Politics evidence bank: Paper 3 (Edexcel A-Level Politics): Model Answers

Politics evidence bank: Paper 3

US Constitution and Federalism

The Nature of the US Constitution

Vagueness of the Document, Codification, and Entrenchment:

• Example of vagueness in the Constitution: The power of Congress "to provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States" (Article I), the power of Congress to make all laws “necessary and proper” for its ability to rule (Article I, Section 8).
• Examples of specificity in the Constitution are the power "to collect taxes" (Article I), the power to name post offices. The Constitutional Framework (Powers) of the US Branches of Government:

The amendment process, including advantages and disadvantages of the formal process.

Advantages:

• Protects the rights of smaller states against larger states - Article V states ¾ of the US states must ratify an amendment.

• Means knee-jerk amendments will not be implemented - 2001 Tax Reconciliation Act would have meant the US government could not raise tax levy and would need to consider alternatives (due to high taxes that year).

• Prevents populist amendments - Trump tweeted he would get rid of birthright citizenship, but this right is protected by the 14th amendment.

• Founding Fathers intended for this process to be difficult.

• Prevents abuse of power - rejection of Bush’s request for line-item veto power in 2006. Disadvantages:

• Smaller states have the same say in constitutional amendments as larger states - Wyoming has a population of 580,000, but California has nearly 40 million.

• Difficult to adapt to modern-day scenarios - Equal Rights Amendment was passed in both Houses in 1972 but not ratified due to not gaining ¾ majority of the states.

• The amendment process is undemocratic - only 13/50 states need to oppose an amendment to block it - Flag protection amendment got over 50% support but did not get a supermajority among states.

Key Features of the US Constitution and Their Effectiveness Today

Federalism:

• A key principle of US democracy where power is delegated to individual states.

• Policies implemented under Republican presidents like Reagan. Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances:

• Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 - Aimed to set out government spending for the next two fiscal years.

• The overriding of President Trump’s veto of the NDAA (National Defence Authorisation Act) in January 2021 was a bipartisan attempt, with an 81-13 vote result in the Senate.

• Difference between Bipartisan Rhetoric and Bipartisan Action - Ted Cruz blamed the 2013 government shutdown on Senate Democrats refusing to accept a "bipartisan bill" from the House that defunded the Affordable Care Act, despite this bill having no Democratic support.

• The government shutdown of Dec 2018 - Jan 2019 over funding for Trump’s wall could be perceived as a result of partisanship, as Democrat opposition led to gridlock and a 37-day shutdown. Limited Government:

• Only 3% of bills will be passed and reach the president.

• All 50 states have their autonomy on legislation and independent judiciary, e.g., DeSantis’ transgender bill, which attempts to block puberty blockers and hormones for transgender people, was struck down by a federal judge in Florida, demonstrating that the state judiciary limits legislation to protect Americans’ positive freedom from being restricted by state laws.

• Bills die easily during the committee stage in the House Rules Committee because the members intentionally timetable the bills to delay legislation and voting on the bill. Therefore, bills are usually dead before they reach the debates, e.g., the 27th Amendment had waited for over 200 years since the initial debate on adjusting the salary rate of congresspeople in 1789. The debate was reintroduced in 1982, and the Constitution was amended in 1992. This shows that the complex process of constitutional amendment prevents the government from overpowering by amending the Constitution too often when the US sovereignty lies on the Constitution. Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances:

• The Constitution mentions in Articles I, II, and III that the election cycles of Congress and the president (executive) are different, and the judiciary is protected by life tenure and a fixed salary rate to prevent threats to tenure and salary to make political verdicts.

• The government's power is shared between three branches - they can scrutinise one another. Congress can control the presidential nominees to the SCOTUS by arranging hearings, e.g., the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee refused to hold a hearing for Merrick Garland, the presidential nominee of SCOTUS from President Obama. The president can veto passed legislation, and the bill will be sent back to Congress. The SCOTUS can hold a judicial review when some people start a case and take it to the SCOTUS, and the judiciary can strike down laws, e.g., the McCain-Feingold Act 2002 (BICRA) was repealed by Citizens Utd v. FEC (2010) to ensure companies, as juridical persons, are seen as individuals, so companies can donate to the super PAC for presidential and congressional campaigns.

Main Characteristics of US Federalism

The Nature of the Federal System of Government and Its Relationship with the States:

• Federalism means a theory of government where political power is divided between national and state government, there is jurisdiction for each, and some decentralisation is involved.

• Federalism is written in the enumerated powers. The term ‘federalism’ is an implied power, but it is indirectly mentioned in Article IV and directly mentioned in the 10th Amendment. Also, it is a concurrent power found in the powers of the federal and state governments. Concurrent Powers:

• Levy and collect taxes (Article IV, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit Clause).

• Borrow money.

• Establish courts (federal courts and state courts), e.g., Sen. DeSantis’ Transgender bill is blocked by the Florida state court.

• Define crimes and set punishments, e.g., marijuana, alcohol, abortion.

• Claim private property for public use. National Powers (Power Shared with Congress and President):

• Coin money.

• Regulate interstate and foreign trade.

• Declare war.

• Raise and maintain armed forces.

• Govern US territories and admit new states, e.g., West Virginia.

• Conduct foreign relations. State Powers:

• Regulate intrastate trade and business.

• Establish public schools.

• Pass license requirements for professionals.

• Regulate alcoholic beverages.

• Conduct elections (refer to Shelby County v. Holder (2013)).

• Establish local governments.

Interpretations and Debates Around the US Constitution and Federalism

Arguments That the US Is Less Federal:

• The 10th Amendment allows different laws across US states, e.g., Oregon has no sales tax.
• Some powers are reserved for states, e.g., the power to conduct their own elections, protected by Supreme Court rulings such as Shelby County v. Holder.
• The role of states in the ratification of amendments maintains their significance, e.g., ¾ of states are needed to ratify an amendment.
• Colorado legalised cannabis in 2014, while in Kansas, it’s still illegal. It also remains illegal at the federal level.
• California implemented pollution permits in 2008.
• Federalism allows better representation of people, allowing those who voted for the party other than the President’ to feel represented, such as Florida, New Mexico, Illinois, Iowa, and Wisconsin, which have Republican Governors but voted Democratic in the 2012 Presidential election.
• Under Republican presidents from the 1980s to 2000s, there was an increase in state-delegated power.
• Block grants were given under Reagan to each state with little federal guidance under the period of New Federalism.
• Roe v Wade overturned allows each state to ban abortion.

US Congress

Factors that influence the relationship between Congress

Party control:

• There is evidence to suggest that congressional oversight of the executive is only really effective when Congress or one house of Congress is not controlled by the President’s party.
• Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016 was defeated by the Republican-controlled Senate.
• Whereas, in times of united government, oversight can drop significantly. This happened during George W. Bush’s 8-year term, where congressional oversight was often non-existent.
• From homeland security to the conduct of the Iraq war, from allegations of torture at Abu Ghraib to the surveillance of domestic telephone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA), Congress had mostly ignored its responsibilities. Party polarisation:

Healthcare: The Affordable Care Act (ACA)

• Issue: The ACA (also known as Obamacare) is a significant example of polarisation. Democrats passed the law in 2010 without a single Republican vote.

• Republican Position: They vehemently opposed the ACA, viewing it as government overreach into the healthcare sector. Multiple attempts were made by Republican-led Congresses to repeal or undermine it.

• Democratic Position: Democrats supported the ACA as a way to expand healthcare coverage and reduce costs. It became a major ideological battle between the two parties. Impeachment of Donald Trump

• Issue: Donald Trump was impeached twice, in 2019 and 2021. The first impeachment was over a phone call with Ukraine’s president, and the second was for inciting the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

• Republican Position: Most Republicans defended Trump, either denying the severity of the charges or framing them as partisan attacks.

• Democratic Position: Democrats strongly pushed for impeachment, citing constitutional violations and a threat to democracy. Party lines were starkly drawn in both impeachment votes. Climate Change

• Issue: The approach to climate change illustrates deep party polarisation.

