting saw President Obama call for collective effort on gun control - economic reforms after 2008 financial crash)

• Presidential Visibility: the media coverage and public scrutiny focused on the president during these times increase their platform and reach (Covid-19 pandemic shifted a lot attention on President Trump)

National Events (No)

• Ineffective Policy: national events take up a lot of the president’s time, which restricts them from delivering their desired policy platform. (The war on terror for Bush limited his ability to push his economic and social policy)

• Weaken Presidential Power: if the president responds poorly to a national event, public opinion will shift against them. (Katrina 2005 and President Bush)

• Media Attention: focus of media on the president can ultimately restrict their power. During the Covid-19 pandemic, Trump was often portrayed as a joke, such as his references to injecting anti-bac.

Imperial Presidency (Yes)

• Executive Orders: Immigration particularly, with Obama in 2014. Bypass congressional checks.

• Signing Statements: a statement written and signed by the president at the same time as signing legislation. May state they will not enforce certain parts. Almost a line-veto item. (Signing statements surrounding Guantanamo)

• Executive Agreements: piece of constitutional magic conjured up by the president in making agreements with other countries without senate ratification. Achieve foreign policy goals. (Obama’s Iran deal, lifting embargoes)

Imperial Presidency (3)

• Executive Orders: can be overturned with 2/3 of congressional support and be removed by the supreme court. (Trump’s immigration executive order in 2017)

• Signing Statements: can issue words but may find it difficult to actually bring about change. Supreme Court will force the president to follow intentions of congressional law. (Drone strikes to kill US citizens even though signing a law to allow it)

• Executive Agreements: are not legally binding and can often be ignored by future presidents. (2015 Senators wrote saying they would not recognize the Iran deal.

Foreign Policy (Yes)

• Constitutional: gives the president significant foreign policy - overcoming congressional checks. Specifically in military action, the president dominates (Libya 2011). Head of state - executive agreements, such as Iran deal.

• Political: a national mandate is arguably best placed to make decisions for the whole of the US. Public look to the president for foreign policy rather than congress. (Boehner’s support for overthrowing of Colonel Gaddafi)

• Practical: the emergence of technology has increased the president’s action in foreign policy, as war is now quicker. The rise of EXOP - the national security council. (Many voted for Bush’s invasion of Iraq)

Foreign Policy (No)

• Constitutional: Congress holds a number of powers to restrict the president. Constitution gives congress the ability to declare war. (2003, Bush asked for approval from Congress to start an intervention in Iraq) Ratify treaties (Clinton on testing nuclear weapons failed)

• Political: an elected body, congress believes its their role to determine US policy. (2006 - Iraq war saw major intervention from Nancy Pelosi who attempted to create a timeline for troop withdrawal)

• Practical: The president cannot claim the need for speed and secrecy in all cases. Congress has its own expertise in foreign policy which may undermine the president. Close congressional sessions allow for committees to receive information and challenge executive action.

Supreme Court is Independent (Yes)

• Life Tenure: the life tenure of the justices ensure that they are not beholden to reelection or any higher body. Stops them voting on executive influence or short-term political considerations. (RBG served up until her death)

• Checks and Balances: Supreme Court is beholden to the constitution and through judicial review they can overturn unconstitutional laws. 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges - struck down state bans on same-sex marriage, granting marriage equality nationwide.

• Diversity: Judges have been seen to come from a range of backgrounds. Kentanji Brown-Jackson. Justice Barrett's appointment added to the range of ideological perspectives on the court.

Supreme Court is Independent (No)

• Appointment Process: incredibly politicised, in recent years. Coney-Barret was a conservative. Failure of Merick Garland and Robert Bork. They are beholden to staunch ideological views. (Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 were highly contentious and marked by strong partisan divisions)

• Ideology: strong, staunch ideological views. This sees predictable results. The 5-4 decision in the case of Shelby County v. Holder in 2013, which struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act.

• Public Opinion: The court relies on public acceptance and respect to maintain its authority. If the court's decisions are perceived as consistently out of step with public sentiment or if it becomes increasingly polarized along political lines, its independence and legitimacy may come into question.

Supreme Court is effective Check on Congress (Yes)

• Judicial Review and Constitutional Interpretation: National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate but limited Congress's power under the Commerce Clause. The ruling demonstrated the court's ability to review and shape congressional legislation.

