Study guide

divided governemnt

A divided governement is when the branches of governement are divided. For instance the majority of the legislative branch could by republican while having the president as a democrate. This happened to obama during one of his terms. A divided governement can be difficult because it makes it harder for the president to get things done because not everyone in the legislative branch has the same ideology. The president however, can put pressure on the legislative branch by going public and having his supporters send letters to congress to urge them to support the president.

3- What is the seesaw effect of successful federalism? Discuss this with the sources of national government and state power. Provide 2 cases as examples one as decentralizing, one as centralizing. Make sure to have appropriate references to the Constitution.

A federation attempts to balance the legitimate authority of the national government with that of the states in equilibrium. In a successful federation, when an imbalance of authority occurs between the national government and the states, counteracting forces within the system work to correct the imbalance—much like a seesaw. Although the U.S. national government has grown stronger over time, the states and, often, the courts respond vigorously when power shifts too far to the national side; however, the pattern over time is that the federal courts have usually sided with the federal government (this can tie into the later discussion regarding increased government centralization over time). National Gov Sources: -commerce clause (Art I Sec 8) enumerates responsibilities of Congress significant powers over the states -elastic clause (Art I Sec 8) grants congress what ever is 'necessary and proper' to execute its powers enumerated within Const -supremacy clause Const, subsequent federal law, and all US treaties become the 'supreme law of the land' to all states are bound -Art I Sec 10 This section of Const lists numerous restrictions on the states State Gov Sources -Bill Of Rights: first 10 amendments places limits on actions of fed gov -Art I Sec 9, like sec 10 for states, this section lists restrictions placed on federal power -Tenth Amendment powers reserved to the states Centralized- Gibbsons V Ogden the court affirmed that Congress has the authority to regulate commerce as long as it involves more than one state Decentralized- US V Lopez(95') the court ruled that the Gun-Free School Zones Act passed by Congress(90') is unconstitutional bc regulating firearms in public schools is not regulating interstate commerce. Court recognizes limitations on nat gov authority gained by the commerce clause

minority leader

A minority leader is a party's head holding the minority seats in the senate or house of represtentives. they are choosen by the party whip to be the speaker of their party's opinions on legistlation. The Senate Minority Leader is acts as the direct counterpart to the Senate Majority Leader. The Senate Minority leader is to act as the chief spokesperson for the their respective party, and are responsible for the coordination and managing for their party's agenda in the Senate.

antifederalist

A person who opposed the adoption of the United States Constitution because they feared it was too strong. They believed that federalism as described by the constitution meant a return to that they despised about the British: remote government with overriding authority to tax without the approval of the popularly elected local or state governments, a standby army ready to oppress the people, and one-size-fits-all polices that did not recognize the diversity of the various states spread across a huge land area. To ease these ideas John Madison and Alexander Hamilton released what they called the federalist papers to explain the political philosophy behind the American form of government.

pocket veto

A pocket veto is a way the president has a check on the legislation branch. The president can perform a pocket veto by not signing a bill for 10 days after passage in congress and congress has adjurned during that 10 day period. If a president poket vetoes a law, then congress ,must pass the law again in the next session to keep th bill alive. Recently, pocket vetos are rare because Congress stays conscience of the president's possible actions and schedualed legislative final votes to avoid the 10 day cutoff. This doesn't mean that pocket vetos are pointless. instead it just spurs members to speed thinds along when the end of the session approaches.

confedertion

A political system with multiple levels of government in which lower-level governments retain full sovereignty and cannot be compelled by the national government to act. One example would be the United States under the Articles of Confederation. All the states retained there own power and could not coordinate with all the other states unless it was unanimously voted upon. One issue could be states having their own currencies which made it harder to trade with each other. A historical example would also be when tweleve of the thirteen states approved an amendment allowing for a levy on imported goods to raise funds for the common defense, yet rhode island did not approve this measure so the confederation had to rely on the good will of the other states to abide by this measure. This led to free riding and collective action problems. Today confederations exist in the European Union.

prisoner's dilemma

A prisoner's dilemma is an interaction between two strategicc actos in which neither actor has an incentive to cooperate even though eac of them would be better off if they did cooperate. For example, when two people are in custody and they are given different options. If they rat the other one out, they can go free and the other person gets a heavy sentence, but if they both keep there mouth shut they both get a light sentence. The traonsaction cost here would be communication because they cant communicate what they should do. A political example would be the use of campaign funds. Two competitors could save there campaign funds by not having tv ads, but they both still use there campaign funds to try to out compete the other member.

signing statement

A public statement written by the president and attatchted to a particular bill to outline his or her interpretation of the legislation. For instance. Obama used signing statements to communicate how laws should be interpreted by federal agencies and the courts. They could look at parts of the law and indicate which parts of the law they consider unconditional and would not enforce. This is one of the checks that the president has on the legislative branch. The president decides on how to enforce the laws. Signing statements started to become more popular recently than they use to, especially in Bush's presidency. Bush used signing statements to connect them with foreign policy matters.

