Transcript for:
UK Politics: Democracy, Parties, and Voting

🥀 A level politics evidence bank A Level Politics Evidence Bank 1 Democracy and Participation 1.1 Direct vs Representative * The most recent referendum in the UK was the Brexit referendum in 2016, where 33 million UK citizens voted on whether to remain a member of the EU or leave, 51.89% voted to leave. 72% turnout (higher than general Elections which sit around 65% → 2024: 60%) * 309,000 are members of the Labour party - 2025 February * 131,680 members of the conservative party - 2024 November - suggests lower participation and democracy deficit as in 1950s it was 2.3million Over 200,000 members of Reform UK - live membership tracker * High turnout for scottish 2014 referendum, 84%, 75% of 16-17 yo voted (participation is not falling) Recall MP Act 2015 - strength of representative democracy The Recall of MPs Act has been used 6 times since its enshrinement into law in 2015, with 4 petitions successfully removing an MP * Chris Davies (2015) tory MP sacked due to false expense claims, petition reached over 10% * Boris Johnson (2023): Although not recalled, Boris Johnson resigned as MP for Uxbridge before he could be recalled given his Parliamentary suspension for lying to the House of Commons was going to exceed 10 days.- after he lied and said “no rules were broken” referring to the partygate scandal which is false. (scrutiny weakness) * 2025 UPDATE: Labour Mike Amesbury MP for Runcorn & Helsby recalled after assault and arrest -caught on camera punching people in altercation(can break public trust in representatives-less participation, or can go the other way and increase public trust because of punishment, it also shows strength of recall act) * Switzerland’s voter turnout for both referendum style votes and Parliamentary elections are both averaging under 50% compared to the UK at 67% in 2019 (UPDATE: in 2024 the turnout was 60%) - shows voter apathy if used too much (however could show happathy- content with gov, though not proven as polls say most people don't vote as they think it doesn't count) * In Switzerland, where initiatives are used regularly minority rights have been damaged.frequent use of referendums and proposals of changes to the constitution leads to tyranny of the majority, votes about migrants, religious minorities and minority groups are impacted by this especially. We don't want this in england. -The Scottish Independence Referendum 2014 = 84.6% turnout, Yes 44.70% , No - 55.30% (higher than general Elections which sit around 65%) * The Belfast/Good Friday agreement turnout = 81%, ended the conflict in Northern Ireland -this and scottish independence are strength of direct democracy as people still vote when it matters * Voter turnout between 1945 & 97 = 76% on average 2000 onwards 64% -yes we are in participation crisis as people are stopping participating * The Cabinet Office estimated that the total cost of the 2016 EU Referendum was £150 million (including the cost of running polling stations and counting votes). Weakness of direct democracy - is it worth the money (especially since they are not legally binding and this referendum needed a second referendum and election for something to actually happen) - money could be better spent elsewhere * In a 2015 poll by Survation: the most common reason people don’t vote is ‘not believing it will make a difference’ * In the 2024 general election according to the electoral commission, 25% of people were planning to vote tactically (to prevent other parties from winning) reform to a two party system? Shows people aren't happy with the government. * 2019 Hansard Audit for Political Engagement found 47% of the electorate do not believe they have an influence in politics * * In 2015, 2017 and 2019: 18-24 year olds turnout was just above 50% while over 75s was above 80%. Parliamentary research report from 2021 found that under 25s had highest political involvement * Voters who had their first vote at 16 (Scottish independence referendum) had higher turnout in Scottish parliament elections than voters who first voted at 18.-reform to voting system - increase in political participation3 * The Alternative Vote Referendum of 2011 = 42% turnout of registered voters, 20% less than the election of 2010. This is chalked up to the fact that voters were not passionate about the issue, and the electorate were apathetic. (Wanted to replace first past the post system with av- a ranking system where lowest ranked are eliminated) people didn't want this * In 2022, the ex-YouGov president said th hi e UK is now pro-remain because 2m Brexit voters have died. -questions government's legitimacy, questions if referendums are a one time thing or can keep up with evolving society, do they truly represent the people. (weakness of direct democracy) * Ethnic minorities are much more likely to vote for Labour than Conservative -in 