• Individual Rights: The US Supreme Court plays a vital role in safeguarding individual rights by reviewing and striking down laws that infringe upon constitutionally protected liberties. Through its decisions, the court can prevent Congress from passing laws that violate fundamental rights and freedoms. (Obergefell vs Hodges)

• Independence: The independence of the US Supreme Court allows it to serve as an impartial and objective check on Congress. Justices are appointed for life and are expected to make decisions based on legal principles rather than political considerations. (Trump vs Hawaii upheld despite congressional outrage)

Supreme Court is effective check on Congress (No)

• Limited Authority: The US Supreme Court's ability to check Congress is limited in the realm of legislative matters. The court can only review laws that are brought before it through litigation, and it cannot proactively review or invalidate laws passed by Congress. (Has been able to challenge gerrymandering)

• Partisan Divide: The US Supreme Court is not immune to partisan divisions and the influence of politics. Justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, often along partisan lines. This politicization of the court's composition and confirmation process can raise concerns about the court's ability to provide an impartial and effective check on Congress. (Coney-Barrett)

• Change: The US Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution can evolve over time, which may impact its ability to consistently check Congress. Different justices may have varying interpretations of constitutional provisions, leading to changing legal standards and outcomes. This fluidity in interpretation can limit the court's effectiveness as a consistent check on Congress. (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010), which allowed unlimited corporate spending in elections, was a highly controversial ruling)

Appointment Process (Yes)

• Independence: the life appointment ensures the separation of powers and checks and balances. Justices are under no obligation to any one political institution or public opinion.

• Judicial Ability: rely on a full senate vote, they are vetted for their ability to operate as a justice on the highest court in the US. (7/9 judges have worked in US circuit courts - Harriet Meyers withdrew application due to heavy senate scrutiny)

• Personal Suitability: no historical concerns or character flaws. Sonia Sotomayor was question by members of the senate who were concerned about gender and racial bias. (Douglas Ginsburg after marijuana use)

Appointment Process (No)

• Politicised nomination: president’s own ideology influences nomination. Judges are described as liberal or conservative. Influences originalist or living constitution.

• Ratification politicised: acting in a partisan manner. The Bork rejection was seen as a reaction to his political inclination rather than ability. Same with the rejection of Merrick Garland.

• Ineffective: nominees tend to give vague testimonials due to fear of being ousted. Bork’s failure due to comments on Roe v Wade. Gorsuch refused to give detail on potential cases.

There is Judicial Activism (Yes)

• Expanding Rights Protection: the court defies constitutional guidelines and offers protection for unmentioned groups. (Obergefell vs Hodges 2015)

• Challenging Legislative Action: By striking down laws or executive actions that are deemed unconstitutional, the court actively shapes public policy and limits the power of the legislative branch. (National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), the Supreme Court upheld the individual mandate of the Affordable Care Act while placing limits on Congress's power under the Commerce Clause.)

• Ideological Split: implies judicial activism as judges have a specific ideological allegiance.

There is Judicial Activism (No)

• Precedent and Institutional Constraints: Justices often rely on established legal principles and prior court decisions as guiding factors in their interpretations. (South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom (2021), the Supreme Court upheld California's COVID-19 restrictions on religious gatherings)

• Adherence to the Constitution: originalist views have dominated since the implementation of a majority republican court. Roe v Wade’s overturning suggests a return to originalism.

• Narrow and Incremental Decisions: In Fulton v. City of Philadelphia (2021), the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Catholic foster care agency but on narrow grounds, avoiding a broader decision on religious exemptions and LGBTQ+ rights.

Supreme Court has expanded Individual Rights (Yes)

• Protecting LGBTQ+ Rights: the passing of Obergefell vs Hodges ensured marriage equality for gay and lesbian couples.

• Racial Equality: Brown vs Board of Education, Shelly vs Kraemer (fair housing covenants). As well as the diverse representation through the court.

• Reproductive Rights: Roe V Wade and Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016) removed burdens to women about their own bodies.

Supreme Court has expanded Individual Rights (No)

• Reproductive Rights: Dobbs vs Jackson - 6-3

• The Second Amendment: In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for self-defense within the home. Stopped states regulating gun controls themselves.