single member district

A single memeber district is an elctoral district in which a single person is elected to a given office. In other words, each disrict has one seat available for one person. This is seen in the Brish house of commons, nearly all states have elcted their representatives for the house and senate through smd and plurality rule. The plurality rule is a method for an election's winner in which the candidate who recieve the most votes wins. in shorts, majority vote wins. In the american current system we use, double memeber districes where states get two senators but each senatorial election occurs as a contest for one seat only, based on plurality voting rules. Until the ealry twentith century, senators were not voted on this way. Until the 17th amendment was created which allowed the plurality rule, the senators were appointed by their state governemnts.

Collective dilemma

A situation in which there is conflict between group goals and individual goals or self-interest. The government can solve these collective dilemmas because states would have no incentive to provide it. Government collects taxes from the states to provide protection and health care to the citizens. They do this to prevent states from freee riding off the institutions that the governments establish from the tax collections.

split refferal

A split refferal isa rule that was put into place that allows the speaker to split a bill up into sections and give certain committees a section. Speakers usually do this to either get the very best infomation and input on a bill that could be beneficial to the country or to get a bill to get marked up by a committee that the speaker knows will not approve. This is uually seen in bills that involve many different policy issues such as omnibus budget bills .

writ of certiorari

A writ of certiorari is an order by the Supreme court directing a lower court to send the records of the case to be reivewed. This means that the justices will review the case .

affirmative action

Affirmative action was a plan by Lyndon Johnson to address the discrimination in the pass towards minorities. They address the discrimination by trying to make up for it now with educational opportunites and emoplyment opportunites. Many u.s colleges have programs designed to bolster the admission of students from certain racial backgrounds of ethinic groups. In addition fire departements and police departments are required by local and federal laws to take steps to hire woman and minorities to maintain certain proportion of such people in there ranks. However ,recently many people are seeing that by having affirmative action, it itself is another form of discrimination because it doesnt bolster those that were a minority in the pass and it doesn't help those that actually have merits to receive the education they want due to there background. o Grutter v. Bollinger, Grates v. Bollinger In the two Bollinger cases, the Court distinguished between a permissible plan, that of the University of Michigan law school, and an impermissible plan, that of the University of Michigan undergraduate admissions. The law school, according to the Court, had narrowly tailored its plan and used race as one element of consideration. The undergraduate admissions plan, however, simply added points onto applications from students from racial minorities. According to the Court, this was not narrowly tailored enough to support the interest of the university in having a diverse student body.

amicus curiae

Amicus curiae means "friends of the court." usually this is found when a case is presented to the Supreme court and peole that are interested in the case submits briefs about there opinions on the case. They could be from experts in a field that relates to the case or they could just be from the general public that finds the case interesting. Regardless, these briefs could be taken into consideration by a judge when they are making a decision on a case.

recall election

An election during the term of an elected government official in which citizens vote directly on whether to remove the individual from office.

Ballot Initative

An election in which citizens vote directly on a proposition raised by a group of fellow citizens.For instance in 2016, the people of California, Massachusettes, and Nevada were asked to vote in ballot initiatives to decided whether marijuana should be legal for recreational use in those states. In all three states, voters approved the initiatives.

exectutive order

An exectuive order is an official means by which the president can instruct federal agencies to execute laws passed by the congress. In the early years of the republic, executive orders were used to dictate the manner in which the federal bureaucracy would implement laws passed by congress. However, recently executive orders are used by the president to make major policy changes and to excerise war powers. For instance, Trumean order that desegretated the arm forces, lyndon johnson ordererd the governement to implement affirmative action, and clinton 's order led to the military use in kosovo. With executive orders presidents dont have to use an alternative which is making it a law because develeoping laws take time and presidents rather do things quickly to solve collective dilemmas within society.

executive agreement

An executive agreement is one of the presidents powers to form agreements with foreign countries. These do not need the senate approval because they are not treaties. There is no real difference between an executive agreement and a treaty in terms of how they are enforced and their legal status, except the fact that treaties last longer than agreements. Since World War II ended, the united states have been party of over 10,000 executvive agreements and all of these are seen consitutional to the federal courts. The North American Free trade Agreement is one example of an executive agreement. This promoted traded between canada, the U.S and Mexico and became one of the largest trading agreements.

