Essay
US-UK Comperative essay plans
- Vak
- Instelling
A* Essay Plans from the whole AQA Government and Politics course. Almost 300 pages together.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 26 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 26 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
gesponsord bericht van onze partner
2 beoordelingen
Door: avniwoah • 3 jaar geleden
Door: jacoblackman1994 • 3 jaar geleden
Verkoper
Volgen
szymongorny23
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
• Both ‘examine’ and ‘analyse’ don’t need an introduction or conclusion - aim for 3-4 paragraphs• For ‘analyse’ questions you need a comparative theory:
• Rational theory: individuals (MPs, senators, PMs, Presidents) - actions guided by own
interests whether these are to maintain power or achieve ideological or policy goals
• People are selfish and will act in a way which achieves the best outcome for them
or their goals
• Cultural theory: groups (pressure groups, political parties) - groups have a culture of
shared ideas, beliefs and values to which members conform - there may be a dominant
culture in a party which influences the behaviour of politicians
• Explaining actions of individuals as a shared belief
• Structural theory: structure, constitutional roles, power and limits of a political process
or institution. The actions of individuals and groups are limited and largely determined by
structures
• Outcomes are determined by the institutions and processes of politics
• Constitution
Examine the extent to which the US and UK constitutions adhere to the doctrine of the separation of
powers
• In the US Constitution, the branches of the legislature and the executive are entirely separate -
separation of powers:
• A member of congress cannot serve the executive, ie Obama had to stand down from his
congressional seat in order to run for President
• The President can’t prematurely end Congress and call new elections.
• Congress cannot remove members of the executive branch expect for ‘high crimes and
misdemeanours’ by impeachment.
• If the President was removed from office, there would not be re-elections but the Vice
President would take office
• The US SC was always separate from the executive and legislature
• US Presidents are often in a situation where they lack a congressional majority so are
more subject to legislative opposition
2. In the UK Constitution there is the fusion of powers:
• British ministers operate in both the executive and legislative branches heading
government departments at the same time as being members of Parliament - as MPs they
pass the legislation as a member of the executive they are also responsible for its
implementation.
• This means that PMs needs a majority in Parliament to achieve their policy goals
• The PM is both the head of the executive branch and leading their party in the House of
Commons
• Parliament can cause a whole downfall of the government in a Vote of No Confidence e.g
when Jim Callaghan was PM in 1979
• Until the UK SC was set up in 2009, the Law Lords in the House of Lords served both in
the legislature and also as a member of the cabinet
,Examine the provision of checks and balances in the US and UK constitutions
• Separation of powers vs fusions of powers:
• US: diffusion of power and the obstruction of strong govt, separation of powers (neither
the President, nor the Vice President, nor any of the department or agency head of
Congress hold any executive officer) - this means there can be no one party rule. With a
divided government there is little the establishment can pass. Strong checks and balances.
• UK: concentration of power and the promotion of strong, usually one-party govt -
‘elective dictatorship’. Fusion of powers means the executive dominates the legislature
and can pass more or less anything they want with an inbuilt majority allowing for strong
government and less checks and balances.
• This is because the US Constitution was written to protect the rights of the governed whilst UK
Constitution evolved to protect the powers of the govt:
• US: reflects the fears of executive power and tyranny of the government over the people
of the Founding Fathers. James Madison wrote tha by checks and balances ‘a double
security arises to the rights of the people’. Checks and balances means the rights and
freedoms of Americans would be protected so that they would limited the power of
government.
• UK: the PM draws up legislative proposals which their ministers then introduced into and
shepherd through Parliament which is virtually guaranteed with a parliamentary majority.
The 5 years general election decided the make-up of the House of Commons and the
identity of the PM
• In both countries, politicians may be able to evade rules by simply saying they do not apply in a
particular case - therefore Constitutions form a weak constraint and check on govt:
• US: e.g. Presidents have claimed authorities to initiate military action as commander in
chief, despite Congress having the constitutional power to declare war. The vagueness of
the power balance between federal and state governments has lead to huge transformation
in federal-state relations without any changes to the Constitution.
• UK: e.g PMs initiating military action despite the convention to ask Parliament. Or not
holding referendums for big constitutional changes such as the Lisbon Treaty as a
convention
• In all this means that in the UK, checks and balances is not very powerful:
• US: US Constitution provides extensive checks and balances which prevents such
executive domination as in the UK. They do not have ongoing patronage power and
members of Congress even if they are from the president's own party may be more loyal
more to constituents than to their own party leader
• UK: power is concentrated in the hands of government because of fusion of powers and
the powerful whip system and patronage ensures a loyal majority in Commons
Analyse the significant differences between the US and UK Constitutions
• The US Constitution is a codified constitution, the UK is uncodified:
• UK: constitution is made up various sources such as statutes, common laws, authoritative
texts, conventions etc. Conventions are not entrenched and can be broke e.g. convention
to ask Parliament for permission of military action but Blair didn’t for Iraq 2003.
, • US: single document which contains most of the country’s constitutional arrangements.
Has convention that have become part of the constitution e.g. President George
Washington put a convention of a two-term limit on the presidency but it was when
Roosevelt broke the convention when this convention was formalised in the 22nd
Amendment (1951) to stop this reoccurring
• The US Constitution is entrenched, the UK is not:
• UK: need a simple majority to pass or rule over statutes. E.g. 2011 Fixed Term
Parliament Act dictates the time period a PM can govern but can be changed with a
simple majority in both houses of parliament.
• US: as a result of the belief that specific rights and provision that are enshrined in the
constitution should not be subject to change by a passing whim, even if voted for by the
majority of the electorate. It means an amendment to the constitution requires a
supermajority. E.g. to amend the 22nd Constitution that sets 2 term limits for Presidents
you need super majorities in both houses
• US Constitution allows for greater popular democracy than the UK Constitution:
• US: Between 1780s-1880s, the HofR was elected on a far wider franchise than the HofC
in the UK. Senate has been elected directly since 1914 whilst the second chamber in the
UK is still unelected. Presidential elections are now virtually direct elections and
electorate can even participate in candidate selection for elections at all levels of
government. Initiatives, referendum and recall procedures holds up direct participation.
Tenth Amendment set out that the power resides with the people.
• UK: advocated representative democracy and parliamentary sovereignty. Fewer
opportunities for democratic participation than their American counterparts. Can only
elect members to one of the two houses of parliament and the UK PM is not subject to
any direct elections but they are the leader of the winning party. Parliament remains
sovereign, not the people.
• Location of sovereignty:
• UK: Parliamentary sovereignty - Parliament has the absolute power and Parliament can
amend the constitution with a simple majority in the HofC. This means the judiciary is
less powerful and sovereignty lies solely with parliament - because there is no codified
constitution to uphold and they cannot declare acts of parliament to be unconstitutional
• US: Constitutional sovereignty - Constitution is society and its sovereignty is upheld by
the Supreme court. The Constitution is entrenched, so is protected from change.
Amendment requires supermajorities in House, Senate and states. This allows the
judiciary to strike down acts as unconstitutional so sovereignty is more dispersed.
• US Constitution provides much stronger protection than the UK Constitution:
• UK: No entrenchment = no entrenchment of rights exemplified by the HRA still meaning
that government can obstruct rights of individuals (Hirst V UK - rights for prisoners to
vote). Rights are more vulnerable to executive and parliamentary attack, partly because
they can be amended or overturned with a new act of Parliament.
• US: rights are entrenched in the constitution meaning that individuals can challenge
powerful institution that restrict liberty.
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper szymongorny23. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €18,65. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 52510 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen