Comparative: USA V UK: Flashcards
The Constitution:
Similarities between the UK and US Constitution e.g. checks and balances (use two examples)
US: The Bill of Rights guarantees fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech, as seen in the 2021 Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. case, where the Supreme Court ruled that students had the right to express themselves on social media. This decision reflects the US Constitution’s strong commitment to protecting individual rights against government interference. Similarly, the UK Constitution, through the Human Rights Act 1998, ensures protections like freedom of expression, showing a shared emphasis on individual rights.
UK: The Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights, protects rights like freedom of expression, as demonstrated in the 2019 Miller case, where the UK Supreme Court ruled against the government’s unlawful prorogation of Parliament. This case shows that the UK Constitution also prioritizes individual rights, much like the US Constitution does with its Bill of Rights. Despite the UK Constitution being uncodified, both countries ensure that fundamental freedoms are safeguarded from government overreach.
The Constitution:
Similarities between the UK and US Constitution e.g. protection of rights (use two examples)
US: The US Constitution enforces checks on the President’s power through impeachment procedures, as seen in 1998 when Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives for perjury and obstruction of justice. This mechanism ensures that the executive branch does not have unchecked power, requiring approval or oversight from Congress and the judiciary. Similarly, the UK also uses checks on the executive, albeit through different mechanisms like judicial review and Parliament’s role in scrutinizing executive actions.
UK: The UK Supreme Court can act as a check on the executive, as seen in the 2019 Miller case, where the Court ruled that the Prime Minister’s advice to prorogue Parliament was unconstitutional. In this case, the Court demonstrated its power to prevent the government from overstepping its bounds, just like the US Supreme Court has the authority to check the executive. This reflects the similar underlying principle in both constitutions of ensuring that no branch of government becomes too powerful and is held accountable.
The Constitution:
Similarities between the UK and US Constitution e.g. power being dispersed (use two examples)
US: The US Constitution establishes a federal system, allowing states like California to pass laws on issues such as marijuana legalization, even when federal law prohibits it. This decentralizes authority, giving states the power to make laws that fit their needs and values, a key feature of the US system. While UK does not have federalism, it has devolution, which gives powers to regions like Scotland, where they have control over matters such as education and health.
UK: The UK has devolution, where powers are transferred to regions like Scotland, allowing them to legislate on issues such as education and health. However, unlike the US system, the UK Parliament retains supreme authority and can override devolutionary powers, especially in reserved matters like defence and foreign policy. Despite these differences, both the US and UK share the principle of dividing power between central and regional governments, ensuring a system where local needs can be addressed while maintaining national unity.
The Constitution:
Differences between the UK and US Constitution e.g. sovereignty (use two examples)
US: In the US, sovereignty is shared between the federal government and the states. The Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution makes it clear that any powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the states, meaning the states have a degree of independence in lawmaking. This division of sovereignty is a core feature of the US Constitution and creates a federal system of government.
UK: The UK Constitution operates under the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, meaning that Parliament can make or unmake any law without being bound by previous laws. For example, Brexit was made possible by Parliament’s decision to override the UK’s membership in the European Union, illustrating Parliament’s supreme authority. This system means that the UK Parliament has the final say on all legal matters, unlike the US system, where state laws and federal laws can sometimes conflict.
DIFFERENCE: The key difference here is that in the UK, Parliament holds ultimate power, whereas in the US, sovereignty is divided between the states and the federal government.
The Constitution:
Differences between the UK and US Constitution e.g. flexibility v rigidity (use two examples)
US: The US Constitution is rigid because it requires a difficult and formal process to amend. For example, an amendment requires a two-thirds majority in Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states. This makes changing the US Constitution a highly complex process, ensuring stability but also limiting flexibility.
UK: The UK Constitution is highly flexible because it is uncodified and can evolve through changes in statute law, common law, and conventions. For example, the Human Rights Act 1998 incorporated international human rights standards into UK law without requiring a formal written constitution. This flexibility allows the UK to adapt to changing political, social, and legal circumstances without needing a complex amendment process.