• Republican Position: Republicans have generally been sceptical of strong government interventions in the economy to combat climate change, with some denying the human impact on climate change.

• Democratic Position: Democrats advocate for aggressive climate policies, including rejoining the Paris Climate Accord and implementing Green New Deal-like measures to reduce carbon emissions and promote renewable energy. Gun Control

• Issue: Gun control has been a polarising issue for decades, especially following mass shootings.

• Republican Position: Republicans, supported by the NRA, generally oppose stricter gun control laws, emphasising Second Amendment rights.

• Democratic Position: Democrats tend to advocate for stricter gun laws, such as background checks and assault weapons bans, to reduce gun violence. Abortion Rights

• Issue: Abortion has been a central issue dividing the parties, especially with the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision being overturned in 2022.

• Republican Position: Republicans have increasingly supported measures to restrict or ban abortion, with some advocating for a national ban.

• Democratic Position: Democrats defend access to abortion as a matter of personal and women's rights, often pushing back against state-level restrictions.

• However, there are times of bipartisanship that enable a working relationship between Congress and the president.

• This was shown in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES) in 2020, the Bipartisan Budget Act in 2013, and the 21st Century Cures Act (2016) Policy Area:

In areas of foreign policy, the president often uses executive agreements to circumvent the Senate.

• This was shown by Obama passing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015 concerning the Iranian nuclear programme with very little oversight from the Senate.

• Similarly, in 2018, Trump was able to abandon the Iran Nuclear Deal with little insight from the Senate. Congress has much more influence on the president in terms of domestic policy.

• This was seen when Obama was frustrated by Congress, which thwarted his attempts to pass legislation on gun control and immigration.

• Trump also struggled with Congress over his immigration policies and also failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Election Cycle:

Members of Congress are more likely to please their district/state rather than the president in the run-up to the election. They essentially prioritise their own re-election above the wishes of the president.

• Congress overrode Obama’s Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism bill in 2016. Democrats did not wish to seem ‘soft’ on terrorism in the run-up to their re-election, despite many of them supporting the legislation. Therefore, as an outgoing president, there was little that Obama could do to persuade anyone to support his stance. Presidential Approval Rating:

Congress can exert less influence when approval ratings are high, and more when they are low.

• In 2005, when George W. Bush was attempting to reform social security, Congress was able to capitalise on his low approval ratings in order to frustrate his attempts. At that time, his approval ratings were around 35% according to a GallUp poll.
• This was entirely different from September 2001, where W. Bush enjoyed the highest presidential approval rating ever recorded, following the 9/11 attacks. He enjoyed a 90% approval rating.
• Biden’s current approval rating sits at only 38%. His low approval rating, and the fact that he is considered to be a ‘lame-duck’ outgoing president, means that Congress, especially the opposition party, is able to exert a much higher level of influence over him.
• Trump’s approval ratings have been the lowest of any president since WWII. He averaged 41% approval during his entire presidency. Congressional Approval Rating:

Congressional approval ratings are important too, and recent years have seen approval ratings of Congress at historic lows.

• Polls have linked this low approval rating of Congress to a long-standing trend of low trust in government among Americans, which started after the Vietnam War and the aftermath of Watergate.
• Congress is seen by Americans as self-interested and unproductive - given that it only has a success rate of around 2-3% in passing new legislation.
• While presidential approval ratings are often low, they have not reached the same lows as seen in Congress. As a result, Congress can often find it hard to exert influence over the president.
• In 2019-20, Trump’s approval rating was at 41%, while Congress’s was down to just 18%. In this case, it was hard for Congress to argue that it possessed greater legitimacy than the president when Congress members criticised his policies. National Events:

In times of national emergency, Congress will often defer to the President in the short term.

• For example, after 9/11, when George W. Bush passed the Patriot Act 2001.
• However, this is not always the case. Congress assisted Trump in passing the CARES Act in 2020, but it had also been very critical of Trump’s handling of the crisis. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives at the time, regularly rebutted the President and acted as the leader of the Congressional Opposition to his policies.

Interpretations and Debates Around Congress

Changing Roles and Powers of Congress and Their Relative Importance:

Congress and domestic policy: Expansion of the federal government

• From 1933 to around 1980, Congress played a role in the expansion of the federal government - in both US society and the economy.

• It passed legislation often with bipartisan cooperation that recognised the rights of its citizens. Some of this includes:

• Civil Rights Act (1964) - Prohibited racial, religious, and sexual discrimination and racial segregation in schools.

• Voting Rights Act (1965) - Prohibited discrimination in voting.

• Medicare and Medicaid Act (1965) - The first public healthcare insurance programmes.

• Housing and Urban Development Act (1965) - Provided federal funds for urban renewal.

• This was the most successful era of the passage of legislation in congressional history.

• However, this can be argued to be as a result of less ideological difference/party polarisation between the two parties, which made compromises much easier to achieve.

• 1980s to Date; Era of Party Polarization:

• Parties have become increasingly polarised in their ideological makeup.

• This has changed the way Congress works and has seen parties refuse to vote for keynote legislation of their opponents.

• Republicans - disinterested in cooperating with Obama’s healthcare reforms.

• Democrats - disinterested in cooperating with Trump’s tax and jobs reform.

• The rate of success for modern congress in passing legislation is only 2-3%. It is easier to prevent rather than enact laws.

• The presidential appointments process has become intensely politicised, i.e., the refusal to consider Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016.

• In 2020, the support for Trump’s nomination to the Supreme Court with Amy Coney Barrett was entirely on party lines - not one Democratic senator supported her.

• Bipartisanship is more of an exception than a rule. Although the CARES Act was an act of bipartisanship, this is not often the case. Even still, Democrats were critical of this legislation. Congress and Foreign Policy:

• The Constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. However, this power has not been used by Congress since 1941, when they declared war against Japan.

• In the era of Nixon, the president was conducting wars that Congress had not even heard of.

• Congress attempted to take back power with the War Powers Act (1973).

• This ensured that if the president did take unilateral action, they must inform Congress within 48 hours.

• It also crucially allows the president to carry out military operations for up to 90 days without congressional approval.

• But, the War Powers Act has had limited effect in preventing the president from going to war. In 2020, Trump even argued that he could use Twitter to inform Congress of future airstrikes.

• The House Foreign Affairs Committee responded, via Twitter, arguing, "You should read the War Powers Act. And… you’re not a dictator." How Effective is Congress in Performing Its Functions:

Legislation:

• Congress still follows the principle of the Constitution - Limited government. Only 3% of the proposed bills are passed, which shows that the legislative process is complex and difficult for bills to be passed. This can prevent ill-thought bills or bills that are only in favour of a particular party’s interest or a temporary benefit on an issue (political whim). The House Rules Committee timetables the legislative agenda, and they can ask the House to amend the bill (especially revenue bills), or they can put the bills behind. So, most of the bills go and die. Representation:

• The 118th Congress has the most radical and diverse membership ever. The Congress is moving away from the ‘Old, Pale, Male’ framework’: The average age of the House is 57 (117th: 58), while the Senate is 65 (117th: 65). The number of white Representatives is 307 (117th: 319), and white Senators is 88 (117th: 89). The number of male Representatives is 310 (117th: 313), and male Senators is 75 (117th: 76).

• Incumbency: 94.5% of the Representatives are re-elected, and 100% of the Senators are re-elected. This is due to the name recognition from the pork barrel politics while the congresspersons hold meetings in town halls to ‘bring back the bacon’ to the constituencies and demonstrate their effort of bringing benefits to the corresponding constituencies, which is also a form of accountability. Besides, the incumbents face fewer challenges even when the congressional districts are gerrymandered, and the relationship and networks between media can converse into electoral support. Hakeem Jeffries has the most fundraising raised with $14 million while running for New York District 08. Oversight:

• The Congress successfully impeached two presidents in these 32 years, and three impeachments were made in total.