2017 GE, Labour won 73% share of ethnic minority vote whilst Conservatives only got 19% (5/75 of the most ethnically diverse constituencies in the UK).after equality act minority votes for labour went up see * The phenomenon of ‘Bregret’ has gained notoriety in recent months, as polls have revealed that in March 2024, 57% of voters believe that the decision to leave the EU was the wrong choice. -weakness of direct democracy * The Brexit referendum saw large amounts of misinformation and exaggerated ideas, which may have led people to vote emotionally rather than rationally. * To further develop this point, in 2019, a petition on the gov e-petition website to revoke brexit got over 6.4 million signs, clearly showing ‘bregret’. * Within the 2019 election, safe seats which had been held by Labour politicians for decades were turned into Conservative MP holding seats, such as in Redcar, a seat that had never before voted Conservative, picked the Tory MP over Labour's Anna Turley by 3,527 votes. Conservative strongholds such as North Somerset for Liam Fox turned Labour after the 2024 election which suggests potential partisan dealignment.(can show class isn't a major factor in voting anymore, economics is a large factor- this happened after brexit as shown by deat of bolsover which has been labour since 1950 up until 2019 and then went labour again in 2024) * Seat of Bolsover, Labour since its creation in 1950 and held by with UK Democracy * Not true??? - But still a good example behaviour of tories being a traditional social factor of region in 2019 * * Reform UK sit at 5000 members (March 2024) - 182 000+ members (January 2025) - now well over 200 000 - 231 456 (May 2025) * In the 1990s, membership of the conservative party was at an estimated 400,000 (1950s was 2.3mil) * 2016 it was under 150,000, showing a significant drop in party membership-crisis. Currently (Nov 2024) around 131,000. * Voting within the age range of 18-24 between 1992 and 2015 has fallen by more than 50%. * Means only 94,000 voted for Kemi Bandenoch (knock on effects for legitimacy of PM if they are voted in by a small number of party members e.g. Rishi Sunak- no national mandate) There is significant engagement with politicians online with Jeremy Corbyn having 2.5 million followers on Twitter and Nigel Farage having 2.2 million – despite both being out of frontline politics. Update: corbyn sits as an independent MP, and Farage MP and leader of reform * In 2024, (January-March) The Labour Party suffered a sharp fall of 23,000 members following controversies over its policies on Gaza and its U-turn on green investment. Following this at the 2024 election labour lost seats to pro gaza MPs, in areas with higher muslim population, showing concern for issues regarding gaza with Labour voters. * The 2024 general election is the first election called under the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, which replaces Fixed Term Parliament Act 2011. This gives the ultimate power for the Prime Minister to call an election at a time they prefer, instead of setting regular terms (5 years). Used by Sunak who called an election for July 4th. * The Palestinian crisis has become a large source of direct action and protest within the past year, with protests in London had 500,000 marchers. Increasing political participation especially among young people— * BUY +are elected as MPs, including MP Jeremy Corbyn who previously has been forced to stand as an independent candidate by the Labour Party due to antisemitic statements made. Notably, issue voting on the Gaza crisis increases the vote share of independent candidates who openly support Palestinians and work for Palestinians. * In the 2024 general election, Nigel Farage has eventually elected as an MP in Clacton-on-sea after 8 attempts running in elections. * 5 Reform UK candidates including Richard Tice and Lee Anderson are elected. However, the aggregate votes in Reform UK ranked the third place in this election (4.1 million votes), which leads to questions on the proportional representation by comparing with votes gain and seats gain. UPDATE: As of April 2025, the Reform party now only has 4 MPs due to the suspension of Rupert Lowe. UPDATE 2: The Reform Party now has 5 MPs again due to the election of Sarah Pochin in the Runscorn and Helsby by-election, which was won by 6 votes. * The Supreme Court and the House of Lords have both tried to interfere with the Rwanda Plan, with the Court holding that the government’s scheme to send asylum seekers to Rwanda as unlawful. * The House of Lords passed five amendments to the bill in March 2024 which started another round of parliamentary ping-pong. * Changes to the voting system have been rejected - major House of Lords reform was rejected in 2012 *by the coalition government, and in 2011 * ality the public voted against AV. 1.2 Debates Over Suffrage * The Electoral