• Voting Rights: In Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, which required certain states with a history of discrimination to seek federal approval before changing their voting laws. This decision has been seen as weakening voting protections, particularly for marginalized communities.

Racial Campaigns have been Effective (Yes)

• Voting Rights: literacy tests heavily restricted the black population. Felony voting restrictions. Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended separate facilities and saw the Voting Rights Act of 1965. (Obama saw to the reelection through Hispanic groups 67-71%)

• Representation: representation in congress has seen to the advancement of minority rights. (115th congress had the highest level of minority representation ever) - The Black Caucus.

• Affirmative Action: introduced by President Kennedy. Provided benefits to groups that had been historically discriminated against. Closed gaps in education, helps remove de facto segregation, decline in racial minority enrolment in top colleges.

Racial Campaigns have been Effective (No)

• Voting Rights: Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, which required certain states with a history of discrimination to seek federal approval before changing their voting laws. This decision has been seen as weakening voting protections, particularly for marginalized communities.

• Representation: Black and Hispanic groups are still majorly unrepresented. (Currently, 25 percent of Congress are people of color, compared to 40 percent of the US. Similarly, 28 percent of lawmakers are women, while 51 percent of the population is)

• Affirmative Action: court cases have undermined the effectiveness of Affirmative Action. (University of California v Bakke 1978 - no quotas, Schuette v Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action 2014 - rejected a challenge to Michigan’s rights to end affirmative)

Affirmative Action (Yes)

• It was needed to improve the socio-economic status of minorities. It’s helped close the gaps in education and income between racial groups. (The "Rooney Rule" in the National Football League (NFL) requires teams to interview minority candidates for head coaching and senior football operation positions)

• It helps reduce racist attitudes by helping overcome de facto segregation. Greater interaction between racial groups can overcome prejudice. (The University of Texas at Austin's affirmative action policy, upheld by the Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2016), aimed to promote diversity in its undergraduate admissions)

• It works. Where AA has been ended, there’s been a decline in racial minority enrolment in top colleges. (In Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), the Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's affirmative action policy, stating that it served a compelling interest in promoting diversity.)

Affirmative Action (No)

• It’s a form of racial discrimination: a cause of racism not a solution for it. It’s unconstitutional as it denies the 14th amendment. (Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin (2016), the Supreme Court considered the argument that the university's affirmative action policy resulted in the denial of admission to a white applicant)

• It has the wrong focus: on college education jobs not on early years. By the time kids group up their life chances have already been damaged by poor education and social surroundings.

• AA has not worked: racial inequality still exists today. Despite AA, there has been a major gap between racial groups in top colleges.

Supreme Court Power in Rights (Yes)

• Judicial Review: can overturn any other institution if it views actions as unconstitutional. Based on idea of constitutional sovereignty. Especially powerful if applying Judicial Activism.

• Interpretation: Constitution is vague, giving justices great latitude in applying personal views. More detailed constitution would undermine their power. Vagueness magnifies power of judicial review. Obergefell.

• Independence: Court protected from external pressure, hard to overturn decisions.

Supreme Court in Rights (No)

• Wording: Limited to the wording of the constitution. Limits extent to which justices can interpret even ambiguous parts - judicial restraint.

• Limited Jurisdiction: can only deal with constitutional issues, weaker than other branches in influencing people’s daily lives. Does not deal with annual budget.

• External Pressure: ideology and influenced by pressure groups and public opinion.

Supreme Court is Judicial (Yes)

• Have to be based in the Constitution: majority opinions must explain how the Court has applied the Constitution to a specific case. (Justice Kennedy indicated that he did not support flag burning but did not see the constitutional basis for Flag Protection Bill)

• Constitution Protects from Political: allows them to maintain their neutrality free from political interference. (US v Nixon, three Nixon appointed judges ruled against him. Liberal justice Sotomayor declined to comment on Donald Trump.

• Confined: they can only make law on constitutional issues, not general day-to-day things. The cases have to be brought to them. The budget is without any of the Supreme Court influence.

Supreme Court is Judicial (No)

• Judges apply own values: the vagueness of the constitution exacerbates judicial bias. Decline of 9-0. The Roberts court repeatedly delivers 5-4 verdicts. (Obergefell case) Justice Marshall on Civil Rights.

• Politicians may attack rulings: President Obama in 2010 attacked the Citizens United ruling with justices of the supreme court in front of him. Justice Alito mouthed the words ‘not true’. Biden on Dobbs vs Jackson.