• Clinton was under the impeachment initiated by the House on the scandal with Monica Lewinsky and the executive office. Trump was first impeached due to the Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, and later he was impeached again due to the Ukraine scandal, which included Trump asking for Zelensky’s assistance to attack Biden (i.e., his presidential rival) by investigating and exposing Biden’s scandals (if there were at that moment).

• The Congress sent subpoenas to officials during the investigation to oversee the executive branch. During Trump’s first impeachment, former FBI director James Comey was one of the people who received subpoenas to give their witness testimony to the Congress. In Trump’s second impeachment, subpoenas were sent to officials like former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to give witness testimony on the Ukraine Scandal.

Changing Significance of Parties in Congress

Party Leadership and Separation of Powers

• Example: In 2021, Democratic Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer could not enforce President Joe Biden's full legislative agenda, despite both being Democrats. This was evident when moderate Democratic Senators, such as Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ), opposed certain elements of Biden's Build Back Better plan, illustrating that party leaders cannot fully influence members of their own party across different branches.

• Another Example: During Donald Trump’s presidency, Paul Ryan (Republican House Speaker at the time) and Mitch McConnell (Senate Majority Leader) struggled to control Trump’s erratic policymaking, especially during the government shutdowns over immigration policies. Party Leadership and Federalism

• Example: In the Republican Party, state-level leaders have sometimes diverged from national party positions. For instance, state Republicans in Texas, led by Governor Greg Abbott, have prioritised stricter immigration policies and abortion restrictions, sometimes differing in tone or emphasis from the national GOP leadership.

• Democratic Example: Similarly, state Democratic parties in states like California have pushed more progressive policies (e.g., universal healthcare) than national party leaders like Nancy Pelosi might prioritise, reflecting a diversity of priorities within the party due to federalism. Party Leadership and Bicameralism

• Example: Currently, Mike Johnson (Republican Speaker of the House) and Chuck Schumer (Democratic Senate Majority Leader) represent different parties and chambers with opposing priorities, complicating the passage of bipartisan legislation. Even when leadership is from the same party, as was the case during John Boehner's tenure as Speaker of the House and Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader (2011-2015), differences in chamber priorities and constituent bases led to tensions over how to pass significant legislation.

• Case of Intraparty Division: In 2021, the Senate’s delay in passing infrastructure legislation frustrated progressive Democrats in the House. While House Speaker Nancy Pelosi tried to keep her caucus aligned, moderate and progressive Democrats clashed on the size and scope of infrastructure and social welfare spending. Theories of Party Decline Have Been Exaggerated

• Evidence of Strong Party Control: The increasing use of party-line voting is a clear indication of strong party leadership. In recent years, both major parties have seen high levels of internal unity. For example, during the vote for the 2020 COVID relief packages and the 2021 Inflation Reduction Act, both parties voted overwhelmingly along party lines, indicating strong party cohesion under leadership.

• Increased Partisan Polarization: Party leaders play a crucial role in enforcing discipline through mechanisms like committee assignments and leadership posts. For instance, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi kept her caucus aligned in 2020-2021, despite ideological differences between moderates and progressives.

• Centralization of Power in Leadership: Modern congressional leaders, such as Mitch McConnell in the Senate and Nancy Pelosi in the House, have amassed significant power through their control over the legislative agenda, fundraising, and the ability to influence primary elections through endorsements or withholding support.

US Presidency

Formal Sources of Presidential Power as Outlined in the US Constitution and Their Use

Nominates Supreme Court justices.

• Joe Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace Justice Stephen Breyer in 2022.

• Trump had made 3 appointments to the Supreme Court from 2017-2020. He nominated Neil Gorsuch in 2017, Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 (49 Rep, 1 Dem), and Amy Coney Barrett in 2020. It was Trump’s three nominations that shifted the ideology of the Supreme Court to overwhelmingly Conservative with a 6-3 majority. Can veto bills.

• Biden 2023: vetoed Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act.

• Trump: 10 vetoes, 1 overridden.

• Biden: 12 vetoes, none overridden.

• Obama: 12 vetoes. 1 overridden. Chief diplomat.

• June 2024: Biden proposed a ceasefire plan between Israel and Gaza.

• January 2021: Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement. Power of pardon.

• Biden pardoned 6500 people for simple possession of marijuana in 2022.

• Trump pardoned 237 altogether.

Informal Sources of Presidential Power and Their Use

The Electoral Mandate, Executive Orders, National Events, and the Cabinet:

If granted a strong electoral mandate, a president can exercise their power with few restrictions.

• Obama achieved some of his most important policy goals in his first two years of office, including health care reform (ACA) & beginning the process of moving troops from Iraq when he was firm on his electoral policies.

• Less significant because, due to the electoral college system, you don’t need the majority of the popular vote.

• Trump - 46% (Clinton got 48).

• Bush - 47.9% (2000) (Gore got 48.4%). Executive orders allow the president to implement policy in the way they wish without Congress’ approval.

• Obama issued an executive order to create the White House Council on Native American Affairs.

• Creation of Homeland Security 2001 under Bush after 9/11.

• Joe Biden signed more than 60 executive orders in his first 100 days of office. 24 of these directly reversed Trump’s policies. This included halting funding for Trump’s border wall, reversing Trump’s travel ban targeting largely Muslim countries, and imposing a federal mask mandate in wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. National events play a modern role in how much a president can exercise their power.

• Bipartisanship and popular support were issued for President Bush’s aggressive proposal of war against terrorist organisations after 9/11.

• Bush faced 9/11 & the War on Terror, the Iraq & Afghanistan wars, Hurricane Katrina & the Banking crisis.

• Obama faced health care reform & the Affordable Care Act, the Budget Crisis & stimulus package, Osama Bin Laden & the Government shutdown.

• Trump faced opposition to the Mexican wall, immigration & the Government shutdown, Mueller's Russia Inquiry, a Trillion-dollar infrastructure plan & repealing the Affordable Care Act. Powers of Persuasion Including the Nature/Characteristics of Each President:

• Obama’s address regarding gay rights in 2010 led to the repeal of the ‘Don’t Ask’ act in 2011.

• When the Democrats controlled both houses in Congress and Bill Clinton was president, he succeeded in 86.4% of Congress votes on issues he supported compared to 36.2% of votes when there was a divided government.

• Obama's 2013 Rose Garden speech over Syria. It was an attempt to get Congress's support for military action in Syria.

• Trump and his Twitter storms - encouraged his followers to show strength and fight against “bad people” at the capitol.

• Executive Office of the President (EXOP), including the role of the National Security Council (NSC), Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the White House Office (WHO).

• The President is dominant over the Executive branch: Cabinet, EXOP, National Security Council.

The Presidency

Relationships Between the Presidency and the Following Institutions and Why This Varies

Congress:

• When the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress while Bill Clinton was president, he succeeded in 86.4% of Congress votes on issues he supported compared to 36.2% of votes when there was a divided government.

• 2016: Trump and the Republicans held both houses - Trump was in a strong position; he brought in huge tax cuts. 2018 Democrats took the House of Representatives, and Trump's policies hit gridlock.

• 2013 government shut down after Obama couldn’t pass his budget - the Republican House demanded austerity and wouldn't debate his immigration bill.

• However, Trump struggled over passing the American Health Care Act in 2017 - suggests that even with a Republican president and a Republican Congress, things are not always straightforward. The bill faced strong Republican opposition in both the House and Senate. The Supreme Court:

  • The president's power over the SC is the ability to make appointments. However, they have no control over how many of these they will make, and they also need agreement from the Senate. The fact that appointments are for life is highly significant. Once in place, a president has no power over the judges.
  • The president is required to carry out SC decisions as part of the president's oath to defend the Constitution and the law.

Limitations on Presidential Power and Why This Varies Between Presidents

Congressional Checks on Presidential Power

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress significant powers to check the president, including the power to override vetoes, control the budget, and impeach the president. However, the effectiveness of these checks often varies.

Example: Override of Veto (George W. Bush, 2008)

In 2008, Congress overrode President George W. Bush's veto of a bill expanding Medicare spending. This demonstrated how Congress can constrain presidential power, especially when the president’s party does not control both houses of Congress.