Commission reported that there was a turnout of 75% amongst 16-17 year-olds in the Scottish Independence Referendum, with 97% of those who voted saying they would vote again in the future. This is extremely high, compared to 54% of 18-24 year olds and 72% of 25-34 year olds. * The Isle of Man enfranchised 16 and 17-year-olds in 2006. In every election since then, voter turnout among this age group has decreased – 55% in 2006 to 46% in 2021. * Research by Survation found that two thirds of non-voters in 2010 would have been significantly ‘more likely’ to vote had there been an online voting option * Estonia is a country which has adapted to the online voting system, where almost 1/4 of all votes cast in the 2011 election were made online. It uses biometric ID cards and verification servers to stop voter fraud. * The Conservative government in 2017 set out the aim of defeating voter fraud by introducing voter ID. Trialled in 5 areas in 2018 and ten in 2019. Critics point to the fact that there was no real evidence of voter fraud, with just 28 reported cases out of 45 million votes. Electoral reform society estimated that around 3.5p million people (7.5% of the population) did not have access to ID and 750 people were denied the vote during the trials in 2019. * The Brazilian Electoral Tribunal has allowed no testing of the country’s electronic voting system since 2012, when a research team uncovered several vulnerable holes in the system having been granted brief access to millions of lines of code. * Change.org: currently 570,000 signatures for e-petition about the compensation for post office scandal * In 2017 around 1.86 million signatures were collected to stop president trump having a state visit – this worked and he came on business rather than a state visit * Sometimes they can lack formality highlighted by the Haaland petition where around 2 million signatures wanted him to leave Man city. * (Prisoner voting) YouGov (2015) found that 8% of the public believed all prisoners should be able to vote * Compulsory voting is a measure currently in force in 15 democracies worldwide, including the comparable European and Commonwealth countries of Belgium and Australia. * Polling shows that over 70% of the British public in c agree with the fundamental proposition that voting is a duty, with fewer than 20% dissenting. (2023) * Acts which have made changes to franchise: 1832 Great Reform Act: The Act disenfranchised 56 boroughs in England and Wales and reduced another 31 to only one MP. It also created 67 new constituencies, broadened the property qualification (so including smaller landowners) and gave the vote to householders who paid a yearly rental of £10 or more. * 1867 Representation of the People Act (Second Reform Act): this gave the vote to working class men for the first time. * 1918 Representation of the People Act: following pressure from the Suffragettes, and the success of working women during World War One, the right to vote was granted to women over the age of 30 who met a property qualification, and all men over the age of 21. * 1928 Representation of the People Act (Equal Franchise Act): this granted, for the first time, equal voting rights to women and men. As a result, both men and women could vote at the age of 21. * 1969 Representation of the People Act: this extended the franchise to men and women over the age of 18. * influence on the effectiveness of direct action) * BMA (British Medical Association) successfully campaigned for a 2% rise in doctors ' wages . JUNIOR DOCTORS approved 22 percent pay rise by Labour 2024 1.3 Pressure Groups/lobbyists and think tanks * In 2023, the government responded to widespread and prolonged public sector strikes with the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act requires some workers to still work during strikers or face being sacked * WASPI have campaigned for compensation due to the government increasing pension age. * They want to receive compensation. 2024. +They failed- Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall stated that most women were aware of the adjustments. * Insulate Britain engages in direct action and often breaks the law - civil disobedience * Just Stop Oil – April 2025 Disbanded, following success as gov. Terminates new gas and oil licenses (Gov crackdown on protests ie Public Order Act 2023 and its in * April 2022 Just Stop Oil activists vandalised petrol pumps along the M25. * October 2022 two JSO activists scaled the Queen Elizabeth Bridge on the M25 near Dartford and were there suspended in cables for 37 hours, both got sentenced to around 3 years imprisonment. * What Just Stop Oil methodology was, was civil disobedience regardless of public image - getting their message across was the priority rather than public support - although many agreed with the cause of the campaign, they did not agree with the method * 2The National