• The Appointment: highly politicised.

Supreme Court is Imperial Judiciary (Yes)

• JUDICIAL REVIEW: Can overturn any other institution if it views actions and unconstitutional - DC V Heller, stopped ban of Handguns. Can overturn elected bodies, such as Congress and the President. Judicial Activism - Roe v Wade, win for Democrats.

• INTERPRETATION: Constitution is vague, giving justices power in applying personal views - No mention of Gay Marriage, yet Obergefell passed in 2015. Vagueness magnifies power of judicial review.

• INDEPENDENCE: Court is protected by external pressure - ignored threats from Donald Trump after overturned legislation. Judicial review and interpretation - can read constitution their way. Hard to overturn due to the amendment process.

Supreme Court is Imperial Judiciary (No)

• WORDING OF THE CONSTITUTION: Court is limited to the constitution’s wording. This limits how much justices can interpret ambiguous parts.

• LIMITED JURISTICTION: Can only deal with constitutional issues. Weaker than other branches in that they cannot control policy or influence daily lives. (Foreign Policy Decisions, Annual Budget)

• EXTERNAL PRESSURE: Subject to external influence or restraint. Justices are influenced by public opinions or pressure groups. (NAACP sponsored Brown V Board of Education) Can be overturned by Constitutional Amendment.

Constitution Allows Supreme Court Protection (Yes)

• Particular rights are directly mentioned in the Supreme Court. These rights are enshrined in the constitution and are not up for debate. Only overturned by the amendment process. Can be seen through 1st Amendment right of Free Speech and the defeat of Snyder v Phelps (hate speech case).

• The vagueness of the supreme court gives a huge amount of personal control to justices. Justices can use their own view of the constitution (living) to put forward new rights. Obergefell v Hodges - 2015 gay marriage.

• The Bill of Rights in the constitution establishes a clear set of rights that the Supreme Court has to enforce. Seen in 2014, through Riley V California, where the 4th amendment was cited to stop the unwarranted seizure of digital devices.

Constitution Allows Protection of Rights (No)

• The constitution’s vagueness has led to the failure to protect many civil liberties. The current conservative court has rejected rights due to originalist views. The overturning of Roe V Wade. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization.

• The Supreme Court cannot initiate cases so have left many civil liberties left off. The failure for the Equal Rights Amendment to be added to the constitution is an example of where SC initiation would help.

• The ideological composition of the supreme court also sees failure in advance for Civil Rights. The current 2023 composition of the court, and stacking by Donald Trump has left the court as conservative biased. Conservatives have historically been hesitant to support new civil rights legislation, such as the striking down of Shelby County v Holder.

The Electoral College is Fit for Purpose (Yes)

• Balancing Regional INTERESTS: presidential candidates must appeal to a broad range of regional interests and not solely focus on densely populated areas. This system prevents candidates from exclusively catering to the interests of urban centers and encourages them to campaign in a more geographically diverse manner. (Trump's success Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, highlighted the significance of appealing to voters in different regions)

• Small States: Wyoming, the least populous state in the US, has a population of around 580,000 and three electoral votes. Without the Electoral College, the influence of such small states might be diminished.

• Clearness and Lack of Fraud: The Electoral College system contributes to stability in the presidential election process by minimizing the likelihood of election fraud and legal challenges. Each state manages its own electoral procedures, which allows for more focused attention and safeguards against widespread fraud or disputes that could arise in a direct popular vote system.

The Electoral College is Fit for Purpose (No)

• Popular Vote: The Electoral College can lead to a discrepancy between the popular vote and the election outcome, resulting in a president who did not receive the most votes nationwide. This discrepancy undermines the principle of "one person, one vote" and can create a perception of an undemocratic electoral system. Bush, Trump.

• Swing States: Florida, Ohio, and Pennsylvania have often received extensive campaign visits, advertising, and resources during presidential elections. Critics argue that this disproportionately high focus on a few key states can neglect the priorities and voices of citizens residing in states that are considered safe or non-competitive.

• Discouraging: he Electoral College may discourage voter turnout, particularly in states that are heavily skewed towards one political party. In safe "red" or "blue" states, where the outcome is largely predictable, some argue that citizens may feel their votes are less impactful and, as a result, choose not to participate in the election process. Texas.