Impeachment of Donald Trump (2019 & 2021)

President Donald Trump faced two impeachments, first in 2019 over the Ukraine scandal and again in 2021 for inciting the January 6 Capitol riot. Although Trump was acquitted both times in the Senate, the impeachment process highlighted how Congress can significantly limit the president’s power and damage their public image.

Variation Between Presidents: The effectiveness of Congress in checking presidential power can vary depending on the party composition of Congress. For example, when a president’s party controls both chambers of Congress, they face fewer legislative obstacles, as seen during Barack Obama’s first two years in office when Democrats controlled both the House and Senate. Conversely, Donald Trump faced significant limitations after losing control of the House in the 2018 midterms, which led to legislative gridlock and impeachment.

The Courts as a Limitation on Presidential Power

The judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, can limit presidential actions through judicial review. However, the extent of these limitations varies depending on the political leanings of the courts and the specific cases brought before them.

Example: Obama’s Executive Actions on Immigration (2016)

In 2016, the Supreme Court blocked President Obama’s executive action on immigration (DAPA), which sought to provide protections to millions of undocumented immigrants. This judicial ruling exemplified how courts can limit presidential power, particularly when actions are deemed to overstep executive authority.

Example: Trump’s Travel Ban (2018)

Conversely, in 2018, the Supreme Court upheld President Trump’s travel ban, which restricted immigration from several predominantly Muslim countries. The Court’s decision showed how judicial rulings can sometimes favour presidential authority, depending on the ideological leanings of the justices.

Variation Between Presidents: Presidents may face more or fewer judicial challenges based on the composition of the federal judiciary. Presidents who appoint more ideologically aligned judges, as Trump did with the appointment of three conservative justices to the Supreme Court, are more likely to see their executive actions upheld. In contrast, Obama faced more pushback from a conservative-leaning judiciary.

Public Opinion and Presidential Power

• Public opinion can be a significant informal constraint on presidential power. Presidents with high approval ratings often find it easier to exercise power, while those with low ratings face greater challenges. Example: Lyndon B. Johnson and the Vietnam War (1968)

President Lyndon B. Johnson's power was severely constrained by declining public support due to the Vietnam War. Although he initially had strong legislative success, public opposition to the war led Johnson to decline to run for re-election in 1968. His ability to push his domestic agenda weakened as his popularity declined.

Example: George W. Bush and Hurricane Katrina (2005)

President George W. Bush’s handling of Hurricane Katrina severely damaged his public image. His approval ratings plummeted, and his ability to push forwards major domestic initiatives in the final years of his presidency was significantly limited by the negative public perception of his leadership.

Variation Between Presidents: Public opinion varies widely between presidents and can shift dramatically based on events. Presidents like Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton managed to maintain high approval ratings during much of their terms, which bolstered their political power. In contrast, Richard Nixon’s declining approval during the Watergate scandal directly led to his resignation in 1974.

The Bureaucracy and Presidential Power

The federal bureaucracy can limit presidential power through its size, complexity, and relative autonomy. While the president is the chief executive, they do not have direct control over every agency and department.

Example: Bureaucratic Resistance to Trump’s Policies (2017-2021)

During Trump’s presidency, he faced resistance from within the bureaucracy on issues like immigration and environmental regulations. Career officials in agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Justice sometimes resisted implementing policies they saw as contrary to established norms or laws. This phenomenon, sometimes referred to as the “deep state,” shows how the bureaucratic apparatus can limit presidential power.

Example: Reagan and Deregulation (1980s)

In contrast, President Ronald Reagan faced fewer bureaucratic limitations during his efforts to deregulate various sectors of the economy. His administration succeeded in reducing regulations in areas such as banking and telecommunications, partly because his appointees to key regulatory agencies were aligned with his goals.

Variation Between Presidents:

The level of bureaucratic cooperation can vary based on the president's appointments and the prevailing culture within government agencies. Presidents who appoint loyalists to key positions, like Trump did with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, may face fewer bureaucratic obstacles than those who confront entrenched institutional norms, as Obama did with the Department of Defence during the early years of his presidency.

International Constraints and Presidential Power

Presidents are often constrained by international factors, including global economic conditions, foreign governments, and multilateral organisations like NATO or the UN. These external factors can limit the president’s ability to act unilaterally on foreign policy.

Example: Obama and the Syria Red Line (2013)

President Barack Obama set a "red line" regarding the use of chemical weapons by the Syrian government, but when Syria crossed that line, Obama refrained from military intervention, partly due to international pressure and reluctance from allies like the UK, which voted against military action in Syria. This illustrates how international factors can limit presidential decision-making.

Example: George H.W. Bush and the Gulf War (1991)

On the other hand, George H.W. Bush was able to build a broad international coalition through the UN and other allies to successfully intervene in Kuwait during the Gulf War, demonstrating how international cooperation can also enhance presidential power in certain contexts.

Variation Between Presidents: International constraints vary based on global circumstances and the president’s diplomatic strategy. While Obama faced resistance from international partners in his efforts to intervene in Syria, George W. Bush faced significant global backlash for the Iraq War in 2003, which hurt U.S. relations and limited his influence on the world stage during his second term.

Resigned in 2024 after being seen as unfit for the presidency by citizens and the party.

The Imperial Presidency:

• The extent of presidential accountability to Congress.

• Congress can veto a presidential veto - Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act 2016.

• The role and power of the president in foreign policy.

• The POTUS is imperial (power is strong), not imperilled (power is weak) - link back to Article 2 in the Constitution. Commander-in-chief: has significant power over foreign policy.

• E.g., Obama sent drones to Afghanistan and killed Bin Laden (Taliban) without congressional approval/confirmation; Trump withdrew US troops in Afghanistan, which ended the US military actions in Afghanistan (officially).

• Restrained by the War Powers Resolution - the POTUS must notify Congress if military action is over 60 days.

• Military bids must pass in Congress - the House is the Power of the Purse.

• Usually, POTUS focuses on foreign policies when they are in the last period of their term (lame duck president as power constrained by others like Congress, interest groups, etc.). Chief Legislator - legislation.

• E.g., Veto (formal power) legislation - Trump vetoed at least 10 pieces of legislation, including Iran War Powers Resolution (terminate actions in Iran).

• Bully pulpit (persuasion, soft power) - SOTU 2024 Biden calls for legislation of the Border bill.

• The EXOP (bureaucratic department) discusses with interest groups and persuades congresspersons to help legislation following the agenda of POTUS (iron triangle).

• Congress can overturn vetoes with a supermajority (⅔ of Congress) - Congress overturned Trump’s veto on the National Defence Authorisation Act (2021).

• The founding fathers see Congress as the superior branch in the government - Constitution: Congress = Article 1; executive = Article 2.

• Checks and Balances - separation of powers (constitution) that power is shared in the 3 branches.

• Presidents can appoint judicial nominees to extend their legacy through SCOTUS, e.g., Trump recommended 3 judges in the SCOTUS, including Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Neil Gorsuch -> voted against abortion rights in Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) (except Amy Coney Barrett).

• POTUS can work with interest groups to exert influence on judicial verdicts through amicus curiae (friends of the court).

• Congress can refuse to confirm the appointment - Mitch McConnell refused to confirm Merrick Garland’s judicial nomination by Obama.

• SCOTUS has massive checks on executive orders through judicial review (founded in Marbury v. Madison) - Trump’s Travel Ban was blocked based on the 5th Amendment -> POTUS has no power to overturn it and must obey the rulings (otherwise, it is unconstitutional and ultra vires (overpowering)).

• SCOTUS judges are neutral and protected by life tenure (Article 3) -> not necessary to follow the ideologies of POTUS -> Amy Coney Barrett voted for abortion in Dobbs and Jackson (2022) as a minority, Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the liberals in NFIB v. Sebelius, David Souter was nominated by Bush as a ‘slam dunk for conservatives’ but went on to become one of the most liberal justices on the bench.