Farmers on has a close link with its relevant government department (Department for Environment, Food and Rural affairs). * FU annual conference, stating he (Rishi Sunak) had worked with the National Farmers Union to create a £220 million package of funding for technology and innovation to protect British farming which would allow bosses to fire and sue union employees in public sectors during strikes if minimum levels of service aren’t met. * The Labour-supporting pressure group Momentum has influenced the Labour party in other ways, such as putting in candidates for election as Labour MPs and councillors. This includes MPs like Zarah Sultana, Apsana Begum and Nadia Whittome (all been very vocal about social justice, climate action, and other leftist policies) * Aspana Begum is the first Hijabi MP in Parliament, she also accused Labour for targeting her for decision because she was a socialist, Muslim, working class woman (2022) * The charity Care4Calais has attempted to bring a legal challenge against the passed Rwanda Bill, stating “Human rights law still applies, we are ready to go” * The National Trust is the largest pressure group in the country, having access to huge amount of funding and membership, however, is sometimes unable to influence government. In 2022, it called for the government to stay true to its net zero by 2030 obligation and continue to ban fracking. Sunak has extended the net-zero to 2050, and PM Truss lifted the ban on fracking (although Sunak has reinstated it). * Extinction Rebellion Occupied St Paul’s Cathedral to campaign for climate change * May 2024 - Extinction Rebellion gathered to launch awareness of pollution in the River Nidd. The venture, named the “Poo Patrol”, consisted of activists dressed in white overalls with fishing rods. The patrol pretended to fish the poops out of the River Nidd as a visual image of what is in the river. * The group FareShare used footballer Marcus Rashford as a figurehead for their social media campaign to provide free meals to struggling children during the 2020 lockdown. This campaign was extremely popular, with Rashford’s e-petition receiving 1.1 million signatures. Consequently, the government announced that it would provide a £120 million ‘Covid summer food fund’ and £170 million ‘Covid winter grant scheme’ for vulnerable families * The Gurkha Justice Campaign was a successful political campaign which sought to impact government decisions.)who served in the British military to gain right of abode. Despite the lack of government support from the Blair government, in 2008, the High Court ruled that the lack of rights for Gurkhas was illegal. In 2009, Gordon Brown announced that all Gurkha veterans who had served four years or more in the British Army would be allowed to settle in Britain. * Stop the War Coalition 2003 - there were mass rallies to stop the invasion of Iraq in 2003. However, this was still resisted by the Blair government, which escalated the conflict by sending British troops to Iraq, due to Blair’s * * ideology of his war doctrine * The shift of Conservative Party thinking towards a more overtly free-market-orientated approach in the 1970s owed a great deal to Margaret Thatcher's patronage of right-wing think tanks, such as the Centre for Policy Studies and the Adam Smith Institute. * In 2022, the neoliberal think tank Institute of Economic Affairs had 24 parliamentary supporters – including prominent figures such as Liz Truss, Priti Patel, Kemi Badenoch and Kwasi Kwarteng (who was previously employed by the organisation) * * Many think tanks, like the Resolution Foundation and the Fabian Society, warned against Brexit, stating that it would be detrimental to the UK economy, however, the Conservative government ignored this. * The Conservative Party is associated with the Adam Smith institute, and the Centre for Social Justice, whereas Labour is associated with the Fabian Society and Institute for Public Policy * When David Cameron was PM, the owner of the financial firm Greensill Capital Lex Greensill was his senior advisor, and had access to key government departments. After leaving politics, Cameron went on to be a lobbyist at Greensill Capital, lobbying Matt Hancock to use Greensill Capital’s services in the NHS during the pandemic * The lobbying firm Best for Britain tried to get another referendum through persuading MPs however this wasn’t successful and Johnson carried on his ‘Get Brexit Done’ plans. * The National Farmers Union used their insider status with the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to allow the 2013 badger cull. Head of the environmental affairs committee attended and NFU summit in 2023, 2024 Rishi Sunak said to NFU “we have your back”. This illustrates close links. * In 2004, th * Robert Colville (head of the Centre for Policy Studies) and Rachel Wolf co-authored the 2019 Conservative Manifesto * From 2015 