Principal agent probelms

An instance in which one actor, the principal, contracts another actor, an agent, to act on the principal's behalf; but the actors may not share the same preferences, and the principal lacks the means to observe all of the agents behavior. An example of this problem would be with the President when he needs information from trusted agents. The president has staff members and cabinet members to provide him with quick decisions on the economy, foreign policies, and national security. If the staff members do not have the correct information that the president believes they do have, then this would be an issue with decided on the best decisions.

dissenting opinion

An opinion issued by a member of the supreme court in oppositon to the majority, offering legal reasoning for the decision to oppose. This is in contrast to concurring opinion. Both of these are important because they might indicate how judge s will try to craft a coalition in future cases on the same topic, or signal to congress how it might write new legislation to overturn the court's decions. For example justice olvier wendell homes wrote several historical dissents that laid the ground work for expanind freedom of speech in later court decisons. Even after the opinions are drafted, judges can change their mind. For instance, ceratin judges convinced kennedy to uphold the logic found in the Roe v. Wade case in planned parenthood v. Casey. The shift that Kennedy made gave those in favor of upholding abotion rights for woman a majority in the case.

appellate jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction is when a case has been brought to a court by either plaintiff or the defendant after being decided on in a lower courtNo new evidence can be brought to an appellate court. The appela cort makes decisions based on the soundeness of the procedures used to decided in the lower level courts. The u.s supreme court has both original jurisidction and appellate jurisdiction. In contrast to federal or state supreme courts who alomst hears cases based on appellate jurisdiction .

devolution

Appropriate analogy aside, devolution is a process in which a central government of a country grants powers to subnational governments (e.g. regional, state, or local governments). This process of decentralization distributes power to territories that want more authority over their own affairs. The most famous example of devolution is in the United Kingdom, where Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland exercise authority over their own lands, but remain part of the U.K. Usually, the central government maintains power of things like national security and defense but allows devolved governments to do things like set up courts, make laws, and regulate education.

block grants

Block grants are given to states by the federal governemnt for a more general purpose. With block grants, states can use the money as they see fit as long as the purpose is in line with the broad goals set by the national government. These kinds of grants were created because states didn't like the other kinds of funding, grants-in-aid and categorical grants, because they has to many conditions and led the national government into mending with state affairs.

checks and balances

Checks and balances refer to the ways in which the three branches of government share power. The founders created this system to make sure that one branch would have complete authority in one area. For example, the legislative branch creates laws, but it up to the president to enforce them. The judicial branch makes sure laws are considtuional with there judicial review power. The president can also veto laws that are formed in congress. The president appoints the judges in the judiciary branch with senates consent and approval.

6- Judiciary is seen as the respected independent arbiter of the Constitution. We have different sources of judicial power, briefly discuss how the Supreme Court's powers evolved over time. Provide examples from each source and discuss how they have affected the Supreme Court's impact on our government. Make sure to make proper references to early cases which established non-constitutional sources of powers.

Constitutional powers are found in Article III, Section 1: Judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court as well as other inferior courts ordained and established by Congress. Judges of these courts will "hold their office during good behavior" In other words, Supreme court Justices and other federal judges are appointed for as long as they are willing to serve in good behavior. Article III, Section 2 defines what types of cases federal courts are allowed to hear. It outlines when the court have original jurisdiction and when the courts have appellate jurisdiction. Judicial review started with Marbury v. Madison. This case marked the first time that the Supreme Court struck down a federal law as unconditional, setting the precedent for judicial review. The Dred Scott v. Sanford was when a slave sued for his freedom and the Court's ruled that Congress did not have constitutional authority to ban slavery in newly acquired territories. This was the second time the Supreme court struck down a federal law for violating the Constitution Federal supremacy appeared in Fletcher v. Peck. The supreme court ruled that a Georgia stare violated the contract clause of the constitution. This was the first time the Supreme Court ruled a state law unconstitutional. McCulloch v. Maryland: The Supreme Court ruled that the constitution allows Congress the authority to establish a bank in Maryland and protects the bank from being taxed by the state. The ruling not only strengthened the power of the Congress and federal law under the Constitution, it also established the authority of federal courts to adjudicate disputes between state and federal governments. Gibbons v. Ogden: The Court struck down a New York monopoly over steamboat ferry services and ruled that other steamboat ferry companies licensed by Confess could not be prevented from competing with companies licensed by New York. The congressional license was valid under the commerce clause of the Constitution. This is another prominent example of Federal courts acting as the authoritative arbiter of disputes between state and federal governments

defense of marriage act

DOMA was a United States federal law that, prior to being ruled unconstitutional, defined marriage for federal purposes as the union of one man and one woman, and allowed states to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages granted under the laws of other states.During the presidency of Obama, the supreme court struck down on DOMA as it violated the liberty protections of the fifth amendment. In 2015, the court in Obergefall v. Hodges ruled that denying same sex marriage violated the equal protection and due process clause of the 14th amendment. After this decision, it allowed same sex marriage to be allowed anywhere in the united states.