Presidential Case Studies

George W. Bush (2001–2009) – War on Terror and Domestic Policy

Achievements: Bush's presidency is most defined by his response to the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent War on Terror.

• War on Terror: Following the 9/11 attacks in 2001, Bush launched the War on Terror, which included the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq. The Patriot Act expanded the government’s surveillance powers to fight terrorism.
• No Child Left Behind (2002): Bush achieved one of his major domestic goals with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act, aimed at improving education standards and accountability in schools.
• Debate: Bush’s effectiveness is heavily debated. While his initial response to 9/11 garnered widespread support, the war in Iraq became highly unpopular, with many arguing that it was based on faulty intelligence about weapons of mass destruction. His handling of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and the 2008 financial crisis further damaged his presidency.
• Effectiveness: Bush was initially effective in rallying the country and pursuing his War on Terror goals, but his legacy is marred by the long-term consequences of the Iraq War and domestic crises.

Barack Obama (2009–2017) – Health Care Reform and Economic Recovery

Achievements:

Obama’s presidency is marked by significant domestic achievements, particularly in healthcare and economic recovery after the Great Recession.

• Affordable Care Act (2010): The passage of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was Obama’s signature legislative achievement, expanding healthcare coverage to millions of Americans and preventing insurance companies from denying coverage for pre-existing conditions.
• Economic Recovery: Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 helped stabilise the U.S. economy in the aftermath of the Great Recession, leading to a steady economic recovery over the course of his presidency.
• Debate: Obama’s foreign policy, particularly his handling of the Syrian Civil War and the rise of ISIS, is more controversial. Critics argue that his "red line" on chemical weapons in Syria damaged U.S. credibility. Additionally, Republicans heavily opposed the Affordable Care Act, leading to deep partisan divides.
• Effectiveness: Obama was highly effective in achieving domestic policy goals, particularly healthcare reform and economic recovery. However, his foreign policy legacy is more debated, with mixed outcomes in the Middle East.

Donald Trump (2017–2021) – America First and Divisive Leadership

Hawkish Pragmatism: aggressive and erratic in his foreign policy approach.

Achievements

• Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (2017): One of Trump’s signature legislative achievements was the passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which reduced corporate tax rates from 35% to 21% and lowered individual tax rates. The legislation was a major victory for Trump and congressional Republicans, fulfilling a key campaign promise to cut taxes and stimulate economic growth.
• Judicial Appointments: Trump succeeded in reshaping the federal judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court. During his presidency, Trump appointed three Supreme Court justices (Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett), shifting the Court’s balance to a solid conservative majority. He also appointed hundreds of lower federal judges.
• Foreign Policy – Abraham Accords (2020): Trump brokered the Abraham Accords, normalising diplomatic relations between Israel and several Arab nations, including the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. This was hailed as a significant achievement in Middle East diplomacy, although debates persist about the long-term impact on peace in the region.
• Deregulation: Trump’s administration rolled back a wide range of federal regulations, particularly in the environmental sector, such as the weakening of the Clean Power Plan. His administration touted these rollbacks as essential for economic growth and reducing government overreach.

Debates and Limitations

• Impeachment: Trump became the first president in U.S. history to be impeached twice. The first impeachment in 2019 was over his dealings with Ukraine, and the second in 2021 was for inciting the January 6th Capitol riot. Although Trump was acquitted both times by the Senate, these impeachments limited his ability to govern effectively in the latter part of his term and damaged his standing with a significant portion of the public.
• COVID-19 Pandemic: Trump’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic is a major area of debate. While his administration spearheaded Operation Warp Speed, which accelerated vaccine development, his inconsistent messaging, reluctance to enforce national mandates, and frequent downplaying of the virus were widely criticised. These actions contributed to a chaotic federal response and likely harmed his re-election prospects.
• Immigration Policy: Trump’s immigration policies, including the travel ban on Muslim-majority countries and the separation of families at the southern border, were highly controversial. Although Trump achieved his aim of reducing immigration, these policies faced significant legal challenges and public outcry, limiting their long-term sustainability.

Joe Biden (2021–2024)

Achievements

• American Rescue Plan (2021): Early in his presidency, Biden signed the American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion stimulus package aimed at aiding economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. This package included direct payments to Americans, extended unemployment benefits, and significant funds for vaccine distribution and reopening schools. It was a major legislative victory that addressed the immediate crisis of the pandemic.
• Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (2021): Biden achieved a rare bipartisan victory with the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, a $1.2 trillion bill aimed at modernising America’s infrastructure, including roads, bridges, broadband internet, and clean energy projects. This accomplishment was a significant part of his “Build Back Better” agenda, though it fell short of the original, larger social spending bill.
• CHIPS and Science Act (2022): Biden successfully passed the CHIPS Act, aimed at boosting domestic manufacturing of semiconductors and reducing dependence on foreign production. This was a strategic move to strengthen U.S. technological competitiveness, particularly in light of tensions with China.
• COVID-19 Vaccination Rollout: Biden's administration oversaw a large-scale vaccination effort, achieving high rates of vaccination early in his term and implementing measures to manage subsequent COVID-19 waves. His administration also passed measures like a federal mask mandate in certain areas and expanded testing and treatment infrastructure.

Debates and Limitations

• Withdrawal from Afghanistan (2021): Biden’s most controversial foreign policy decision was the chaotic withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan in August 2021. The rapid collapse of the Afghan government and the Taliban’s return to power led to widespread criticism of Biden’s handling of the situation, with many arguing that the withdrawal lacked proper planning. While Biden defended the decision as ending “forever wars,” the execution severely damaged his approval ratings and raised questions about U.S. global leadership.
• Build Back Better Failure: Biden’s original Build Back Better agenda, which included ambitious social spending on education, healthcare, and climate change, was significantly scaled down after opposition from moderate Democratic senators like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. While some parts of the agenda were passed in smaller bills, the failure to pass the full package was a setback for Biden’s broader domestic goals.
• Partisan Division: Like Trump, Biden has faced deep partisan division. Republicans in Congress have consistently opposed much of his agenda, leading to gridlock on key issues like voting rights and gun control. Despite initial hopes of bipartisanship, Biden’s legislative successes have often required narrow Democratic majorities or budget reconciliation processes that bypass the need for Republican support.
• Inflation and Economic Concerns: High inflation rates, largely driven by global supply chain issues and the economic fallout from the pandemic, have put pressure on Biden's administration. Despite efforts to manage the economic recovery, rising prices for goods and fuel have been a significant concern for voters, affecting Biden's approval ratings and limiting the perception of his effectiveness on economic issues.

US Supreme Court

The Nature and Role of the Supreme Court

The US Constitution:

• Interpretation: founders' intent (strict constructionism) v. modern standards (loose constructionism). The Independent Nature of the Supreme Court:

Factors that reinforce the independence of SCOTUS:

Although Article III of the Constitution gives Congress the power to change the composition of the SC, it has remained as nine members since 1869.

The American Bar Association (ABA) is an interest group made up of professional lawyers, rather than just political actors. The ABA rates the sustainability of the nominee and their understanding of the law and the Constitution.

• Ketanji Brown Jackson (appointed in 2022) was rated ‘well-qualified’.
• Amy Coney Barett (appointed in 2020) was rated ‘well-qualified’.

The Judicial Review Process (Marbury vs. Madison 1803 and Fletcher vs. Peck 1810):

• Madison v Marbury: established the principle of judicial review - empowering SC to review and invalidate laws from the executive that is in violation of the Constitution.
• Fletcher v Peck: set a precedent for the protection of property rights and economic contracts.

The Appointment Process for the Supreme Court

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Process:

Strengths:

• Ensures judicial independence - salary rate is fixed, and justices with life tenure cannot be sacked unless they are found guilty of impeachment. Therefore, they are immune to the threat of tenure.

• Ensures judicial ability - In 2005, Harriet Miers, as the George W Bush nominee, was rejected due to a lack of prior experience as a judge and being a close friend and advisor to Bush.