DIFFERENCE: The UK Constitution can be amended more easily through ordinary laws and evolving practices, whereas the US Constitution is rigid and requires a lengthy and formal amendment process.
The Constitution:
Differences between the UK and US Constitution e.g. uncodified v codified (use two examples)
US: The US Constitution is codified, meaning it is written down in a single document that clearly outlines the structure of government, powers, and rights. For example, the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) is explicitly written into the Constitution to protect individual freedoms like freedom of speech and religion. This written form provides clarity and is fixed, with only specific formal amendments able to change it.
UK: The UK Constitution is uncodified and is not written down in one single document. Instead, it is made up of statute law, common law, conventions, and even works of authority. For example, the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty is not written in one document but is part of the country’s constitutional conventions and statutes. This system allows the UK Constitution to evolve without requiring the formal process of writing changes down.
DIFFERENCE: The US Constitution is codified and remains fixed unless amended, providing clear written rules, while the UK Constitution is flexible and unwritten, shaped by laws and traditions that can evolve over time.
Congress:
Similarities between UK Parliament and US Congress? e.g. Taxation and spending (use two examples)
UK Parliament: The UK House of Commons holds the primary power to initiate and approve money bills, including taxation and the allocation of public funds for government policies. Any proposed changes to taxation or spending must first be presented to the House of Commons, which is directly elected by the people. This power is a vital check on the executive’s ability to raise money and implement policies, ensuring that no government can raise taxes without the consent of the elected representatives of the public.
US Congress: In the US, the House of Representatives has the exclusive authority to introduce and amend revenue bills, meaning they control the government’s ability to raise taxes and spend money e.g. power of the purse. This power is a key feature of the separation of powers, ensuring that the legislature, not the executive, has control over financial matters. The Senate can amend these bills, but it is the House of Representatives that starts the process, underscoring the importance of the people’s direct representatives in managing public finances.
SIMILARITY: Both the UK House of Commons and the US House of Representatives hold significant power over government taxation and spending, ensuring elected representatives have control over national finances.
Congress:
Similarities between UK Parliament and US Congress? e.g. representation (use two examples)
UK Parliament: The UK House of Commons consists of Members of Parliament (MPs) elected from constituencies across the country, each representing local communities with specific regional or social concerns. These MPs debate and vote on national issues, ensuring that all parts of the country are represented in the decision-making process. The diversity of representation allows the government to take into account the needs of different regions and communities when making policies.
US Congress: The House of Representatives in the US is similarly made up of elected officials who represent districts within states. Each district is drawn to reflect the population, ensuring a diverse array of constituencies is represented. The Senate provides further regional representation, with each state having equal representation, regardless of population size, ensuring that both small and large states have a voice in the legislative process.
SIMILARITY: Both the UK and US legislatures are designed to ensure diverse geographical and social interests are represented, with MPs in the UK and Representatives and Senators in the US representing different communities and regions.
Congress:
Similarities between UK Parliament and US Congress? e.g. oversight over the executive (use two examples)
UK Parliament: The UK Parliament plays a crucial role in holding the executive accountable through various mechanisms. Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) is a key event where MPs question the Prime Minister about government policies and decisions, holding them to account. Additionally, parliamentary committees can scrutinize government departments and their spending, ensuring transparency and responsibility in the executive branch.
US Congress: In the US, Congress holds the executive accountable through congressional hearings and investigations, where members of the executive, including cabinet secretaries and even the President, can be questioned. Committees such as the House Oversight and Reform Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee are designed to monitor the executive branch and investigate any misuse of power or misconduct. This process allows Congress to ensure that the President and other government officials are acting in the best interest of the public.
SIMILARITY: Both the UK Parliament and the US Congress have mechanisms in place to scrutinize the actions of the executive, ensuring that elected representatives have the power to hold government leaders accountable.