federalist 51

Federalist No. 51 (1788) In this Federalist Paper, James Madison explains and defends the checks and balances system in the Constitution. Each branch of government is framed so that its power checks the power of the other two branches; additionally, each branch of government is dependent on the people, who are the source of legitimate authority. Madison also discusses the way republican government can serve as a check on the power of factions, and the tyranny of the majority.

gerrymandering

Gerrymandering is when a party redraws district boundaries to gain a political advantage. They could spread votes out in districts to minimize votes for an opposing party or to give a disadvantage towards population groups that were once discriminated against. This is called racial gerrymandering. For a court to deiced whether the motive for gerrymandering was race is difficult to conclude. However cases have been presented to the suprme court that involved racial gerrymanding. One case Thornburg v. Gibgles... The North Carolina General Assembly passed a redistricting plan for the state's Senate and House of Representatives. Black citizens of North Carolina alleged that the plan created seven new districts where blacks would not be able to elect representatives of their choosing. They filed suit in a District Court claiming that this violated Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. Before the District Court could hear the case, Congress amended Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act in order to clarify that voting violations needed only to have a "discriminatory effect" and required no "discriminatory purpose." Considering the "totality of circumstances" of the redistricting plan, the District Court ruled that six of the new districts violated the newly amended Voting Rights Act by diluting the power of the black vote. The North Carolina Attorney General appealed the decision directly to the Supreme Court.

impeachment

Impeachemnt is a process by which the house of representative formally charges a federal governemnt official with "treason, bribary, or other high Cimes and Misdemenaors." If the president is impeached by the house, the case goes to the senate, which votes whether to recall the president from office. Although no president has been impeached yet, this still displays a check on the president by the legislative branch. There were three presidents that cam close to being impeached Johnson, Nixon, and CLinton. Johnson was impeached but the Senate acquitted him by one vote. Nixon resigned before the house could impeach him, and cllinton was impeached by the house, but was also acquitted by the senate to finish his term.

caucus

In a legislature, a group of legislators that unities to promote and agenda not pursued within the parties or the legislative committees. Caucuses are not given formal legislative powers, nor do they command much in the way of resources or disciplinary mechanisms to hold they members in line. Some important caucuses align by racial identity, such as the congressional Black caucus, or by ideology, such as the conservative house freedom caucus.

grants-in-aid

Is money that is distributed to lower level governments with the purpose of funding a special project. For example, the federal government can giving money to states to fund school lunch programs or new transportation infrastructure.

original jurisdiction

Is where a case started at in a court.

judicial Restarit v. Activism

Judicial activism refers to judicial rulings that are suspected of being based on personal opinion, rather than on existing law. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint.Judicial restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional, though what counts as obviously unconstitutional is itself a matter of some debate. Judicial activism can best be described as rulings that are guided by the personal decisions or political interests of the individual judge. For example, instead of strictly applying the law, the judge makes a determination which includes his own stance on the issues of the case. e.x roe v wade Judicial restraint can best be described as a type of conservative legal decision that is made solely according to the law and by legal precedent. Legal precedent consists of prior court decisions. These decisions may be turned to for current pending legal decisions. For example, instead of relying on any personal or political beliefs of his or her own, a judge who uses legal precedent would make a determination based on how the court decided on similar cases in the past.

judicial review

Judicial review was first applied to the supreme court by the Marbury v.Madison decision. This case involved president adam's midnight appointments before the end of his term. Adam appoint Marshall chief justice of the supreme court. The commissions granting the appintments for the justices were placed on the Department of States' s desk. They were supposed to be deleivered but were overlooked. When Jeffereson took office, he didn't delieve the commissions and therefore voiding the appoinments. Mar bury brought Madison, Jefferson's Secretary of state, to suit, and under the judiciary act, he asked the supreme court for a writ of mandamus to force Madison to make the appointment or to compensate him for his wrong. The act that gave the court original jurisdiction in such cases did not extend to the idea that the supreme court could override the states or was the final arbiter on legal matters. Marbury put the court in a vulnerable postion . chief justice marshall reasoned that the court were not empowered to adjucutate the controversey over adam's appointments, it was empowered to declare laws passed by congress unconstituional . The decision diminished the courts power under the Judiceray act , but gave the courts an new power of judicial reivew. In a unanimous decision, written by Justice Marshall, the Court stated that Marbury, indeed, had a right to his commission. But, more importantly, the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional. In Marshall's opinion, Congress could not give the Supreme Court the power to issue an order granting Marbury his commission. Only the Constitution could, and the document said nothing about the Supreme Court having the power to issue such an order. Thus, the Supreme Court could not force Jefferson and Madison to appoint Marbury, because it did not have the power to do so.

jim crow laws

Laws that were passed after the civil war that made african americas second class citizens. After the Plessy v Furgensen case, these laws became stronger in society due to the "separte but equal" statement.

