The men who shaped the United States were victims of tyranny, and thus deliberately structured our central government with self-imposed checks and balances. These checks aimed to ensure the safety and interests of the people while also holding the members of the government accountable to each other and the nation. The framers of the constitution were successful in many ways, however there are conditions today that impede maximum political accountability. Members of Congress are held accountable to a variety of political forces ranging from the district and federal level. Overall, members of Congress’ predominant goal are to be reelected. To accomplish this feat, the support of the constituents is the driving influence. When analyzing …show more content…
Congressmen can change their entire stance on an issue, even though know one is paying attention, just because of the fact there is a chance at some point it could help them win reelection. Colleagues and the president also of course influence congressional decision-making, but the original intent and practice is for the people, constituents, to have the most direct (and indirect) accountability for Congress by controlling the voting. While this sounds good in theory, there is an underlying basis for why congressional accountability is unsuccessful. Running a campaign is no small task and takes a lot of capital. To make a credible challenge to an incumbent in the house, it is estimated 1-2 million dollars is needed (Bianco and Canon 2015, 405) and the average U.S. senate race cost in 2014 was 2.7 million dollars (Miller, 10/1/2015). Congressmen always have to be in campaign mode and because it is so monetarily dependent, the need for members to seek out or accept financial help from sources such as parties and PACs becomes a prevailing factor of congressional decision making (Bianco and Canon 2015, 405 and Miller, 10/27/2015). This element, money, creates a new audience for Congressmen to be attentive to contradictory to the original intent and thus clouding the accountability of Congress. The President’s primary responsibilities are to the constitution and the electorate. The
Today, career politicians are constantly looking for what will aid them in getting reelected. They become more loyal to their campaign fund contributers than to the people whom they represent. This increases the likelihood of having corrupted politicians in office, as they use the government as a vehicle to further their own career (Kurfirst, 1996, p. 123, 129). George Will, a well-known political journalist, was quoted as saying “[The] worst feature of professionalism in politics is that it obliterates the proper distance between the representatives and the represented” (Kurfirst, 1996, p. 125). Even James Madison agreed that legislators were meant to represent the people, not hold office as a career. In The Federalist No. 57 (1788), he wrote, “From this change of men must proceed a change of opinions; and from a change of opinions, a change of measures.” The lack of new faces in Congress today symbolizes that the American legislative branch is straying from its intended purpose.
The inter workings of Congress have been studied extensively by Richard Fenno and David R. Mayhew. Mayhew’s study of Congress took place in Washington, while Richard Fenno conducted his research by following politicians within their congressional district. Mayhew attributes three primary goals to congressmen- getting reelected, achieving influence within Congress and making “good Policy”. Fenno also attributes three basic goals, having influence inside the House than other congressmen. Second, helping their constituents and thereby insuring their reelection, and lastly helping make good policy. The purpose of this paper is to research a member of Congress and to make a direct connection between his activity in Washington and his home district. The paper will answer whether the congressmen is a delegate or trustee. Are the actions a pursuit for reelection? Are the committee assignments a path for movement within the House or outside? What legislation has he/she sponsored or co-sponsored and does it directly reflect his/her districts political view. And finally, do major industries and interest groups within his/she district affect the way he/she votes.
Nearly the late year of 1787, the U.S. Constitution was established, stating the basal laws and fundamental principles that the United States would be governed by. Many philosophers and political thinkers furnished a great comprehension for the modern day structures that are very active today. Our Founding Fathers created a system which divides different acts of government into the legislature, executive, and judicial branches. Following in the form of the Separation of Powers, the checks and balances system ensures that political power isn’t contributing to any individual or group that enables them to gain an abundant amount of power. For the instance of this, “the Constitution provides a method for change, as the Founders created it this
When the Framers of the Constitution met in Philadelphia, they came together with one common purpose in mind. They needed to form a fair and solid system of government that would stand the test of time; one that was both fair for the people and would not involve a monarchy. Each of these men had their own ideas on what would constitute this system, however, so many compromises had to be made. Together, the men gathered in Philadelphia created a federal system of government and drafted a constitution outlining this government. They took care in developing three branches of federal government with a system of checks and balances so that no one branch would gain too much power, thus avoiding any
The Founding Fathers put their blood, sweat and tears into the making of the Constitution and created a government out of practically nothing, all while having a vision for the future. This future consisted of a government that focused on liberty over security; a government of minimal intervention. To say that the modern version of the United States government is exactly what the Founding Fathers envisioned is a very debatable topic. There are many instances where todays government has followed the Constitution for the most part, but then there are a lot of other areas where the Founders visions have been twisted to the point that they are unrecognizable anymore. To start off, the basic concept of the United States government is one of checks and balances. This was put in place to ensure that the government never became too powerful. One very good example of checks and balances is the media. Even the founding fathers knew the extreme power of the media and its ability to keep the government in check. Two men by the names of William Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer were even able to create the Spanish American War by the process of yellow journalism, or the crude exaggeration of events. The first amendment states that “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” The government today reflects this belief that the media is a watchdog or “fourth estate” as it is so often referred to. Political parties and everything that comes with it, including
The third factor that seems to have an influence on the operations of Congress is the public opinion. Logically, if the public thinks that a certain congressman doesn’t know how to do his job, then he won’t get elected. That’s why the public opinion has a major influence the operations of Congress because the public has say if that Congressman or Congressmen will get elected again.