Congress:
Differences between UK Parliament and US Congress? e.g. Elected v Unelected (use two examples)
UK Parliament: The UK Parliament is made up of elected Members of Parliament (MPs) and unelected members of the House of Lords. The House of Commons consists entirely of elected MPs who represent constituencies across the UK. In contrast, the House of Lords includes appointed members, including life peers, bishops, and hereditary peers, who are not elected by the public, leading to a significant difference in legitimacy and democratic representation.
US Congress: In the US, both the Senate and the House of Representatives consist solely of elected members. Senators are elected by the people of each state for six-year terms, while Representatives are elected for two-year terms by constituents in their districts. This means that the entire legislative branch in the US is made up of elected officials, ensuring a fully democratic process in the legislative branch.
DIFFERENCE: The UK Parliament’s House of Lords includes unelected members, whereas the US Congress is entirely elected, highlighting a key difference in the composition and democratic accountability of the two legislatures.
Congress:
Differences between UK Parliament and US Congress? e.g. Party unity (use two examples)
UK Parliament: Party unity is generally stronger in the UK, especially within the House of Commons. The Whip system is used to enforce party discipline, ensuring MPs vote in line with party positions. For example, during the Brexit vote in 2019, MPs from the ruling Conservative Party were strongly whipped to vote in favor of the government’s position, with few rebellions within the party.
US Congress: In contrast, party unity is often weaker in the US Congress due to a higher degree of individualism among lawmakers. For example, Republicans in the House of Representatives showed a split during the 2020 impeachment vote of President Trump, with several Republican Representatives voting against their party’s stance, showcasing internal division. The more frequent instances of cross-party voting in the US suggest a less cohesive approach to party politics compared to the UK.
DIFFERENCE: The UK Parliament relies heavily on the Whip system to maintain party unity, while US Congress sees more individualism and cross-party voting, leading to a more fragmented party system.
Congress:
Differences between UK Parliament and US Congress? e.g. domination in legislative branch (use two examples)
UK Parliament: The Prime Minister and the executive hold significant influence over the legislative process in the UK, particularly in the House of Commons. Since the Prime Minister is typically the leader of the majority party, they have the power to dominate the legislative agenda, influencing which bills are introduced and the direction of policy. For example, during the 2019 election, Prime Minister Boris Johnson had the backing of a majority in the House of Commons, which allowed him to easily pass his Brexit deal through Parliament.
US Congress: In the US, the executive (the President) is separate from the legislature, which means that the President does not dominate the legislative agenda. For example, in 2019, President Donald Trump faced significant opposition from the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives regarding his proposed budget and immigration policies, leading to legislative gridlock. This separation of powers between the executive and legislature limits the President’s control over Congress, making it harder for the President to dominate the legislative process.
DIFFERENCE: The UK Parliament has a fusion of powers, where the executive and legislative branches are closely linked, allowing the Prime Minister to dominate the legislative process. In contrast, the US Congress operates under a separation of powers, preventing the President from easily influencing legislative decisions.
Congress v Parliament :
Strengths of the House of Representatives e.g. two year terms ensure accountability
Example 1: 2018 Midterm Elections
In the 2018 midterm elections, all 435 members of the House of Representatives were up for re-election, which led to a significant shift in power from the Republicans to the Democrats. The two-year term cycle allows voters to quickly express their approval or disapproval of their representatives, keeping elected officials accountable to the people. This quick turnover makes representatives more responsive to public opinion and changes in political sentiment, as seen in the 2018 elections.
Example 2: 2020 Presidential Election Results
In the 2020 Presidential Election, the outcome influenced the House of Representatives, as many Republicans who supported President Trump faced tight races. Representatives were held accountable for their positions on issues like the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic stimulus response. The two-year cycle led to shifts in the House, ensuring that representatives remained connected to the views of their constituents, especially in a polarized political climate.
