Evaluate the view that the House of Representatives and the Senate do not fulfil their legislative and representative functions adequately

Paragraph 1: Legislative Function – Weaker Counterargument First

Weaker counterargument:

Some argue that Congress still effectively passes legislation and responds to the needs of the people.

Explanation:

Despite criticisms of gridlock, recent examples show that Congress can enact major reforms and respond to public demand when bipartisan support is present.

Evidence:

  • TAKE IT DOWN Act (2025): A rare bipartisan initiative addressing modern social issues (non-consensual imagery).

  • Trade Review Act (2025): Asserts congressional authority over tariffs, showing legislative proactiveness.

  • “Big, Beautiful Bill” (2025): Though narrowly passed (215–214), it proves Congress can pass significant packages when motivated.

Stronger argument:

However, these successes are the exception, not the rule—overall, Congress fails to fulfil its legislative role effectively due to gridlock and polarization.

Explanation:

Persistent party polarization, especially post-1980s, has caused legislative stagnation. Many bills die in committee or are blocked by party leadership.

Evidence:

  • Legislative success rate only ~3%.

  • Gridlock worsened by House Rules Committee control and Senate filibuster.

  • Examples: Key bipartisan priorities often stall (e.g., immigration reform, voting rights bills).

  • War Powers Act (1973) often bypassed by presidents—e.g., Trump claiming he could notify Congress via Twitter.

Paragraph 2: Representative Function – Weaker Counterargument First

Weaker counterargument:

It’s argued that Congress is becoming more representative and diverse, better reflecting the American populace.

Explanation:

Recent Congresses have shown improvements in gender, racial, and age diversity, challenging the traditional “Old, Pale, Male” stereotype.

Evidence:

  • 118th Congress: Most diverse yet; more women, people of color, and younger members.

  • Separate electoral cycles allow more frequent voter engagement and responsive representation.

  • High incumbent re-election rates (94.5% House, 100% Senate) suggest voter satisfaction.

Stronger argument:

Despite surface-level diversity, real representative function is undermined by structural issues and electoral inequalities.

Explanation:

Gerrymandering, incumbency advantages, and pork-barrel politics mean that members serve party or interest groups more than constituents.

Evidence:

  • High re-election rates often result from unfair advantages, not performance.

  • Pork-barrel spending rewards loyal districts rather than serving national needs.

  • House gerrymandering distorts representation—e.g., districts with lopsided party majorities reduce competitive elections.

Paragraph 3: Oversight Function (esp. Judiciary) – Weaker Counterargument First

Weaker counterargument:

Congress does have oversight powers and has used them in high-profile cases.

Explanation:

High-visibility impeachment trials and Judiciary Committee hearings demonstrate Congress exercising its oversight authority.

Evidence:

  • Trump impeachments: Congress issued subpoenas, including to FBI director James Comey.

  • Oversight of Supreme Court nominations (e.g., Amy Coney Barrett 2020).

  • Biden’s Supreme Court commission proposal implies legislative attention to judicial structure.

Stronger argument:

However, Congress’s actual power to check the judiciary or executive is minimal and largely ineffective.

Explanation:

Constitutional hurdles and partisan politics limit Congress's ability to reform or restrain the Supreme Court, reducing accountability.

Evidence:

  • Merrick Garland (2016): Senate refused to consider Obama’s nominee, politicizing appointments.

  • Supreme Court activism (e.g., Obergefell v. Hodges, US v. Windsor) went unchecked.

  • Changing Court size or amending Constitution practically impossible.

  • Impeachment of justices almost never happens due to political cost.