Congressional Elections Struggles

Congressional gridlock has been around for centuries in Congress and does not seem to be changing anytime soon. Congressional gridlock refers to the inaction of the government and failure to make a decision or legislative law that satisfy the needs of the people. This inaction of the government and stagnation occurs when two parties cannot agree on a single matter, and they cannot come to a good agreement on how or when the law is going to be passed, thus leaving complex problems in the nation unhandled. Congressional gridlock does not just come and take over the government on its own, though. It is evident that congressional gridlock is a major problem in the American government that needs to be addressed because there are so many root causes that the government fails to fix including gerrymandering and a lack of “bridge-builders.” Solutions to these causes that have yet to be made include improving the system of checks and balances and reducing representative dynamics and some of the nation’s most pressing problems that should not even be examples of congressional gridlock include climate change and the gun laws issue.

Partisan Elections      In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year’s election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

Americans only see few ways to affect real change on government because politicians are too reliant upon large donations. Groups contribute money, and later on receive a kickback of bill that favors them or supports their positions. “Candidates who raise lots of money say it indicates broad support. Candidates with little money point out that voters, not donors, decide elections” (2012 Presidential). Candidates spend large amount of time fundraising, which decreases people’s confidence in the government’s ability to do their

We gripe and complain about the laws that we live with and say we want change, but without using the power to vote, those in office will continue to push forward their own agendas. This is something nonvoters need to realize. People need to be encouraged and educated more on how they have a voice and that every vote matters.

This means they will likely raise money in any way possible to increase their chances of winning. This leads many members of Congress to give less consideration to the needs of low-income individuals when developing legislation. Since these low-income individuals do not have the means to give large amounts of money to re-election campaigns, their views are often ignored. Many members of Congress endorse legislation that would benefit their largest donors. This leads to a Congress that is not a true representative of the broad interests across the United States (Flavin 2015).

In the 2016 election there was an increased amount of citizens that have realized that the current voting method we are using is unfair because not everyone’s vote is being counted due to them being minorities within the states that are already spoken for. However in the past, a couple of states have already done this and modified the method in a way that makes every vote count because equality is what our country stands for. By using the Congressional District Method instead of the current electoral college, it increases the chances we have in including everyone's vote. Many people are against changing the electoral college and believe that keeping it as it is is the best method we could use because they are afraid of change; however this

Only 53.6% of eligible voters vote, leaving 46.4% not voting (“Political Participation in the US”). This 46.4% of people do not believe their votes count. They believe that the Electoral College system cancels out their votes and that the government will not listen anyway. People think that nothing will change

Assess the extent to which incumbents have an adage over challengers in congressional elections. (25marks) Congressional elections occur every two years and it is when members if the House of Representatives and Senate are elected. An incumbent is when a congressman is up for re-election but is currently still holding office.

The main Idea of the matter, is that the people need a better system to which to elect the president. What I am seeking is that our congressmen change the system, to better fit the time that we live in now. Where so many civil moments have occurred to give us more rights and privileges than ever before. These are just some of the reasons why I believe that the electoral college is outdated and should be changed, or done away with completely.

The American Constitution, as outlined in the Preamble, boldly defines its purpose as “We the People” (U.S. Constitution). Reasonableness suggests that the framers of the Constitution would provide appropriate legislation enhancing the citizenship’s right to actively participate in government via public elections given such a definitive statement expanding on the power of the people. However, American citizens do not possess a constitutionally protected right to vote. During the drafting period of the Constitution, only white male property owners could vote, however, voting rights have drastically changed throughout the history of the United States. Through amendments passed over the past two centuries, the Constitution has changed

1 1998 Utah L Rev 716 (1998): 2780 words LexisNexis Academic Web Date Accessed: 2016/10/19 Previously Utah was one of only four states that allowed convicted felons to vote; felons retained their right to vote unless they have been "convicted of treason, or a crime against the elective franchise" (voting

Introduction: Public policy is affected by the decisions of the congressional and presidential process due to the fact that these parties cannot agree on certain issues. The congressional electoral process offers more individualism among its members than among legislators. Congress seeks for re-elections because they want to maintain a personal

As exemplified above, one decision could fit the bill for one of your groups, but then completely alienate another. Two, elections have gotten to the point where they more or less can be “bought”. If a tobacco company wants a politician to convince people to buy lots of cigarettes, all they need to do is write a big enough check to the campaign. In tandem, these two points raise an important question: how good can our government really be if it cannot effectively represent all people and support of a policy can be bought by those with fat wallets? This is an important question to think about, especially as our political environment becomes more polarized by the

Since the United States of America established itself as its own self-governing country, one of the things that caused it to be salient and stand out from other countries is its relentless insistence on functioning as a democracy. Wars and protests have occurred so that every type of people, whether it was women or African Americans, may be granted the right to vote. Having a say in the American government is an honor and a privilege bestowed upon American citizens when they reach the age of eighteen. However, in recent years, statistics have shown that voter turnout and participation in recent elections has been rapidly and steadily declining, causing the United States to have the lowest voter participation in the world (“Is the System

Historically in America, voting has been a relatively discriminatory practice. It has limited and deprived many individuals of many diverse races, ethnicities, and walks of life from casting their votes to select the individual who they feel is most educated, and skilled to represent their interests. Not only has this been proven to be wrong by discriminating minority groups in voting, it also has proved to be a process, which minimizes the largest growing demographics in the country. Furthermore, with millennials growing to become more politically active, minority groups are becoming more politically involved than ever. Taking this into account an important question that is raised by the author William Eskridge in his book “Legislation and Statutory Interpretation” is “Would minorities be better off with more representatives who had to pay attention to their interests because they are a powerful and organized constituency, rather than with a few representatives of minority districts who specialize in protecting only their interests?” (Eskridge,Frickley,& Garrett, 2006, pp.55).