line-item veto

Line item veto is a partial veto that allows the executive to strike specific passages from a bill . This is one of the checks that the president has on the legislative branch. If a president didnt want to accept a law in its entirity, he can choose parts within the bill that he likes. This basicall allows the president to mold legislation to their liking. In 1996 the u.s congress approved on the presidential line-item veto, but the supreme courtquickly ruled that it was unconsitutional.

logrolling

Logrolling is an instance of two or more legislators agreeing to vote in favor of one another's proposed bills or amendments. Usually legisltaros use this as a way to bring back pork to their districts. If one legislators agrees to support anothers legislators bill of a a budget plan for a construction project that would only benfit that small district, the supported legislators is expected to do the same and support the other's proposed bill or amendment. In other wordsm id do you a favor if you do me a favor, a classic quid pro quo case.

party discipline

Party discipline is an act where party leaders try to put pressure on party memebers to vote on bills that have the party leader's support. this helps solve coordination probelms on common action because if different committtees or factions in congress fail to coordinate, then congress can not get anything done.

pork barrel

Pork barrel is governement spending that bemefits a narrow constituency in return for electoral support or some kind of political support, including campaign donations. In congress, legisltors usually try to bring back pork, or benefits, to their districts or state to help get reelected. Pork barreling tends to bring about collective action problems because one member's interest is disconnected from the groups interest. If all members of congress spent their time trying to get pork and doing constituency services , then nothing would get done that benefits the whole country. Many legislators would love to bring back as much pork and do as many constituency services for their district, but this could lead them to free rising off of other legislatures hard work of crafting legislation that is good for the whole country. Pork barreling also leads to the incumbency advantage because if a legislator is able to bring back many benefits to there district, then people would want to vote for them again so that they can keep bringing back benefits for their district.

reed's rules

Reed's rules are procedural guidlines used by the majority party leadership for determining who sits on what committees, how the order of busincess should be decided, and how the majoirty party should limit the powers of the minorities party. This gives order to the legislative branch and helps the majority party to conduct business for the greater of their group. As the name states, therse rules were developed by thomas reed. Inthe 1890s, congress was deadlock on a tariff policy because coalations continually unraveled due to free riding and coalaition raiding. The minority party used tactics to repreatedly derail legislation favored by the majoirytl By controlling the agende more effectlively, Thomas Reed achieved his goal of raising tariffs.

1- After stating 3 different "repeated injury and usurpations" in the Declaration of Independent (other than taxes) please briefly explain why the US constitution is referred as a "living constitution"; please provide at least two different examples on how the original provisions of the Constitutions have evolved in time.

The Constitution is called a "Living Constitution" because it grows and changes with the country and its citizen's mindsets. Each generation of people have different ideas of what they deem right. For instance, at the birth of the Constitution, when voting for president, woman was not allowed to vote. However, things changed as the world started to change. Soon the country believed that it was time to allow woman to vote. The constitution made it easy to amend new laws. That's why when people believed it was the right time to allow woman's suffrage they amended new laws into the Constitution. This allows for the 19th amendment to be amended and allow woman to vote. In addition, the constitution can be interpreted in different ways according to different situations. For instance, under the elastic clause, Congress can make any law that is deemed "necessary and proper" to carry out its enumerated powers. One such example saw Congress locking horns with the state of Maryland in 1819, when Congress chartered the Second Bank of the United States in 1816. Two years later, the state of Maryland passed legislation that would ultimately tax the bank, but James W. McCulloch, a cashier working at the bank's Baltimore branch, refused to pay the tax. When the issue of whether the federally-chartered bank could be taxed by the state, the U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously that Congress had the power to establish the bank, and that Maryland did not have the power to tax it. In this example of Elastic Clause interpretation, Chief Justice Marshall specifically noted in the decision that Congress can enjoy "unenumerated powers" that are not expressly defined by the Constitution.

miranda rights

The Miranda warning is part of a preventive criminal procedure rule that law enforcement are required to administer to protect an individual who is in custody and subject to direct questioning or its functional equivalent from a violation of his or her Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. In Miranda v. Arizona (1966), the Supreme Court held that the admission of an elicited incriminating statement by a suspect not informed of these rights violates the Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, through the incorporation of these rights into state law.[Note 1] Thus, if law enforcement officials decline to offer a Miranda warning to an individual in their custody, they may interrogate that person and act upon the knowledge gained, but may not use that person's statements as evidence against him or her in a criminal trial.Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court. In a 5-4 majority, the Court held that both inculpatory and exculpatory statements made in response to interrogation by a defendant in police custody will be admissible at trial only if the prosecution can show that the defendant was informed of the right to consult with an attorney before and during questioning and of the right against self-incrimination before police questioning, and that the defendant not only understood these rights, but voluntarily waived them.

