101 Chambers Review

serve in Congress. By the middle of 1995, almost half of the states had limited

The founding Fathers also tried to make the representation equal in the two houses of legislature. However, the makeup of the senate doesn’t agree with this because large states and small states had the same amount of representation rather than the house that has representatives equal to the ratio of the people. While John P. Roche gave his argument that the founding Fathers were best suited for their position, he never gave concrete evidence to support his statement. On the contrary, Howard Zinn gives his opinion that the founding Fathers were not democratic reformers; rather, they were making decisions that protected their power.

Federalist 51 mentions that “the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for the inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches.” Keeping this idea in mind, it is the reason why the legislative branch is divided into the House of Representatives and the Senate. By dividing the legislative branch, Congress assures that too many individuals do not control one large portion of the government and that the legislative branch works with more efficiency without too many conflicting opinions. Additionally, in the Judiciary branch, the author explains that “some deviations [from absolute democracy] must be admitted.” The exception is necessary because according the Hamilton or Madison, the branch needs specific qualifications in order to elect essential members and that the position must be permanent so that it combat all dependence on authority. This concept sets up the process by which Supreme Court justices are put into power today where the president appoints a judge to serve for life or until the judge chooses to retire. Moreover, the article proposes the design that the overall government itself should be split into two sections, the federal and state level. This so that the state government can adhere to the values of its individual populations while the federal government lays down the general guidelines so that the state government’s values does not exploit the citizen’s natural

Part B: Discuss the development of a national government in the United States, from the Albany Plan to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution.

In “Congressional Government”, Woodrow Wilson tries to explain the system of Congress and in it he thoroughly discusses the predominance of Congressional Committees in the legislative body. He argues that our legislature is more analogous to a conglomerate, not a homogenous body and that “we are ruled by a score and a half of ‘little legislatures’”(Wilson p. 323). There is little unity in the House and party organization is not strong according to Wilson. The many distinct, disconnected committees has leads Congress to have weak leadership and therefore decreases decision making. Also Wilson shows how multiple committee jurisdictions creates a system where there is no clear voice on the issue and since committees differ in political ideology broad questions of policy suffer. Lawrence C. Dodd also discusses the committee system in “Congress and the Quest for Power”. In it, he argues that the solution to congressmen’s need for power is a decentralized congress with a committee system that allows members to gain considerable power in their small committees. “Each member wants to exercise power, to make the key policy decisions. … Given this widespread power motive, an obvious way to resolve the conflict is to disperse power”(Dodd p. 335). Dodd argues that the solution to member Congress constantly seeking power is the current

The congress is divided into two houses, the Senate and the House of Representatives (Doc. D). In the Senate representation is equal; each state has two senators (Doc. D). In the other house, the House of Representatives, the number of representatives is based on population (Doc. D). The House gives the large states more representation because of the larger population giving them more congressmen. The Senate helps the small states gain representation by being giving all states the same amount of senators. This prevents large states from controlling all decisions or the large states being overpowered by the small states. This evidence further explains why a bicameral legislature against tyranny because no state holds most of the power and are all represented in a way that gives power to

A bicameral legislature means that there are two different houses that everything has to go through. In the Iroquois system of government they have two sets of Confederate Lords: Mohawk and Seneca Lords; Oneida and Cayuga Lords. Any questions will first be passed through the Mohawk and Seneca Lords, and then it will be discussed by the Oneida and Cayuga

The American Constitution was questionable from the earliest starting point, as thoughts were separated between backers - an answer for all the country's issues, and commentators - a depravity of its republican standards. The supporters trusted that the Constitution augmented their republican thoughts, adding another level to the chose government, while the faultfinders trust the republicans worked in little political units, for this situation the states. The most effective method to separate the force between state governments and focal government was in this way a principle contention while the Constitution was composed furthermore later in time, remaining a vital issue until today.

The House would be represented by The Hare and the Senate would be represented by The Tortoise. The Hare carries his house above his body. He has an “upper house.” The Hare finds his power in the “lower house”, or in this case his lower limbs. The Hare has a shorter lifespan than The Tortoise. Because of this fact, The Hare is focused on quickly finishing the “race” and responding to the needs of the people faster since their “term” is shorter. The Tortoise’s “life span” is longer and they are able to take longer when investigate and discuss the long-term effects of the laws they are considering. The House of Representatives job is very similar because they have to work at a fast pace like The Hare, but is still trying to get the job

Abstract: The term limits movement for state legislatures has been gaining momentum. Fourteen states adopted limit initiatives in 1992. The goal of this final paper was to determine the factors that have contributed to the growth of the term limits movement. Much background research was conducted to determine the characteristics of the movement. Past research suggested several apparent reasons for the growth of the movement. These reasons included the existence of direct initiative, rates of legislator turnover, incumbency, regional political culture, citizen involvement, and the influence of interest groups.The overall questions for the project were to evaluate the factors which may have affected the movement. Including: what factors have influenced the growth of the term limits movement? In order to answer this question several hypotheses were tested for factors which have been used to explain the movement. The overall research conclusion was that the only explanatory factor for the growth of the term limits movement was the existence of the direct state initiative. The other factors include the regulation of the congressional developments. More states would have term limits if they had the power of initiative and term limits will likely be restricted to states which have this power, however, they should be placed in congress.

The catalyst to the developments making America unique was the creation of the House of Burgesses. This simple establishment introduced the idea of accurate representation of and for the people. This concept was eventually refined to what we call today; democracy. A belief that was not concrete in any of the major powers of the time, including Britain.

The Framer’s notion of a republic, or democratic republic form of government, rested on the necessity to limit the formation and success of factions. Yet, as Dahl argued, the irony of Madison’s aversions to factions is that, not long after the ratification of the

In this module we have study modifications to the way Congress and the President do business. The Constitution lists specific duties for Congress to attend to; it is a little vaguer when assigning duties to the President. It is up to both of these institutions to best determine how to accomplish these duties. The major theme of this module is change, the addition of offices under the President and the modifications to the power distribution within the Congress to help better and sometimes hinder these institutions in accomplishing their duties.

Russian and American political systems are alike in the perspective of comparison. Both governments provide a framework for three branches of government: the executive, the legislative, and judicial. Both countries also have a bicameral legislature as well as separate elections of the legislature and the executive branch. Both countries are the lead legislative body. There is assurance of this author in Section One, Chapter Five, and Article One of the Russian Constitution that declares “The Federal Assembly -- Parliament of the Russian Federation --shall be the supreme representative and legislative body of the Russian Federation (The Constitution of the Russian Federation). There is also a judicial branch that is elected a bit differently in each country, but ultimately have the same responsibilities. However, they are different in political parties and the order of the country. Tocqueville states, “Without comparisons to make, the mind does not know how to proceed” (Comparing Political Systems). This political thinker emphasizes that in order for any country to advance, some type of evaluation must be done to see what works for a place and what doesn’t. What perhaps works for Russia may not work for the United States of America. As for my part of the group presentation, I will be comparing the legislature of the

Take it all the way back to when the constitution was being written. The founding fathers had a big choice to make; did they establish a direct democracy or a representative democracy? They had to weigh the pros and cons of each and they ended up deciding on a representative democracy. In this paper I will tell you why they made things the way they did and certain compromises they made along the way.