Changing significance of parties in Congress Flashcards
What are the arguments that parties still matter in Congress
- The two parties still control the white house
- state officials up are all largely aligned with parties
- umbrella of allegiance
- party polarisation
- centralisation of power by leadership
- nationalisation of campaigns
What are the arguments that parties no longer matter in congress?
- emergence of movements e.g. Tea Party movement
- big tents parties with many factions that don’t agree
- funding now comes from major donors over parties
- lack of incentives to control politicians
- change of communication e.g. TV interviews over rallies
What are the main differences between the US and UK in terms of legislation?
- levels of party discipline
- number of bills introduced (many more in US)
- number of bills passed (many more in UK)
- Many individual members introduce legislation in Congress but few in Parliament
- Standing committees are permanent and specialist in the US but not in the UK
- does a government programme exist in legislation?
- Do the two chambers have equal power?
- President veto v royal assent is purely formal
- bills considered in houses at the same time or one after the other?
What are the structural differences between Congress and Parliament?
Congress is seen as a policy making legislature whereas Parliament is a policy influencing legislature - legislation simply passes through Parliament
One has separation of powers and one has fusion
Elections - separate for the US President
In Congress President has to persuade them to pass legislation whereas in Parliament the executive controls the legislative timetable
Executives survival is dependent on Parliament so MPs are far more loyal than congressmen
In the UK, the PM usually has a majority whereas there can be divided government in the US
How is oversight different between the two chambers?
The main differences come from the separation of powers:
- US exec survives regardless of Congress whereas US exec are dependent on them e.g. through votes of no confidence
- Senate’s power to confirm appointments, ratify treaties and impeachment is unknown in the UK
- No equivalent of PMQs in the US because the exec cannot be questioned in Congress
- President can only be questioned in congressional committees but this rarely happens given they are techniquly not answerable to Congress but the people who elected them
Which power of oversight is increasingly similar between the two legislatures?
The power to declare war
Oversight by select committees in HOC and standing committees in congress
How does the function of representation vary in the UK and US?
- Congress are more responsive to constituents - because of primaries, 2 year terms in HOR and a lack of sticks and carrots - unlike Parliament who are responsive to the party
- gerrymandering
- people have more representatives in the US - 3 - than in the UK
- More elections in the US meaning greater representation: president HOR and HOL
Similarities of representation?
Both use FPTP
Increasing use of pressure groups
What are the differences between the HOL and Senate?
- One is directly elected one is appointed. This means one has continuity whereas the other is constantly changing
- One directly represents constituents whereas the other represents the whole country
- One is somewhat superior to the other house whereas one is inferior
- one has experts and bishops whereas one has professional politicians
- HOL lacks a democratic mandate
- Senate has a larger number of checks over the executive
- Senate sees more partisanship and gridlock
What are the differences between the HOC and Reps?
One is more powerful whereas one is somewhat inferior
One contains the executive
One has PMQs and power of backbenchers
One has sticks and carrots
What is one similarity between HOL and Senate? How does this still create differentiation?
Both contain members who previously sat in the other chamber. However, they progress for different reasons: one is promotion whereas another is seen as retirement
How can we apply the rational approach to Congress?
MPs seek parties approval for promotion whereas Congressmen seek approval of constituents for frequent re-election
MPs have far more incentive to back the PM than congressmen do. This is why the Lords inflicts more defeats than the Commons
How can we apply the cultural theory to Congress?
MPs are far less polarised than those of the US
Both are adversarial
The senate has a more powerful role than the HOL which was intentional because Founding Fathers wanted more checks on the lower chamber
Large level of factions within each party. This is true when comparing moderate versus conservative Republicans and those in the Conservatives who want to remain or leave
What’s an example of a bill which couldn’t be passed because of gridlock between the two houses?
The Build Back Better Act was a key part of Biden’s legislative programme. It was passed by the House late 2021 who had a Republican majority but was unable to get through the Senate despite it also being a Democrat Majority (very narrow majority). Sinema and Manchin voted against it along with all Republicans meaning it couldn’t pass. Some of the reforms were passed in the Inflation Reduction Act 2022 but this was in a very watered down form