federal court supremacy

The arrangement based on the supremacy clause in the consitution that gives federal courts the authority to overtrun state court decisions and to decide on the constituionality of state laws and actions. In fletch v. Peackm the Court's first time in rulign a state law unconsituional. In addition in Martin v. Hunter's lessee the Supreme Court established supremacy over state courts . The virginia supreme court ruled that the judiciary act os 1789 was unconsituional because it implied that the federal courts could overrule state courts, In the Martin decision, The u.s Supreme court iewed the potential problem of various state courts offering different interpretations of the meaning of federal laws. The court deemed is necessary for a single authorirty to reivew the laws interpretation , so that everyone would be in sync with the meaning of a law. This coordniation problem amongst courts was fixed by a single interpretor of the law.

commerce clause

The commerce clause is found in article I section 8 that enumerates the responsibility of congress, giving congress significant powers over the state for instance, the Supreme Court limited the scope of the national powers to regulate certain forms of commerce. The court struck down efforts by the national government to regulate things like working hours and child labor, and to impose a national minimum wage. In 1930s the courts expanded their view on the commerce clause which allowed Roosevelt to assert powers to regulate and stabilize the economy during the depression without no restriction by the 10th amendment. However in recent decades, the court limited their view on the commerce clause .

elastic clause

The elastic clause is found in article I that allows Congress to make any law that they seem" necessay and proper" to execute its powers enimerated within the consitution. The antifederalist feared thi clause the most because they feared that this wpould allow the national governement to over ride the state in any domain. One such example saw Congress locking horns with the state of Maryland in 1819, when Congress chartered the Second Bank of the United States in 1816. Two years later, the state of Maryland passed legislation that would ultimately tax the bank, but James W. McCulloch, a cashier working at the bank's Baltimore branch, refused to pay the tax. When the issue of whether the federally-chartered bank could be taxed by the state, the U.S. Supreme Court voted unanimously that Congress had the power to establish the bank, and that Maryland did not have the power to tax it. In this example of Elastic Clause interpretation, Chief Justice Marshall specifically noted in the decision that Congress can enjoy "unenumerated powers" that are not expressly defined by the Constitution. Justice Marshall also held that while states do have the power to tax, the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution reigns supreme, and that states do not have the authority to tax the federal government. This is one of many examples of the Elastic Clause working in Congress' favor.

4- Explain the relationship between expansion of the executive powers over time and the changes in the powers of federal government? Are they correlated? Choose one president from history and explain how he impacted the executive branch (power grab) and what developments took place during his administration in the federal government?

The expansion of the exectutive powers over time and the changes in the power of the federal government are corelated. Take this as an example. After the wall street crash on 1929, the national government under president hoover and republican congress seemed unable or unwilling to respond effectively to the economy crisis. In 1932, President Roosevelt took action when he entered the White House. Within the first 100 days of office, he laid ground work for his New Deal which was a set of policies to boost the American economy in the face of the great depression. The New deal was a major overhaul in house the national government operated within the American political system. It gave the executive branch greater authority . Under Roosevelt, many new bureaucracies were created to regulate the economy, The New Deal policies including Social Security and unemployment nsureance, increased both the taxes the federal government collected from the people and the benefits the people received from the national government. Due to the New Deal, the politiacal fate of all presidents has increasing been tied to the state of the national economy. Because the president now weilds so much power, the American people could legitmaetly blame the president when the economy is in trouble. Growth of the federal government spilled over into the presidents office when FDR created a massive bureaucracy within the executive branch that was devoted to helping him make economic decisions. Most of the beurcracies today did not exist before President Roosevelt took office such as the National Security council.

federalist 10

The great thing about a primo, melt-in-your-mouth Union is that it's really good at cutting down the influence of factions. Factions are bad news to a just government. They end up causing instability, injustice, and confusion. Lots of governments have fallen to one group gaining too much power over the whole. Sadly, America also has factions. Try not to panic. People are worried that the common good is being ignored in favor of the conflicts between rival factions. Not only that, but also the rights of the minor party are getting steamrolled by the power of the majority. But what are factions, anyways? They're a group of citizens, however big or small, who are united by a specific interest that puts them against another group of citizens and their specific interests. There are two ways to stop factions: Remove its causes, or control its effects. The downside to the first thing is that factions are a by-product of having opinions in general and the freedom to express them. You can't go into someone's brain and get rid of their opinions—in 3789 maybe, but at least not in 1789—and getting rid of people's freedom of expression kind of flies in the face of the whole democracy thing. It would be like launching your house into space to put out a fire. Fire can't burn without that pesky oxygen (pesky freedom, in this analogy), but you also need oxygen to breathe. What gets even worse is that everyone has an interest. A creditor and a debtor would have vastly different opinions about the economy, and so would a farmer versus a manufacturer. People also tend to support things that benefit themselves, and in a democracy there's nothing really stopping the biggest faction from calling the shots. An example of self-interest in government is setting taxes. A government has to set taxes to function, but when it's deciding how much money to take for itself, there's always the temptation to skim a little extra off the top. So, that's a no-go on cause-preventing. But luckily, we can cut down on the worst effects of Factions by governing. By changing the US to a Representative Democracy, big potentially dangerous ideas get filtered down into a smaller set of trained government officials, who will take them and use their best judgment on them. Representatives also can be corrupt, so this system hopefully keeps those people in check by cutting down their influence. But does a large Republic work better than a tiny one? If there are too many people to one representative they can't really be in touch with the people they represent. If there are too many representatives in the kitchen, then big factions get to claim a lot of representatives for themselves, and we're back to the problem of factions to begin with. Actually, the bigger the United States are, the better—more people mean more opinions, and thus the powers of faction are kept at bay. Also, with a representative democracy, it's a lot easier to slot more states into the Union without overwhelming the government and still ensuring the new regions get their say. Faction leaders may be able to start a spark in their necks of the woods, but the proverbial fire won't spread to the rest of the government thanks to our representative system.

