• both chambers have equal power in the passage of legislation, constitutional amendments, overrides of presidential vetoes and declarations of war
• Evidence that the Senate is more powerful than the House includes:
• the Senate’s exclusive powers of appointment confirmation and treaty ratification are often of considerable consequence for the political system
• the increased use of the filibuster, and the consequent need for a ‘super-majority’ to pass almost any legislation, means the president’s legislative strategy is usually focused on the Senate
• the Senate delivers the final verdict in impeachment proceedings

Evidence that the House is more powerful than the Senate includes:

• the House initiates impeachment proceedings
• the House begins consideration of money bills
• the House elects the president if there is not a majority in the Electoral College

Poor ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary.

2

3

4

5

Sound ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Adequate ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary.

• Outline awareness of the structure of Congress

• Limited knowledge of one common power and one exclusive power of the two houses

7

8

9

10

Good or better ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Sophisticated ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary.

• Clear understanding awareness of at least two common and two exclusive powers

12

13

14

15

Poor ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary.

2

3

4

5

Sound ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Adequate ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary.

7

8

9

10

Good or better ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Sophisticated ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary.

12

13

14

15

Poor ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary.

2

3

4

5

Sound ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Adequate ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary.

7

8

9

10

Good or better ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Sophisticated ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary.

12

13

14

15

Poor ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary.

2

3

4

5

Sound ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Adequate ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary.

7

8

9

10

Good or better ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Sophisticated ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary.

12

13

14

15

Poor ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Weak ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making little or no use of appropriate vocabulary.

2

3

4

5

Sound ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Adequate ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making some use of appropriate vocabulary.

7

8

9

10

Good or better ability to analyse and explain political information, arguments and explanations.

Sophisticated ability to construct and communicate coherent arguments, making good use of appropriate vocabulary.

12

13

14

15

• the Founding Fathers created a system in which the ‘popular passions’ were filtered and diffused; the Senate was not directly elected, nor was there a requirement that presidential electors were; the popular passions are now given much freer rein
• Congress was the preeminent branch of government; the president was only to suggest legislation ‘from time to time’ and the power to declare war was reserved to Congress; since the Second World War especially, the president has assumed a dominant role
• the federal government’s powers relative to the states were intended to be constrained by the 10th amendment; since the New Deal especially, the federal government has assumed power at the expense of the states
• the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review is not mentioned in the constitution; its discovery has created what some see as an ‘imperial judiciary’

Evidence that the modern operation of the constitution has not departed drastically from the vision of the Founding Fathers includes:

• the president’s constitutional powers remain unaltered; the expansion of presidential power at the expense of Congress has been with the acquiescence of Congress and he remains dependent on it to a significant extent
• the system of separation of checks and balances continues fundamentally unaltered
• the expansion of Congress’s power through the ‘necessary and proper’ clause was anticipated by the Founding Fathers in the Federalist Papers, and the state governments still retain a significant degree of autonomy
• the power of judicial review is implicit in the constitution, and was established very soon after its ratification

Evidence from the Bush administration that the modern presidency is imperial includes:

• some of its members, including the vice-president, believed the administration had a duty to revive the executive branch, exploiting President Bush’s status as a ‘wartime president’
• expanded use of signing statements, often asserting the right to ignore those sections of a bill which, in the view of the administration, unconstitutionally infringed the president’s authority
• expanded use of executive orders and the use of military orders to designate fighters captured in Afghanistan as ‘unlawful enemy combatants’ and the creation of military tribunals to try them
• the pervasive culture of secrecy and executive privilege
• Subsequently, President Obama has exerted unilateral power, e.g. in the military campaign in Libya in 2011, which was conducted without congressional authorisation

Evidence that there are significant restraints on the modern presidency include:

• during and subsequent to the Nixon presidency, Congress passed a number of measures to rein in presidential power, e.g. the War Powers Act, the Budget & Impoundment Control Act, the National Emergencies Act and the Intelligence Oversight Act
• the expanded powers of the Bush administration were largely a consequence of the attacks of September 11th 2001, and only applied in a narrow range of policy relating to national security; even on some national security issues it was forced to compromise, e.g. on the status of the new Department of Homeland Security
• military action in both Afghanistan and Iraq was authorised by Congress
• the extent of the president’s power in the Bush first term depended on an acquiescent Republican majority in Congress
• the checks and balances of the constitution remain, as illustrated by the failure of President Bush to make progress with the domestic agenda of his second term
• even with a Democratic Congress, President Obama encountered significant problems in advancing his domestic agenda

• increased partisanship, the product of ideological polarisation of the parties since the 1980s, and fuelled by the growth of partisan media outlets, gerrymandering and ideological interest groups, has led to:
• an increase in ‘party votes’, confrontation between the parties, e.g. the passage of the recent health care legislation, and an unwillingness to compromise
• routine use of the filibuster in the Senate, meaning a ‘super majority’ is required for the passage of almost all legislation
• abuse of congressional procedure, e.g. the extension of the roll call vote for Medicare expansion in 2003
• appointment hearings which focus on personality rather than fitness for office
• oversight now being conducted for the purpose of partisan advantage
• a breakdown in civility, epitomised by the shout of ‘you lie’ during President Obama’s address on health care to Congress in 2009
• the disappearance of more moderate members, either through resignation, e.g. Olympia Snowe, or primary defeats, e.g. Richard Lugar

Evidence that Congress is not ‘broken’ includes

• measures with broad sustained support will pass, e.g. the welfare reform bill initiated by the Republican leadership and signed by President Clinton in 1996, the ‘No Child Left Behind’ Act, initiated by President Bush and co-sponsored by Teddy Kennedy
• some commentators argued that President Obama’s first term difficulties with health care were the result of a failure of strategy, rather than any problem inherent in Congress
• health care reform did eventually pass, and some commentators have claimed that the 111th Congress (2009-11) ‘made more law affecting more Americans since the ‘Great Society’ legislation of the 1960s’
• the extent of party control may be overstated; if there is a conflict between party and district, congressmen will almost always ‘vote the district’.