Advantages of Primary / Caucus Process

• Electability/Proven Candidates: tests ability to overcome deficiencies, personal issues, proven candidates more likely to win, tests ability to raise funds.

• Raises Key Issues for Debate: successful policies of losing candidates developed by winner. Competition. Where key politicians reside on issues.

• Voter Choice: Open primary debates, choice of social characteristics, choice of competition ideologies.

Disadvantages of Primary / Caucus Process

• Timing – early states voting can influence late states

• Internal divides in parties – reduce popularity of winning candidates / negative campaigning within party

• Specific procedures – different rules for different states

Incumbency Guarantees Win (Yes)

• Executive Control and Experience: Presidents can bring benefits to key groups and swing states or make popular policy shifts. Obama claimed major success with the killing of Osama Bin Laden. In office, rewarded key voting blocs such as Hispanics.

• Name Recognition and Media: Rose garden strategy, 2012 Speech in Benghazi. Commander in chief. Lack of primary challenge.

• Electoral Resources: proven track record and insane amounts of funding. Outspends.

Incumbency Guarantees Win (No)

• Presidents receive blame when things go wrong. Obama had to fight accusations of failure due to healthcare reforms. Failure during Covid-19 killed Trump.

• Money does not equate success - Jeb Bush recorded record funding in the 2016 primaries and failed. Obama raised more money because he was more popular.

• Others can exploit the media. Biden’s attacks on Trump. 1992 republican challenge to George H.W Bush.

Reform for US Money

• Reducing Influence of Wealthy Voters: By implementing stricter campaign finance regulations, such as contribution limits or public financing options, the influence of big money in politics can be curbed, allowing for a more equitable representation of diverse voices. (The Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) Supreme Court decision allowed corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money)

• By reducing the reliance on large campaign contributions, candidates with less access to financial resources can compete more effectively, ensuring that elections are not dominated by those with substantial financial backing. (2020 Democratic primary, candidates like Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren focused on small-dollar donations and grassroots fundraising efforts to compete against opponents who had larger financial resources.)

• Improved transparency ensures that voters have access to information about the financial interests behind political campaigns, allowing them to make more informed decisions and hold candidates accountable. (Sheldon Adelson, billionaire casino magnate - ‘dark money)

Reforms for US Money (No)

• Opponents argue that campaign finance reform may infringe upon the First Amendment rights of individuals and organizations to engage in political speech and expression. They contend that limiting campaign contributions or imposing restrictions on spending may restrict the ability of citizens to support candidates or causes they believe in.

• Government Overreach: Opponents of campaign finance reform express concerns about government overreach and intrusion into the political process. They argue that increased regulations and restrictions on campaign funding may empower the government to unduly influence the electoral process and stifle free and open political discourse.

• Some argue that campaign finance reform may not effectively address issues of corruption and undue influence in politics. They contend that determined individuals or groups can find alternative avenues to influence elections and policy outcomes, rendering strict regulations on campaign funding ineffective in curbing corruption.

Campaign Finance is the most significant factor in determining the outcome of Congressional Elections (Yes)

• Advantage of wealth can outrun other candidates. Regardless of who may be better / experienced / beneficial. Better funded campaigns can use advertising to influence. Wisconsin received 45,000 airings of political ads during the 2022 mid-term elections.

• Grass-roots campaign only tend to reach small amounts of people, whereas heavily funded campaigns can reach farther and organise more events. Democrat Nancy Pelosi raised $25m which made her unbeatable to any other candidate.

• Significant PAC support. This can allow for greater polling and voter analysis. Big companies can sponsor anonymously. $179m corporate PAC support.

Campaign Finance is the most significant factor in determining the outcome of Congressional Elections (No)

• There's increasing examples of candidates winning on lesser funds/spending - grassroots campaigns.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez beat the highly-funded Joseph Crowley. In reality, it was AOC’s actual policies that mattered.

• The emergence of grass-roots campaigns, particularly by the democrats has proved money is often not important. Its about personality and frequent contact with voters.

Grassroots campaigner Raphael Warnock won against highly-funded Herschel Walker in Georgia run-off.

• Corporate money often isolates candidates.

A candidate’s personality and ability to go door-to-door has been effective in the highly-funded US election climate of recent years.

