1.4 debates around the US constitution Flashcards
the extent of democracy within the US constitution
how were the founding fathers not advocates for pure democracy?
- madison believed it would allow ‘rights of the minor party [to] become insecure’
- selfish: they were privieged, educated, white men, who enslaved and were very rich
the constitution they produced does not always reflect 21st century understandings of democracy
the extent of democracy within the US constitution
challenges to democracy in the constitution
5 points
- the electoral college
- an originally appointed senate
- equal representation for the states
- the three fifths compromise
- the role of supermajorities
the extent of democracy within the US constitution
the electoral college
challenges to democracy in the constitution
- indirectly electing the president means direct influence of public is limited
- electors have the final choice whether to go through with what they have been voted to vote for anyways
challenges to democracy in the constitution
an originally appointed senate
- while the house was to be elected, the senate was to be appointed by the state governments.
- this is especially important when considering the powers of the senate
challenges to democracy in the constitution
equal representation for the states
- two senators per state meant small states could not be ignored
- larger states are equally undervalued in the senate
challenges to democracy in the constitution
the role of supermajorites
- smaller minorities being completely ignored, or allow tyranny for the minority.
challenges to democracy in the constitution
the three fifths compromise
enslaver states were keen for elsaved people to be counted but not recognised as whole people:
- the three fifths compromise valued enslaved people as three-fifths of a person
the impact of the constitution on liberal and representative democracy
ways in which the constitution upholds LIBERAL democracy
- the bill of rights ensures individual rights are upheld.
- eg. snyder v. phelps 2011 meant the right to free speech was upheld
- the power of the supreme court protects civil rights
- they have the power to overrule both elected branches without fear of their jobs
- checks nad balances limit the government
the impact of the constitution on liberal and representative democracy
ways in which the constitution upholds REPRESENTATIVE democracy
- appropriations bills MUST begin in the house!! (the most repsonsible chmaber due to 2 year election cycle)
- hosue ensured proportionality in representation
- amendments have extended the number of voters in the USA, ensuring increasing represetation
- the senate is now elected, ensuring a greater degree of popular soverignty
- amendments to the constitution cannot be made without approvsl of the states
the impact of the constitution on liberal and representative democracy
ways in which the constitution undermines LIBERAL democracy
-
checks and balances can limit the gov to the point of it not being effectivve.. Eg. 21 government shutdowns since 1974.
-** the electoral college **undermines the principle of ‘free and fair elections’ with the loser of the popular ovte winning the presidency in the last 5 elections - minority rights have been challenged in cases such as shelby v. holder
the impact of the constitution on liberal and representative democracy
ways in which the constitution undermines REPRESENTATIVE democracy
- supreme court holds vast amounts of power to interpret the US constitution and overrule elected branches, but is unrepresentative and accountable
- the senate represents the USA by state rather than populations, so states with smaller populations are over represented
- teh requirement for a supermajority allows for tyranny of the minority.
strengths and weaknesses
strengths
4 points
- vagueness: has allowed for relevant/interpretive amendments
- codification means its hard to change, and gives clarity about the rights of US citizens
- powers of each branch are clear. Seperation, checks and balances, and the short election cycle means the government always has to work in the interests of the people it represents
- the amendment process has worked and allows for flexibility while preventing frequent change in response to short lived trends
strengths and weaknesses
weak
- vagueness has allowed broader interpretation than the founding fathers may have envisaged. specific areas - prevented adaptation, most notably in the powers of congerss.
- codificaiton has created gridlock through checks and balances, and has led to outdated aspects remaining enforced in the 21st century
- the constitution can create girdlock in the case of divided government, and a lack of scrutiny during a united government
- the amendment process is immensely difficult to achieve, preventing necessary amendments while also having allowed for mistaken amendments to be maed Eg. 18th.
postivie impact on the government
positive impacts on the government?
- clear rules and powers. Eg. although trump pledged to ‘build a wall’ he was dependent on congress for funding it, preventing him from achieving it. Eg. Biden struggled to pass Build Back Better despite having democrat controlled congress.
- short election cycle requires constituency representation. Eg. Because Biden had the lowest ever presidential poll ratings going into his first state of the union of address, members may choose to act in line with their constituents rather than their party
- compromise is ensured through checks, balances, and federalism.
- threat of the court using its power helps to produce gov policy in line with the constitution
negative impact on government
negative impact on government
- partisanship and gridlock are a result of the constitution. Eg. January 2019 happened at a time when one party controled both congress and the presidneyc. It lasted for 35 days, and cost $11b. for the economy
- obstructs function : as the supreme court decides the meaning of the constitution, it is also possible for a government policy that responds to modern problems to be ruled unconstitutional. Eg. campaign finance laws that were meant to restrict the role of a very few wealthy individuals in an election were struck down by the Supreme Court in 2010 and 2014.
- Vagueness of Article II has allowed for presidential dominance, while the specificity of article I has meant congress has struggled to interpret its power
Differences between the USA and the UK constitutions
Sources.
1.USA: Written; single document created in 1787 plus 27 subequent amendments ammounting to 7000 words. Supreme court rulings supplement these written sources with ‘interpretive amendments’
2.unwritten; conventions are commonplace, there is no constitutional requirement for a cabinet.
3.UK: written; statute law, due to soveriegnty of parliament, authortative works and EU treaties outline specifically how government works
4. unwritten; conventions, how PM is chosen, royal assent, laws passed, how parloament workls.
Differences between the USA and the UK constitutions
PRINCIPLES
- USA: founding fathers made sure to embed a limited government, speeration of powers, checks and balances, bipartisanship and federalism into the constitution
- UK: principle of fused powers; with the executive being drawn from the legislature. soveriengty resides with parliament, which limits truly effective checks and balances. Devolutuon has developed recently, but the UK remains a unitary government
Differences between the USA and the UK constitutions
SEPARATION OF POWERS
- USA: professor Neustadt has suggested it is ‘separate institutions sharing power’ rather than 3 entirely seperate branches
- UK: supreme court created in 2025 has incerasingly seperated powers in the UK, but the execvutive dominance of the legislature is still fused
Differences between the USA and the UK constitutions
CHECKS AND BALANCES
- USA: CLEAR CHECKS: well scrutinised policy, but also gridlock
- UK: questions of effectiveness of scrutiny, since executive is drawn from the major party, but minimal gridlock
Differences between the USA and the UK constitutions
PROTECTION OF RIGHTS
- USA: bill of rights and subsequent amendments provide clear and entrenched rights for citizens, and an independent and powerful Supreme Court to uphold these rights
- UK: HRA 1998 gained moral authority and is judiciable, but isnt higher law and can be repealed. Lack of sovereignty limits the protection of rights
Differences between the USA and the UK constitutions
FLEXIBILITY
- USA: the amendment process is not flexible, but has been used effectively. The interpretaive amendments of the supreme court has allowed the constitution to be modernised
- UK: lack of codification means its very flexible, but it is also open to abuse by a government with a large majority.