Why it’s a strength: The two-year terms in the House ensure that members are closely accountable to their constituents, allowing for regular assessments of their performance and responsiveness to changing voter concerns.
Congress v Parliament :
Strengths of the House of Representatives e.g. power to initiate over taxation and appropriation bills
Example 1: COVID-19 Relief Packages (2020-2021)
The House of Representatives played a crucial role in initiating multiple COVID-19 relief packages, including the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. As per the Constitution, all bills related to taxation and government spending must begin in the House, allowing it to set the legislative agenda for economic recovery. By passing key spending bills, the House ensured that financial support was directed to citizens, businesses, and healthcare systems during the pandemic.
Example 2: Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (2021)
In 2021, the House passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, a major spending bill that aimed to improve transportation, broadband, and other public services. The House’s ability to initiate bills related to appropriations allowed it to secure funding for such large-scale projects. This power ensures that the House plays a critical role in shaping national fiscal priorities.
Why it’s a strength: The House’s exclusive power to initiate tax and spending bills gives it significant influence over national fiscal policies, allowing it to play a central role in addressing economic and public service needs.
Congress v Parliament :
Weaknesses of the House of Representatives e.g. partisanship means not many bills are passed
Example 1: Government Shutdown (2018-2019)
The 2018-2019 government shutdown highlighted the weakness of partisanship in the House. Despite the Democratic-controlled House passing numerous bills, many were blocked in the Republican-controlled Senate, especially over disagreements on funding for the border wall. The stark party divisions resulted in little meaningful legislation passing, illustrating how partisanship can stall progress and governance.
Example 2: COVID-19 Stimulus Negotiations (2020)
The COVID-19 stimulus negotiations in 2020 also showcased how partisanship led to prolonged delays in passing relief packages. Despite the House passing several relief bills, partisan disagreements with the Republican Senate led to months of inaction, leaving millions of Americans waiting for financial support. This political gridlock reflects how internal division within the House and between the branches can prevent swift legislative action.
Why it’s a weakness: Partisanship in the House can lead to legislative gridlock, where bills are often delayed or blocked, hindering the House’s ability to efficiently pass meaningful laws and address pressing issues.
Congress v Parliament :
Weaknesses of the House of Representatives e.g. poor representation of women and ethnic minorities
Example 1: Underrepresentation in 2020 Election
In the 2020 election, although there was an increase in diversity, women and ethnic minorities still remained underrepresented in the House. Women held about 27% of House seats, and racial minorities, particularly African Americans and Hispanics, were also significantly underrepresented compared to their proportions in the U.S. population. This lack of diverse representation means that the perspectives of these groups are not fully reflected in the legislative process.
Example 2: Representation Gaps in 2022
In 2022, despite progress in electing more women and minority candidates, the House of Representatives still struggled with diversity. For example, only about 13% of House members were Black, and 19% were Latino, despite these groups making up a much larger share of the U.S. population. This disparity limits the diversity of viewpoints and experiences, particularly in shaping policies affecting these communities.
Why it’s a weakness: The underrepresentation of women and ethnic minorities in the House means that the legislative body does not fully reflect the demographics of the country, which can result in policies that overlook or misrepresent the needs of these groups.
Congress v Parliament:
Strengths of the House of Commons e.g. dominance by the majority party means its easier to pass legislation
Example 1: The Brexit Withdrawal Agreement (2020)
In 2020, the UK government, led by the Conservative Party, was able to pass the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement with relative ease in the House of Commons. The Conservative Party’s majority allowed the government to push through key pieces of legislation with minimal resistance. This demonstrates how a majority party can use its strength to swiftly pass major reforms and avoid prolonged opposition, ensuring that the government can implement its policies effectively.
Example 2: The Nationality and Borders Bill (2021-2022)
The Nationality and Borders Bill, which aimed to overhaul the UK’s immigration system, passed with little opposition from the House of Commons in 2021 due to the Conservative Party’s majority. The party’s dominance allowed the government to shape the bill in line with its vision of tougher immigration controls. This highlights the strength of a majority party in controlling the legislative agenda and ensuring the passage of key government priorities.