to 2021, the Institute of Fiscal Studies’ reports had over 150 citations in official government documents. * Ruth porter worked as a special advisor to Liz Truss and was formerly a high level employee in the Institute for Economic affairs. She clearly influenced Kwarteng and Truss’ disastrous mini-budget due to the pressure groups right wing leaning. * Greenpeace, outsider group, was successful in its Microbeads campaign as the government proposed the strongest ban on microbeads in the world and declared that all personal care and cosmetic products containing microbeads would be off the shelves by 2018 (example of a successful outsider pressure group demonstrating that insider status is not significant) * * Countervailing is a product of hyperpluralism, for every PG that exists there is one that directly opposes its views. This means the govt can choose one they agree with the most and continue with their intended policy aim while appearing to be responsive to PGs. the british chamber of commerce for a 3rd runway at heathrow and the no 3rd runway group. Trade union congress in favour of a higher minimum wage and the confederation of british industry against the existence of the minimum wage. * Consulting with PGs is a politically calculated move the PG cage uk which advocates against post 9\11 terror laws that disproportionately affect muslims has little influence, because muslims only represent 4% of the electorate their lack of influence is accentuated by the fact that most muslims are labour voters so there would be no electoral gain if the cons party consulted with them. * Lobbying scandal - MP Scott Benton suspended for breaking lobbying rules after he was alleged to have lobbied for the gambling industry and gave the company access to confidential government documents. * Derek Draper 1998= Political lobbyist caught by the observer boasting about his links to Downing Street. “Lobbygate” * The UK lobbying industry is the third largest in the world with 4,000 lobbyists in and around Westminster * Palestine Solidarity Campaign → campaigned for immediate ceasefire in Gaza which led to gaza mass protests in London = 18th May 2024 → 250,000 marched in London (biggest one) * June 2022: Institute for Government issued ‘How metro mayors can help level up England’ * June 2022: Adam Smith Institute released a paper entitled ‘Countdown: Reforming the Cabinet Office, exploring how the Cabinet office could be made more efficient and effective. It released this because it opposed bureaucracy and believed the government should be small. It suggested reducing the size of the cabinet office by 90% (outsourcing some work done by the Cabinet Office to private bodies + keeping a tighter grip on spending * The Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s 2022 UK Poverty Report was a wide-reaching examination of the causes of poverty and its impact, including its effects on children, the disabled and those from different ethnic groups * Chatham House (an international affairs think tank) is responsible for the ‘Insights’ book series, which are intended to provide readers with a better understanding of key international issues. For example, in 2022 they published The Justice Laboratory: International Law in Africa * Three think tanks which were most often cited in policy documents between 2015-21: The Joseph Rowntree Foundation - Name checked in 157 documents relating to employment, culture or education. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation is a charity that researches social policy and campaign on quality of life issues The Institute for Fiscal Studies - A research institute with particular interests in taxation, welfare benefits and education, which received citation in 150 documents The National Bureau of Economics Research - A non-profit American group mention in 130 documents * The 2019 Conservative Manifesto was co-authored by Robert Colville and Rachel Wolf, both from the Centre for Policy Studies * The Players Panel * Initiative launched by Entain (company that owns betting companies like Ladbrokes). * Paid CT Group, a lobbyist firm run by Lynton Crosby, former advisor to PMs Theresa May and Boris Johnson, to offer insider advice. * It was created in response to a 2023 government proposition (White Paper) to increase restrictions on gambling for greater safety. * The ‘Players Panel’ launched a campaign to encourage those who had registered on their website to write to their MPs opposing these restrictions. The groups offered letter templates and advised its members to target the Culture Secretary, Lucy Frazer. * “At no stage do these emails point out that it’s a lobbying exercise by a company. They’re trying to hide behind constituents rather than coming clean about their own self-interest.” (Iain Duncan Smith, former leader of Conservative party, The Guardian) * Lady Davidson, the former leader of the Scottish