Main factor affecting voting behavior in Congress are the Divisions within and between Political Parties (Yes)

• Congresspeople are often expected to vote along party lines. There is a sense of belonging within a party.

No Republicans voted for Obama’s stimulus budget in 2009 according to partisanship.

• Team Competition - there is an extreme desire to purely vote against the opposite party in order to defeat them. Messages are driven hard.

Mitch McConnell voted against the Respect for Marriage Act despite it going against his own interests. (Has Asian Wife).

• Party leaders do have tools of patronage. They can make promises of committee chairmanships or memberships to induce politicians.

Marjorie Taylor Greene was awarded a spot on the Homeland Security Committee due to her voting along with Leader McCarthy.

main factor affecting voting behavior in Congress are the Divisions within and between Political Parties (No)

• Congress are far more influenced by public opinion rather than party leadership. They represent the constituency and have only 2 years to prove their loyalty.

11 Southern Democrats voted against Obama’s stimulus package due to the opinion of their constituencies.

• Caucuses do influence how people vote. Many are based on ideology or social characteristics, with those apart of them highly likely to vote the way of the caucus.

The Blue Dog Democrats regularly vote with their conservative leanings. The Black Caucus often vote on pro-black rights.

• Congressional whips are significantly weak. There is no significant ways patronage can be achieved, which often leaves the leader of the house a figurehead.

Suggest that Interest Groups and Professional Lobbyists can entice congresspersons far more than any whip or patronage. 2012 Newton shootings, Obama was blocked due to convincing from the NRA.

Interest Groups Enhance Democracy (Yes)

• Participation: Interests groups get actively involved in US politics and increase their influence over politicians. Many citizens are fed up of the two-party system, pressure groups provide supplementary representation. (AFL-CIO 2000 volunteers delivering anti-Trump messages)

• Checks on the Government: stops government self-interest and maximizes the wishes of the people. American Civil Liberties Union specialize in rights protection. The NAACP ensure voting rights.

• Representation: represents groups that do not see strong congressional or executive representation.

Interest Groups Enhance Democracy (No)

• Violent and Illegal Activity: some groups use violence and break the law as part of their campaign. Restrict the rights of others. NAACP sit-ins in senior republican offices disrupted the representative function.

• Restriction of Elected Government: have no elected mandates, yet they attempt to stop politicians making decisions.. AARP (retired persons) lined up to block the passing of Obama’s ACA.

• Inequality of Representation: interests groups contribute to the over-representation of minority groups and the marginalization of other groups. Professional lobbyists and the revolving door create closed network of decision-making. NRA.

Senate More Powerful (Yes)

1. Confirmation of Supreme Court Justices: The Senate has the exclusive power to confirm Supreme Court justices nominated by the President. This authority allows the Senate to shape the ideological composition of the Court and influence its decisions for decades. For example, in 2020, the Senate's confirmation of Justice Amy Coney Barrett solidified a conservative majority on the Court, impacting future rulings on critical issues such as abortion rights and healthcare.

2. Treaty Ratification: The Senate possesses the power to ratify international treaties negotiated by the President. This authority enables the Senate to shape U.S. foreign policy and international relations. For instance, in 2015, the Senate played a significant role in the Iran nuclear deal when it required a two-thirds majority to approve or reject the agreement, illustrating the Senate's influence over critical international matters.

3. Impeachment Trials: The Senate has the sole power to conduct impeachment trials, which can result in the removal of a President, Vice President, or other federal officials. This power gives the Senate the ability to hold high-ranking officials accountable for their actions. Trump 2020/2021.

Senate More Powerful (No)

• Origination of Revenue Bills: The Constitution grants the House of Representatives the exclusive authority to initiate revenue bills, which include tax and spending legislation. This power gives the House greater influence over fiscal policy and budgetary matters. For example, in 2017, the House played a crucial role in the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.

• Size and Proportional Representation: The House of Representatives has 435 voting members, making it larger than the Senate's 100 members. This larger size gives the House a more proportional representation of the American population, allowing it to reflect the diversity and needs of the nation more accurately.

• Impeachment Proceedings: This authority gives the House a significant role in holding officials accountable for wrongdoing. For instance, the House's impeachment of President Trump in 2019 and 2021 highlighted the House's power to launch inquiries and bring charges against high-ranking officials, setting the stage for Senate trials.