strict constructivism

The legal philosophy that judges should use the intentions of those writing the law or the constitiuion as guides on how to interpret the law.Under strict constructionism, a judge can interpret a text as it is written, considering only what is presented within the four corners of the legal document. While strict constructionism is often thought of as a way of interpreting the Constitution, it may also be used to interpret laws and other legal texts.udges who adhere to this legal philosophy are known as strict constructionists. When reading a law or applying constitutional principles, strict constructionists ignore context and consider only the words on the page. The circumstances or potential result of a judicial ruling do not factor into a strict constructionist's decision-making process. They believe that legal texts carry the same meaning from the day that it is written until the day it is amended or repealed. Strict constructionists seek to understand and apply the original meaning of the legal text. They do not rely upon political or personal motivations when applying the law. Likewise, they aren't driven to hand down a particular ruling or judgment for the sake of obtaining a specific result. That approach is known as judicial activism.

partisan model

The partisan model suggests that the majority party leaders dominate the workings in congress, making sure that the party members get the most benefits. One of the greatest powers party leaders have is the power to control the agebds. Through the rules committee, party leaders will make sure that legislation that is not good fot the party will not make it to the floor. This could mean that they split up abill in a way that the party leader knows that a certain committee wil mark it up so that it will be killed, or if its a good bill, the party leader will send it to committtees that will give the best input. Minority party's in this instance lose in there efforts to pass legislation or gain pork for their district because their ideals might not be the same as the majority party because they dont want competing bills to hit the floor. Those in the party that are loyal party members get more rewards like choosing the committee they prefer to be on, but those they are disloyal get punished and get an undesiarble committee assignments.

party whip

The party whip is a member of the House of the Senate who is elected by his or her party to help party leaders coordinate party members' actions, including enforcing party discipline. They are below the house speaker and help enforce memebers of their party to vote for their party's legislation.

equal protection

The principal that laws passed by and enforced by the states must apply fairly to all individuals.

due process

The right to legal protections against arbitrary discrimination of life liberty or property. In other words fair treatment Due process and equal protection were both incorporated into the states through the fourteenth amendment and so were the bill of rights. This applied to the discrimination towards African Americans and other minorities due to the Jim Crow laws making African Americans second class citizens. Plessy v. Furgensun

Minning Winning Coalition

The smallest sized coalition necessary to achieve a goal. For example, say that there are nine people in the house but only five parking spots. You have to pay the land lord a flat fee of 500$, so you and four others agree to form a coalition , and each member of your group promises to contribute $100 towards the parking spaces. This example is called a minimum winning coalition. These are more desirable because larger membership tends to dilute the overall benefits of winning. If another person tries to join the coalition, there wouldn't be a guarantee parking spot for everyone. In addition, minimum winning coalitions are prone to being raided by a better offer. For example, two of the other housemates that want to park their car make the following offer of having three members of your coalition pay 90$, and the other two house mates only pay $115. This could lead to an unstable coalition because people will keep making better offers to win over the group.

moot

The status of a case in which further legal proceedins would have no impact on one or both parties This could happen when a plantiff ides or a new law passed by congress changes the legal standards, or the matter at question is not longer relevant. A student sueing over ccollege admission standards may have been admitted in the meantime making the case moot.If class action is involved , the court may hear the caseeven when it is moot or the plaintiff has died and no longer represents the class. For instances, weven if the plaintiff dies and no longer represents the many millions of former smokers, the case may continue because there are millions of other former smokers who continue to have standing.

stare decsis

To stand by things that have been settled.