Why it’s a strength: A majority party in the House of Commons provides a clear path for legislation to be passed swiftly, ensuring that the government can implement its policies without significant delays from opposition parties.
Congress v Parliament:
Strengths of the House of Commons e.g. use of Parliament Acts and the Salisbury Convention allow for strong government
Example 1: Parliament Acts and the House of Lords (2015)
The Parliament Acts were invoked in 2015 to bypass the House of Lords’ rejection of the House of Lords Reform Bill. The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 allow the House of Commons to pass legislation without the Lords’ consent if they reject it in two successive sessions. This gives the House of Commons a significant advantage in ensuring that its legislative agenda is not stalled by the unelected House of Lords.
Example 2: Salisbury Convention and 2017 General Election
The Salisbury Convention, which states that the House of Lords should not block legislation promised in the governing party’s manifesto, played a role in the 2017 General Election. Despite some opposition from the Lords, the Conservative Party’s manifesto promises were largely respected, and legislation reflecting their agenda passed through both Houses with minimal delay. The convention helps ensure that the government can carry out its election promises effectively, providing the House of Commons with a strong position in the legislative process.
Why it’s a strength: The Parliament Acts and the Salisbury Convention give the House of Commons significant power, particularly when there is a clear electoral mandate, ensuring the government can implement its agenda without obstruction from the unelected House of Lords.
Congress v Parliament:
Weaknesses of the House of Commons e.g. dominance by the majority party can allow an elective dictatorship
Example 1: The Brexit Process and the 2019 General Election
In the 2019 General Election, Prime Minister Boris Johnson secured a significant Conservative Party majority, which allowed him to push through the Brexit deal without much opposition. The government’s dominance led to criticisms of an “elective dictatorship”, as the Prime Minister had nearly unchecked power to make decisions without meaningful checks from the opposition or the House of Lords. This concentration of power highlights the dangers of a government with a large majority, where decisions can be made with minimal scrutiny.
Example 2: Handling of the COVID-19 Pandemic
The Conservative Party’s majority during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed the government to implement controversial measures, such as the lockdowns and economic support schemes, without significant challenge from Parliament. The opposition struggled to exert influence on key decisions, and the government’s dominance in the Commons meant that alternative views often went unheard, raising concerns about the lack of accountability in the decision-making process. This again illustrates how a strong majority can result in an “elective dictatorship”, where government decisions are not sufficiently debated.
Why it’s a weakness: Dominance by the majority party in the House of Commons can undermine democratic accountability, concentrating power in the hands of the government and leading to decisions made without proper scrutiny or debate from the opposition or wider public.
Congress v Parliament:
Weaknesses of the House of Commons e.g. the two party system limits the influence of third parties
Example 1: The 2015 General Election and UKIP
In the 2015 General Election, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) received over 3.8 million votes, but only secured one seat in the House of Commons. This outcome highlights the limitations of the First-Past-The-Post electoral system, which tends to favor the two major parties (Labour and Conservative) and disproportionately disadvantages smaller parties like UKIP. Despite significant voter support, UKIP’s lack of representation in Parliament illustrates how the system marginalizes third parties and limits their influence in shaping policy or passing legislation.
Example 2: The 2019 General Election and the Liberal Democrats
In the 2019 General Election, despite the Liberal Democrats receiving 11.5% of the vote, they only won 11 seats in the House of Commons. The two-party dominance in the Commons led to a skewed representation where the influence of smaller parties was minimized, and the political focus remained largely on Labour and Conservative policies. This lack of proportional representation means that third parties struggle to have a meaningful impact on the legislative process.
Why it’s a weakness: The two-party system in the House of Commons limits the influence of smaller parties, restricting diverse viewpoints and policies from being adequately represented or considered in the legislative process.