• Ensures personal suitability - In Kavanaugh’s hearing, he had over 32 hours of hearings from the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate if he really had sexually assaulted several women due to improper FBI investigations into allegations. Weaknesses:

• Justice Roberts in 2005 as a Bush nominee only had a 17-hour hearing with a result of 78-22 votes in Congress that some Democrats voted for him, whereas Justice Kavanaugh in 2018 nominated by Trump had over 32 hours of hearings with loads of questions including from Vice President Kamala Harris while Kavanaugh accused Harris of making him cry. He also had a close vote of 50-48. Therefore, the changes in duration and the tension in the hearing can be interpreted as a political appointment process.

• The confirmation process is open to abuse because the Senate Judiciary Committee holds the power to decide if the confirmation process will be held, e.g., Mitch McConnell as the minority leader of the Senate and a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to hold a hearing to confirm Merrick Garland, who was Obama’s nominee.

• Presidential nominees can be the political legacy for presidents when they leave the executive office, e.g., Trump successfully appointed 3 justices, including Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett, to extend his legacy and exert influence over Supreme Court decisions. Especially Justice Amy Coney Barrett was accepted in a rush, two weeks before the presidential election in 2020.

• Justice Thomas was accepted with a close vote of 52-48, while he had only been a judge for a year, and he never wrote a legal book, article, or brief of consequence. Also, he and Kavanaugh are accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault by ex-colleagues and several women, yet they still became justices. Factors Influencing the President’s Choice of Nominee:

Ideological Leaning:

• Organism/strict constructionist - justices who have a strict interpretation of; the original meaning (from the literal meaning of the Constitution), favour state autonomy over federal power. e.g., Roe v. Wade (1973) was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022), and this retrieves the power to control abortion rights to the states.

• Liberal/loose constructionist - justices who have loose interpretation as; the Constitution is a living, dynamic, and thriving document (pragmatic approach to Constitution and move/evolve with the society), favour federal power over state control. e.g., Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) to allow same-sex marriage on a federal level. Judicial Ability:

• Kagan was nominated due to her judicial academic background (Professor of Harvard Law School) and legal career as a solicitor general of the US.

• Alito was nominated for his 15-year legal experience as a justice in the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

• Roberts was nominated by George W Bush with a legal career of a legal clerk for Justice Friendly and Justice Rehnquist and 4-year experience as a justice in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

• Ketanji Brown Jackson was nominated by Biden with a legal career in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, as a federal public defender, and the vice chairperson of the United States Sentencing Commission.

• Harriet Miers was rejected in the confirmation process due to a lack of prior legal experience as a judge. Political Motivations:

• Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by President Obama with the interpretation of Obama’s Hispanic support.

• Ketanji Brown Jackson was nominated by President Biden with the interpretation of Biden’s Black support. Social Characteristics:

• Amy Coney Barrett was nominated by Trump, as Trump mentioned before her nomination that he will nominate a female justice to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

• Ketanji Brown Jackson was nominated by Biden with the interpretation of being the first black female justice.

The Impact of the Supreme Court on Public Policy in the US

How the Supreme Court Shapes Public Policy:

• Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruled that state laws to segregate blacks and whites in public facilities are constitutional and not violate the 14th Amendment (‘separate but equal’). However, judicial activism is stronger as justices review the cases and determine the interpretation of the Constitution from the judicial perspective rather than deferring to the states. For example, Brown v. Board of Education (1954) ruled that state laws to segregate blacks and whites in public schools were unconstitutional and violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, which overturned the ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896).

• Chief Justice Earl Warren (1953-1969) called for judicial restraint, but Chief Justice William Rehnquist (1986-2005) promoted judicial activism. Judicial Review:

• Judicial review is an important power of the Supreme Court, as they have the power to interpret the Constitution and overturn executive actions.

• Roe v. Wade (1973) established the principle of abortion rights by interpreting that the right to privacy (1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment) protects women from restrictions on abortion.

• Citizens United v. FEC (2010) established that companies are considered juridical persons, and therefore, companies have the right to freedom of speech under the First Amendment. Therefore, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002 (McCain-Feingold Act) was repealed. Judicial Activism:

• Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) established same-sex marriage rights at a federal level by interpreting the 14th Amendment and equal protection under the law. Same-sex marriage is protected in all US states.

• Roe v. Wade (1973) was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022). This ruling indicates that the Supreme Court has returned the power to control abortion rights to the states.

US Democracy and Participation

Electoral Systems in the USA

Different Election Processes in the USA:

The Debate Around the Electoral College:

• Strengths:
• Protects the voice of smaller states.
• Encourages coalition-building across a variety of states.
• Weaknesses:
• The candidate who wins the popular vote can lose the election, e.g., in 2016 Hillary Clinton vs. Donald Trump.
• Focus on swing states, leaving ‘safe’ states ignored.

Campaign Finance in the USA

Role and Importance of Money in US Politics:

Campaign finance laws, Political Action Committees (PACs), and Super PACs.

• The role of PACs and Super PACs is to raise and spend money to influence elections.

• Citizens United v. FEC (2010) allowed for unlimited spending by PACs and Super PACs, considering it free speech under the First Amendment.

• The amount of money raised and spent on elections has consistently increased. In 2020, the presidential election cost around $14 billion, the most expensive election in US history. Regulations and Challenges:

• The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002 (BCRA) sought to limit the influence of money in politics.

• The FEC is responsible for enforcing campaign finance laws but is often criticised for being ineffective due to deadlocks among commissioners.

Voting Behaviour

Social Factors

Age:

• Young Voters (18–29) tend to support the Democratic Party. In the 2020 presidential election, 60% of voters aged 18–29 supported Joe Biden, compared to 36% for Donald Trump.
• Older Voters (65+) tend to lean Republican. In the 2020 election, 52% of voters aged 65+ voted for Trump, while 47% supported Biden, showing a generational divide in party preference.

Race:

• African Americans: African Americans overwhelmingly support the Democratic Party. In the 2020 presidential election, 87% of Black voters supported Joe Biden, while only 12% voted for Donald Trump.
• Latino Voters: Latinos generally support Democrats but are more divided than African Americans. In 2020, 65% of Latino voters backed Biden, while 32% supported Trump. Trump performed better among Latinos in 2020 than in 2016, especially in places like Florida and Texas.

Gender:

• Women tend to support the Democratic Party, while men lean towards the Republican Party. In 2020, 57% of women supported Biden, while 53% of men voted for Trump. The gender gap has been a consistent factor in recent elections.
• White Women are more divided: In 2020, 55% of white women supported Trump, while non-white women overwhelmingly supported Biden.

Religion:

• White Evangelical Christians overwhelmingly support the Republican Party. In 2020, 76% of white evangelical Protestants voted for Trump, continuing a longstanding trend of Republican dominance among this demographic.
• Religiously Unaffiliated Voters are more likely to support the Democratic Party. In 2020, 71% of religiously unaffiliated voters (atheists, agnostics, and those with no religion) voted for Biden.

Geography:

• Urban vs. Rural Divide: Urban areas tend to support the Democratic Party, while rural areas overwhelmingly support Republicans. In 2020, Biden won the majority of votes in large metropolitan areas, while Trump dominated in rural America.
• The South and Midwest tend to lean Republican, while the Northeast and West Coast are Democratic strongholds. In states like California and New York, Biden secured overwhelming victories, while Texas and Alabama remained Republican.

Economic Factors

• Economic Performance and Incumbency: Voters tend to reward incumbents when the economy is strong and punish them when it is weak. In 1992, George H.W. Bush lost re-election largely due to a recession, despite having high approval ratings after the Gulf War.
• Bill Clinton's 1992 Victory: Clinton famously won the 1992 election with the campaign slogan "It’s the economy, stupid." The U.S. was recovering from a recession, and Clinton’s promise of economic growth helped him defeat incumbent George H.W. Bush.
• Barack Obama’s 2012 Re-election: Despite a slow economic recovery from the 2008 financial crisis, voters credited Obama for stabilising the economy. His policies, such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, helped him secure re-election against Mitt Romney.
• Donald Trump and the 2020 Election: Trump initially benefited from a strong economy, with record-low unemployment in 2019. However, the economic downturn caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the administration’s response to the crisis significantly affected his re-election bid. Voters concerned about economic recovery shifted towards Joe Biden.