civil rights movement

a movement during the 1950s nd 1960s that promoted that all people be treated as equals under the law and that discriminatio based on race, relgion,dender be eliminated. The primaryface of this movement was Matrin luther kings would prmoted a nonviolent protest. He velieved in civirl rights for the minorities. He wanted minorites to be allowed to vote and ensure that all individuals recieved due process and equal treatement under the law.

dual federalism

a political system in which each level of governement - national and state- is soveriegn in its own sphere of policy authority. For example the national could be in charge of national defense, currency, tariffs and trade, and negotiating treaties. Whereas the states could be in chare of traffic regulations, education k-12, zoning, marriage, ad insurance regulating.

revenue- sharing

a principle whereby the national governement and the lower level of governemnt cooperate in funding a project. Usually these involve categorical grants. The federal governement funds the lower level governement on projects but attactch many conditions. For example, the state want a school lunch program. The federal goveberment will give them moeny but will tell them what types of food could be served and how many calories.

common law

a system in which the judicary has the authoirty to determine how the law is to be interpreted . Under this, legal precedent established by the judges inform future decisions. This corrolates with stare decisis meaning to stand by things that have already been settled.

seperation of powers

dividing the powers of government among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The consitution separates these powers in three different ways. In the legislative branch, it was a bicameral. The lower house was the House of Representatives which was elected by the voters. The House of Representatives is directly proportionate to state population and each representative serves two years. The senate was the upper house and each state had only two representatives. They serves for six years. They are also directly by the people in the representative states. This wasn't always the case. This was established in the 17th amendment. In the executive branch, the president is elected by the electoral college to serve for four years. Finally in the judicial branch, the Supreme Court judges are selected by the president but with the consent and approval by the senate. They are appointed for life with good behavior. In addition to how they were separated by appointment, they were also separated by term length and divided on how much they get paid and their internal disipline . Another branch can not determine the pay of another branch.

Conference committee

o Conference committees are one way for the House and Senate to resolve differences over a bill. Since legislation from the House and Senate must be identical before it can be placed on the president's desk, both chambers must figure out a way to make this happen. Conference committees are one way to do this, and about one-fourth to one-third of the time, this is how bills become identical in their language. A more frequent method is simply to "ping-pong" the bill back and forth between the chambers, resolving differences in the process.

incumbency advantage

the incumbency advantage is an advatnage the the legistlation branch has for being reeclected. The house of represenatives have a higher incumbency advantage than the senate because the house of representatives only have to please a smaller crowd than the senate does. The senate has to please the whole state where as the HOR onle have to please theire district. Some of the advatages include having a srong repuatation within their districts due to bring pork back and constituency services. they have more campaign fiananing which allows incumbents to amass large amounts of funds eben beofre officially kicking off their relection bid (war chest). This could scare off potention competitiors because they are so fearful of losing or not recieving enough money to fund their campaign. Another advatage is televsion access, tv access helps members of congress get their name across to their consitutents. In addition there is gerrymanding. Gerrymandering helps protect incumbents. This could be seen in the partiasn model, the partisan gettymandering could put therie competing party in just a few districts to ensure that their party incumbents are safe and that more of them will be elected. Finally the national party efforts themselves help save vulnerable incumbents from being removed by funding their campaigns and promoting their name.

path dependence

the notion that earlier events or decisions deeply affect current and future policy decisions. One example could be seen in the judiciary branch. The beginning cases that were ever brought forward to the Supreme Court paved the way to what laws and amendments we have now. Supreme courts are now able to judicial review to deem laws unconstitutional from the Marburg v. Madison case. Another example would be found in McCullough v. Maryland that creates a law that a state cannot tax a national bank.

2- We have learned about different models of studying the US Congress, please explain them, and taking these models as your basis, discuss briefly which model you believe is most useful in describing Congress today and predicting how it will evolve in the future?

• Distributional model: Members trade benefits, quid pro quo, Pork barrel, Logrolling. The distributional model focuses on members engaging in logrolling (helping one another deliver specific benefits to a certain group of people). For example, one representative's district needs a new bridge while another representative's district needs a new research center. Both representatives agree to vote for each other's project in a classic quid pro quo. Focus on pork: benefits for a narrow constituency and logrolling or vote trading Informational model: Congress designed to help members make informed decisions Knowledgeable members sit on certain committees. The informational model suggests that committees and other internal institutions exist in Congress to help the chamber as a whole make more-informed decisions. Committees are therefore going to be filled with "experts" who know a lot about a particular area of policy and can then pass on this information to other members. Partisan model: Party leaders control the agenda and force members to vote a certain way, Role of the Rules Committee. The partisan model suggests that the majority party leaders dominate the workings of Congress, making sure that the party's members get the most benefits. One of the greatest powers party leaders have is the power to control the agenda (this is most true in the House). Through the Rules Committee, party leaders will make sure that legislation that is not good for the party will not make it to the floor.