Congress v Parliament:
Strengths of the House of Lords e.g. allows for experts in policy making (use two examples)
**Example 1: Influence on the Investigatory Powers Bill (2016)
The House of Lords includes experts from various fields such as law, medicine, and technology. During the Investigatory Powers Bill (2016), peers with backgrounds in data privacy and human rights, such as Lord Pannick QC, played a pivotal role in challenging and improving parts of the bill concerning surveillance powers. Their expert knowledge ensured the bill addressed complex issues surrounding privacy, making it more robust and balanced.
**Example 2: Amendments to the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill (2019)
The House of Lords also contributed its expertise to the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill (2019), which was designed to reform laws on the care of people with learning disabilities. Lords with expertise in health and social care, such as Lord Low of Dalston, helped ensure that the bill protected vulnerable individuals from potential abuse in care settings. Their expertise led to amendments that helped improve the care provisions and oversight mechanisms in the bill, highlighting the Lords’ role in scrutinizing complex health legislation.
Congress v Parliament:
Strengths of the House of Lords e.g. more freedom to challenge the will of the government (use two examples)
**Example 1: The Trade Bill (2018)
The House of Lords provides a platform for opposition to government policies, and this was clearly demonstrated during the debates over the Trade Bill in 2018. The Lords proposed amendments to the bill, insisting on stronger parliamentary oversight of trade negotiations after Brexit. The government initially rejected these amendments, but the challenge from the Lords was a sign of their role in holding the government accountable without facing the same electoral pressures as MPs.
**Example 2: The EU Withdrawal Agreement (2019)
In 2019, during the debates over the EU Withdrawal Agreement, the House of Lords took a strong stance against certain provisions of the agreement, particularly concerning workers’ rights and environmental protections post-Brexit. Lords proposed amendments to ensure these rights would be safeguarded, challenging the government’s proposed terms. Although the House of Commons ultimately rejected some of the Lords’ amendments, the Lords still managed to create a significant debate and drew public attention to issues that might have otherwise been overlooked.
Congress v Parliament:
Weaknesses of the House of Lords e.g. lacking legitimacy as they are unelected (use two examples)
**Example 1: The Brexit Delays (2019)
A major criticism of the House of Lords is that it is unelected, which raises concerns about its democratic legitimacy. During the Brexit debates in 2019, the Lords voted to delay the government’s withdrawal plans, which caused frustration among many members of the public who felt that unelected peers were undermining the results of the democratic referendum. This unelected status often fuels criticism that the Lords do not represent the will of the people.
**Example 2: The House of Lords Appointment System
The House of Lords is appointed rather than elected, which means that many members are seen as lacking democratic legitimacy. For example, the House of Lords Reform Bill (2012) proposed changes to the way Lords are appointed, aiming to make the process more democratic by creating a partly elected House. However, the lack of elections for the majority of its members continues to raise questions about the legitimacy and accountability of the House of Lords.
Congress v Parliament:
Weaknesses of the House of Lords e.g. challenge can be ignored by the HOC (use two examples)
**Example 1: Rejection of Lords Amendments to the EU Withdrawal Bill (2019)
Although the House of Lords can propose amendments, their power is limited because the elected House of Commons has the final say. In 2019, after the EU Withdrawal Bill was amended in the House of Lords, the Commons voted to reject many of these changes, particularly on workers’ rights. This illustrates that, despite the Lords’ ability to scrutinize, the House of Commons often overrules their amendments, reducing the Lords’ influence on legislation.
**Example 2: The Parliament Acts and Limited Power
The Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1949 limit the ability of the House of Lords to delay legislation, and this is often seen as a weakness. For instance, in 2015, the House of Lords sought to delay the Tax Credits Bill, which would have cut welfare benefits for working families, but the Commons passed it over their objections. This shows that, despite their scrutiny, the Lords’ power to influence major legislation is curtailed by the constitutional limits set by the Parliament Acts.