Partisanship

• Strong Party Identification: Partisan loyalty remains a strong predictor of voting behaviour. In 2020, 94% of Republican voters supported Donald Trump, and 94% of Democrats backed Joe Biden. This shows that despite the increase in independent voters, party identification still drives much of the electorate.
• Decline in Partisanship: However, party loyalty has weakened over time as more Americans identify as independents. According to a 2021 Gallup poll, 41% of Americans identified as independent, the highest in recent decades. This suggests a growing number of voters are less tied to a specific party, leading to more volatility in elections.
• Swing Voters and Independents: Independent voters are often seen as the key to winning elections. For example, in the 2020 election, Biden won 54% of independent voters, compared to 41% for Trump, which helped him win in key swing states like Michigan and Pennsylvania.
• Realignment in Voting Patterns: Partisan realignment has occurred in recent decades, especially with white working-class voters shifting towards the Republican Party and suburban voters moving towards the Democratic Party. Trump’s success in 2016 was partly due to winning traditionally Democratic Rust Belt states (like Wisconsin and Michigan), thanks to his appeal to working-class white voters.

Voting Participation

U.S. voter turnout is low compared to other democracies: In recent elections, turnout in the U.S. has been significantly lower than in many other advanced democracies. For example, the 2020 presidential election saw a voter turnout of about 66%, which was the highest in over a century, yet still lower than the average turnout in countries like Germany (76% in 2021), France (74% in 2017), and the UK (67% in 2019). Prior to 2020, voter turnout in U.S. presidential elections had hovered around 55-60%, a stark contrast to the 70-90% turnout rates seen in other advanced democracies.

Factors Influencing Turnout

Voter ID Laws:

• Proponents of voter ID laws argue that they are necessary to prevent voter fraud and ensure the integrity of elections. For example, Texas and Georgia have some of the strictest voter ID laws in the country, requiring specific forms of government-issued identification to vote.

• A 2014 Government Accountability Office report found that voter ID laws in Kansas and Tennessee reduced turnout, with a greater impact on younger and African-American voters.

• 2013 Supreme Court Ruling on the Voting Rights Act: In Shelby County v. Holder, the Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, which had required certain states with a history of voter discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing voting laws. This led to an increase in voter ID laws in states like North Carolina and Texas, which critics say suppress turnout among minority voters. Early Voting:

• In the 2020 election, more than 101 million Americans voted early, either by mail or in-person, accounting for 73% of all votes cast.

• COVID-19 and Early Voting in 2020: The pandemic prompted an expansion of early voting and vote-by-mail options across many states in the 2020 election. States like Georgia and Arizona saw record early voting turnout, with early voting believed to have increased overall voter participation.

• However, some states have moved to restrict early voting. For instance, Georgia’s 2021 voting law (SB 202) limited the number of drop boxes for mail-in ballots and reduced the timeframe for early voting, which critics argue could reduce turnout. Voter Suppression Tactics:

• Purging voter rolls: Some states, like Ohio, have aggressively purged voter rolls, removing voters who haven’t participated in recent elections. The Supreme Court upheld Ohio’s voter purge in a 2018 ruling (Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute), but critics argue that such purges disproportionately affect minority and low-income voters.

• Long wait times and fewer polling stations: In minority-heavy areas like Fulton County, Georgia, voters have faced long wait times and fewer polling stations, especially during high-turnout elections. These factors can discourage voter participation, particularly among working-class and minority voters.

Debates Around Voter Suppression

Voter Suppression Tactics Disproportionately Affect Minority Voters:

• Impact on African-American and Latino voters: Various studies have shown that voter suppression efforts, including strict voter ID laws and reduced early voting opportunities, disproportionately impact African-American and Latino voters. A Brennan Centre for Justice study found that Latino voters in Texas were 46% more likely to lack the required ID to vote under Texas’ strict voter ID law, and African-American voters in Georgia faced longer wait times on average than white voters during the 2018 election.
• Georgia 2021 Voting Law (SB 202): Georgia’s new voting law has been at the centre of voter suppression debates. The law imposes stricter voter ID requirements for absentee ballots, limits the use of drop boxes, and bans giving food or water to voters waiting in line at polling stations. Critics, including civil rights groups, argue that the law will disproportionately affect minority voters, particularly in urban areas with historically longer wait times. President Biden described the law as “Jim Crow in the 21st Century.”
• Voter ID and Native Americans: Native American communities, particularly in states like North Dakota, have been disproportionately affected by strict voter ID laws. In 2018, North Dakota required voters to have a residential address, which many Native Americans on reservations lack, complicating their ability to vote.

Gerrymandering:

Partisan Gerrymandering: Gerrymandering is a major form of voter suppression, as it manipulates district boundaries to favour one party over another, diluting the power of certain voter groups, particularly minorities.

• Example: North Carolina and Pennsylvania: In North Carolina, the state’s congressional districts were heavily gerrymandered to favour Republicans. The Supreme Court ruled in 2019 that federal courts could not intervene in cases of partisan gerrymandering (Rucho v. Common Cause), leaving such cases up to state courts. In Pennsylvania, the state Supreme Court struck down the Republican-drawn congressional map in 2018, ruling that it unfairly diluted Democratic votes. Racial Gerrymandering: In some cases, gerrymandering is used to specifically dilute the voting power of racial minorities. In Alabama, lawsuits have been filed against the state’s congressional district maps, arguing that they dilute the influence of Black voters, who are packed into a small number of districts.

Counterarguments: Preventing Voter Fraud:

• Donald Trump and other Republicans have repeatedly made claims of widespread voter fraud, particularly after the 2020 election, although these claims have been debunked by multiple courts and independent investigations.
• Support for Voter ID Laws: Polls consistently show that a majority of Americans, including minority voters, support voter ID requirements. A 2021 Monmouth University poll found that 80% of Americans support voter ID laws, with support cutting across party lines.

Pressure Groups

The Role of Pressure Groups in US Politics:

• Pressure groups are organisations that attempt to influence government policy without seeking election themselves. Types of pressure groups include:

• Sectional groups, representing a section of society (e.g., AARP for older Americans).

• Cause groups, advocating for a specific cause (e.g., the Sierra Club for environmental issues).

• Pressure groups use various methods to influence policy, including lobbying, public campaigns, and litigation.

• The power of pressure groups is often linked to the amount of money they can raise and spend.

The Role of Pressure Groups in US Politics

The NRA (National Rifle Association): The NRA is a powerful pressure group that advocates for gun rights. It has been highly effective in shaping gun policy in the U.S. through lobbying efforts, campaign contributions, and mobilising its members. The NRA spends millions of dollars each election cycle to support candidates who align with their views on gun ownership, and its influence has played a significant role in blocking gun control legislation despite public demand for stricter laws after mass shootings.

Planned Parenthood: Planned Parenthood, a cause group focused on reproductive rights, has been influential in advocating for women’s health and reproductive freedom, including access to abortion services. It actively lobbies Congress and state legislatures to protect abortion rights and expand access to healthcare for women. Planned Parenthood also engages in public campaigns, including organising protests and running educational programmes, and has frequently used litigation to challenge laws that restrict abortion access (e.g., Planned Parenthood v. Casey in 1992).

Types of Pressure Groups

Sectional Groups:

Sectional groups represent a specific section of society, typically focused on promoting and protecting the interests of their members.

AARP (American Association of Retired Persons): The AARP is a prominent sectional group that represents the interests of older Americans. With over 38 million members, it is one of the most powerful lobbying groups in the U.S. The AARP lobbies extensively on issues such as Social Security, Medicare, and retirement benefits. Its large membership base gives it considerable influence, and it has successfully advocated against attempts to cut Social Security benefits or privatise Medicare.