Created on November 15, 1777 and ratified by the first 13 colonies on March 1, 1781, the articles of confederation is known for being the first constitution of the united states. “The constitution provides a division of powers, meaning it assigns certain powers to the national government and reserves others for the states.” (crouse, slide 4) The constitution is needed because if we didn't have it the government would be weak and would most likely have no power. Framers of the constitution chose a system of government on a territorial basis, between a central government and several states. “ the framers were worried about the government being too powerful because; government power inevitably poses a threat to individual liberty. Therefore the
In the past century, people continued to express an increasingly discontent view of Congress especially true when one looks back before the Clinton Impeachment debacle As the size of the nation and the number of congressman have grown, the congress has come under attack by both public influences and congressman themselves. Yet looking at one congressman's relationship with his or her constituents, it would be hard to believe that this is the branch of government that has come under suspect. In "If Ralph Nader says congress is 'The broken branch,' how come we love our congressman so much?" author Richard F. Fenno, Jr., provides insight into this view and why, through congress coming under fire, constituents still feel positively about
The framers of the constitution did many things that limited the power of the president by creating impeachment, checks and balances, executive privilege, and allowing the legislature to declare war. However they gave the president too much power because they allow the president to court packing, they allow him to announce important events to the public, and allowing presidents to issue many executive orders. A president must be at least thirty five years old, a natural born citizen, and live in the United states (U.S.) for at least 14 years. The president is allowed to serve four year terms when he or she is elected.
The framers of the Constitution did many things to limit the power of the president such as creating a system of checks and balances, establishing a process of impeachment, and requiring congressional approval for many presidential decisions; however some believe the president was given too much power by the framers by allowing executive orders and court packing. Through trying to limit the power of the president, the framers also set requirements to become president. These include being least 35 years old, living in the U.S. for consecutive 14 years, and natural born citizen of the United States of America. The framers of the Constitution did enough to limit the power of the President. This was done by creating a process for impeachment,
Imagine that your country has just become independent from the leadership of a cruel dictator. They took your money through taxes, they stole your liberty and stripped you of your independence. You must prevent this from happening again. But how? In 1787, 55 men gathered in Pennsylvania for the Constitutional Convention. How did they keep our country from being run by a tyrant when our government was formed? The framers of the Constitution did this in four ways: Federalism, Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, and the Great Compromise.
The framers of the 1787 Constitution formed a just government with ideals such as separation of power that insured none of the three branches of government could hold more power than the others, representation of people to ensure a democratic society in which everyone had a voice, and allowed changes to be made in order to fit with the evolution of people's views. This constitution at the time established a just government, by definition, but at the same time represented how unjust our society was, by allowing slavery to stay prominent, and removing a majority of the people's power from the three branches of government, however these issues were understandable due to trying to represent everyone at that time.
Stephen Medvic, In Defense of Politicians, discusses why Americans feel that politicians are dishonest. In 2007, a Gallup poll about honesty and ethical standards for occupations, showed that only 12 and 9 percent of people felt that Congressmen and State office holders held high standards, (Medvic p. 2). In addition, Americans tend to like their representatives more than the members of Congress because they view them as actual people. Americans view Congress as a group of politicians who are greedy and not representing their interests, (Medvic p. 4).
In my opinion, I feel that constituents have power over congress members because they have the power to vote them in or out of office. On the other hand, I feel that voting constituents have the least amount of influence over congress members, who strive for money contributions in order to, run their political campaigns, compared to donors and PACs.
Certain interests do not change over time in our society. Over 200 years ago, the prominent concern that led to the framing of the Constitution regarded the establishment of a government that was “for the people and by the people.” The framers of the Constitution, with concern of an over powering central government in mind, provided a basis for the structure of the federal government of the United States. The powers of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government are laid out strategically in a way that no one branch can have more power than the other. The national concern of maintaining a legitimate government has not shifted since the initial days of the framers. Although the capacity of the government has grown over time, the system of checks and balances that was adapted in the framing of the Constitution allows for the structure and powers of the federal government to remain in order today. Other than providing a structural map for how the government will operate, however, the additional aspects of the Constitution fail to administer practical framework for addressing 21st century interests. This document was written over 200 years ago and it has not been altered substantially since then (Lazare). While certain Amendments have been added to assist the Constitution in staying relevant, such as the abolishment of slavery and the addition of women’s right to vote, there has been practically nothing added to help in applying the framers’ intentions