(12) differences between commons and HOR

Question 1

commons dominance

Answer 1

-UK, because of its democratic mandate and the lords lack thereof, commons dominates (salisbury convention, parliament acts 1911&49) e.g. blair government’s use of parliament act 1949 to overrule lords to bring in hunting act 2004
-US, co-equal to senate, can be vetoed and to pass bills it must reconcile with senate e.g. HOR passed Build Back Better Bill but it was ultimately rejected by the senate
-cultural, US emphasises limited government (liberal), UK emphasises strong central government (conservative)

Question 2

commons can remove executive

Answer 2

-UK, via a vote of confidence, the commons can remove the sitting PM from office e.g. callaghan in 1979
-US, the house can only impeach the president, the trial is left up to the senate e.g. trump was impeached twice but remained in office due to two acquittals by the senate
-structural, US decentralises power through both institutions, UK only by commons

Question 3

commons ratifies treaties

Answer 3

-UK, commons must ratify treaties as confirmed by the article 50/miller case e.g. European Withdrawal Act 2020 was ratified by the commons
-US, the senate exclusively ratifies treaties, the states not the people ratify treaties e.g. the house was not consulted on the obama south korea trade treaty
-cultural, US is relatively anti-democratic to treaties (liberal), as the UK prefers parliamentary sovereignty, the people’s consent matters