The American Medical Association (AMA): The AMA is a sectional group representing doctors and the medical profession. It lobbies Congress on healthcare legislation and medical regulations. The AMA played a significant role in the passing of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), although it opposed certain provisions. Its influence in healthcare reform debates highlights the power of sectional groups to shape policy outcomes affecting specific professional sectors.

Cause Groups:

Cause groups advocate for a particular cause or issue, often driven by ideological or moral motivations rather than the material interests of their members.

The Sierra Club: The Sierra Club is one of the oldest and most influential environmental pressure groups in the U.S. It advocates for policies to combat climate change, protect public lands, and promote clean energy. The Sierra Club uses a combination of lobbying, grassroots organising, and litigation to influence environmental policy. For instance, it has filed numerous lawsuits against the Trump administration’s rollbacks of environmental protections and regulations.

Black Lives Matter (BLM): Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a cause group that campaigns against systemic racism and police brutality. While BLM is a decentralised movement rather than a formal organisation, it has used protests, social media campaigns, and public advocacy to influence public opinion and government policy. BLM played a key role in shaping debates around police reform and racial justice in the U.S., particularly after the murder of George Floyd in 2020.

Methods Used by Pressure Groups to Influence Policy

Lobbying:

Pressure groups hire professional lobbyists to meet with members of Congress, government officials, and regulatory agencies to persuade them to support or oppose specific legislation or regulations. Lobbying is often focused on providing expert knowledge and building relationships with policymakers.

The Pharmaceutical Industry: The pharmaceutical industry spends heavily on lobbying to influence healthcare policy. In 2021, pharmaceutical companies and their trade associations spent more than $350 million on lobbying efforts to shape drug pricing legislation and regulations related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The industry has successfully blocked attempts to pass price controls on prescription drugs, demonstrating the power of well-funded lobbyists.

Public Campaigns:

Pressure groups organise public campaigns, including protests, advertising, and social media efforts, to raise awareness about their causes and mobilise public support. These campaigns can be crucial for pressuring lawmakers to act on certain issues.

March for Our Lives: After the 2018 mass shooting in Parkland, Florida, student-led activists organised the March for Our Lives to advocate for gun control. The movement held protests across the country and mobilised millions of people, particularly young voters, to demand stronger gun legislation. The protests led to increased political pressure for gun control reforms, although significant federal legislation has not yet been passed.

Litigation:

Many pressure groups use the courts to challenge laws or regulations that they oppose or to seek legal protections for their causes. This is a particularly effective strategy when legislative action is stalled or unfavourable.

The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union): The ACLU frequently engages in litigation to protect civil liberties and constitutional rights. The organisation played a key role in challenging President Trump’s travel ban (Executive Order 13769) in court, eventually leading to modifications of the policy. The ACLU also files lawsuits on issues ranging from free speech to LGBTQ+ rights, and it often relies on the judiciary to influence policy when other branches of government are unresponsive.

Campaign Contributions:

Pressure groups with financial resources can contribute to political campaigns through Political Action Committees (PACs) and Super PACs. Campaign contributions provide access to candidates and elected officials and can be used to shape policy priorities.

The NRA and Campaign Contributions: The NRA is known for its extensive campaign contributions to Republican candidates and members of Congress who support gun rights. During the 2016 election cycle, the NRA spent $30 million to help elect Donald Trump and other pro-gun candidates. This financial backing gives the NRA significant influence in shaping gun policy in the U.S.

The Power of Money in Pressure Group Influence

Koch Brothers and Americans for Prosperity: The Koch Brothers, through their funding of Americans for Prosperity, have exerted significant influence over conservative and libertarian causes. Their network of political contributions, think tanks, and advocacy groups has shaped Republican policy on issues such as tax reform, deregulation, and climate change denial. Their financial power allows them to sway policy through a combination of lobbying, media campaigns, and political donations.

Rights and Liberties in the USA

Civil Rights and Civil Liberties:

The Bill of Rights:

The Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, protects various civil liberties, such as:

• First Amendment: Protects freedom of speech, religion, and the press, and the right to assemble and petition the government.
• Fourth Amendment: Protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, ensuring privacy.
• Fifth and Sixth Amendments: Protect the rights of individuals accused of crimes, including the right to a fair trial and protection from self-incrimination. Freedom of Speech – Citizens United v. FEC (2010): In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court ruled that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited under the First Amendment, equating corporate spending with free speech. This decision expanded the scope of free speech, allowing for increased spending by corporations in U.S. elections but also raising concerns about the influence of money in politics.

Civil Rights:

• Civil rights refer to the rights of citizens to political and social freedom and equality, often associated with movements to end discrimination based on race, gender, and other characteristics. Brown v. Board of Education (1954): In this landmark case, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, overturning the “separate but equal” doctrine established in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). This case was a cornerstone of the Civil Rights Movement and led to efforts to desegregate schools and other public institutions across the United States.

Obergefell v. Hodges (2015): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage is a constitutional right under the Fourteenth Amendment, guaranteeing equal protection under the law. This decision legalised same-sex marriage nationwide, representing a major victory for the LGBTQ+ rights movement.

Debates Around Civil Rights

Balance Between Security and Civil Liberties:

The War on Terror has sparked a long-standing debate about the balance between national security and civil liberties, especially following the 9/11 attacks.

USA PATRIOT Act (2001): Passed shortly after 9/11, the USA PATRIOT Act expanded government surveillance powers to combat terrorism, allowing law enforcement to monitor phone and internet activity without a warrant in certain cases. Critics argue that these expanded powers infringe on Fourth Amendment rights, particularly regarding privacy and protection from unreasonable searches.

NSA Surveillance and Snowden Revelations (2013): In 2013, former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked classified documents revealing that the National Security Agency (NSA) had been collecting phone records and internet data on millions of Americans. This raised significant concerns about government overreach and the violation of privacy rights, sparking debates about the trade-off between security and civil liberties.

Affirmative Action:

Affirmative action policies are designed to address racial and gender inequalities by giving preferential treatment to underrepresented groups in education and employment. However, these policies remain highly controversial.

Regents of the University of California v. Bakke (1978): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that racial quotas in college admissions are unconstitutional, but it upheld the use of race as one factor in admissions decisions to promote diversity. This case highlights the complexity of affirmative action, where promoting diversity is balanced against claims of "reverse discrimination" against white applicants.

Ongoing Debate: In 2023, the Supreme Court took up cases challenging affirmative action at Harvard University and the University of North Carolina, with critics arguing that race-based admissions policies unfairly discriminate against Asian American and white applicants. If the Court overturns these policies, it could mark a major shift in how universities approach diversity and affirmative action.

Voting Rights:

Voting rights have been a central issue in the U.S., particularly after the Supreme Court’s decision in Shelby County v. Holder (2013).

Shelby County v. Holder (2013): The Supreme Court struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which required certain states with histories of racial discrimination to obtain federal approval before changing voting laws. This decision has led to the introduction of stricter voting laws in several states, such as voter ID laws and the reduction of early voting periods, which critics argue disproportionately affect minority voters and amount to voter suppression.

Current Debate on Voter Suppression: In recent years, Republican-controlled states, including Georgia and Texas, have passed new voting laws, such as limiting the use of absentee ballots and reducing the number of polling stations in minority-dominated areas. Democrats and civil rights groups argue these measures are designed to suppress voter turnout among Black and Latino voters, while Republicans argue they are necessary to prevent voter fraud.

Abortion Rights:

Roe v. Wade (1973) was a landmark Supreme Court decision that recognised a woman's constitutional right to access abortion. However, this ruling has been at the centre of political and legal challenges for decades.

Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organisation (2022): In this case, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, ending nearly 50 years of federal protection for abortion rights. The Court ruled that there is no constitutional right to an abortion, leaving the matter to individual states. Following this decision, several Republican-led states passed laws that severely restrict or ban abortion, while Democratic-led states have moved to protect abortion access.

Debate: The Dobbs decision has reignited fierce debates over women's rights and federalism. Critics argue that it disproportionately affects low-income and minority women, who are less able to travel to states where abortion remains legal, while supporters believe it restores states’ rights to regulate abortion.