Conservatives, said: “Of course it’s legitimate for the public to lobby MPs on upcoming legislation. But for members of parliament – and members of the public – to be kept in the dark over which well-funded gambling firm is behind lobbying efforts such as template emails is pretty underhand. In fact, it stinks.” (The Guardian) * Entain refused to say how much of the Players’ Panel funding it provided and whether any of its staff were involved in writing the templates. * “We do not see any contradiction between our welcoming of the review and our encouragement of our customers to make their voices heard in what is an important and necessary debate.” * Entain added that members of the Players’ Panel, some of whom have written articles about gambling regulation on the group’s website, were unpaid volunteers who did not receive any benefit from the company. * Greenpeace, alongside other environment-focused pressure groups, protested against the extension oa 1.4 Rights in Context 2 Political Parties 2.1 Features of Parties * Sharing similar/same political views and values (ideology) * Seek to secure the seats of their candidates as representatives or to form a government at various levels: local, regional, national * Some kind of consensus on developing policy, recruits candidates and identifies leaders * Manifestos are the collection of beliefs and promises made by parties presented to the electorate during election period and for the public holding later accountability if the party forms a government` Nour government hired hundreds of extra investigators and "intelligence agents". Foreign policy: aiming to introduce legislation that means military intervention can only take place with legal + Parliamentary authority. Reluctance to support anything ‘anti-Brexit’/reversing Brexit. Vocal support for NATO (esp. r.e. Russia v Ukraine). Looking to amend Brexit -> increase collaboration. 2.2 Established Political Parties Conservatives Economy: Cameron's priority was to reduce the budget deficit inherited from the Labour government. Insisted on a programme of public spending cuts, dubbed ‘austerity’, to maintain confidence in financial markets and prevent Britain’s borrowing costs from rising. Fiscal responsibility, commitment to free trade, furlough scheme during Covid, increased corporation tax from 19-25%, increased national living wage. Kemi Badenoch; pro free market economics, pledged to remove ‘red tape’ and said “Capitalism is not a dirty word, wealth is not a dirty word, profit is not a dirty word.” Thatcher ( Thatcherism ) Mass Privatisation, deregulation, laissez faire → Telecommunications Act 1984 ( Privatised british telecom ), →Housing Act 1980 ( right to buy - allowed council tenants to buy homes at discounted rates ( up to 60% )) [ 2+ million homes sold by 1997 ], →Financial Services Act 1986 ( Allowed foreign firms to trade on london stock exchange, ended fixed commissions for stockbrokers ), → Gas Act 1986 & Electricity Act 1989 ( privatised British Gas and electricity ) [ split industries into competing firms ], →Poll Tax 1989 ( Scotland ) and 1990 ( England/Wales ) ( replaced property taxes with a flat rate poll tax. Charged based on individual, regardless of economic status. So a rich man and a poor man both paid the exact same amount of tax ) Welfare: Cap on benefits. Benefits rates frozen from 2010 to 2019. Cuts to public services + introduction of private sector competition in public services. Promised to increase funding for NHS and education + bring down waiting lists. Law and order: 2019 – promised to increase the number of police officers (despite a decade of cuts), increase stop and search powers, limitations on right to protest. Restriction to individual liberty during Covid, e.g. enforced mask wearing, gathering restrictions. New Bill of Rights curtailing some HRA freedoms + threats to leave ECHR. Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 (though Labour plan to repeal). Foreign policy: commitment to armed forces, nuclear deterrent, membership of NATO. ‘Get Brexit Done’. Reduction in foreign aid budget to 0.5% GDP. Rwanda asylum scheme, ‘stop small boats’. Labour Economy: Set up great british energy in 2024- publicly owned clean power company (manifesto promise), abolish non-dom status, focusing on employee rights, increases NIC contributions for employers, tax increases, Welfare: Old labour comprehensive school-equality,social democracy Blair took an approach from passive benefits → active welfare. Work is the best route out of poverty ( third way ). Evidenced through New Deal Programmes ( 1998 ) → 18-24 yo mandatory job training, education, or work after 6 months of unemployment or benefits were cut. | Working Tax Credit subsidised low wages. Job seekers Allowance rules tightened and enforced, penalties for refusing work or training. 2008 Welfare Reform Act -( Brown ) expanded conditions: even sick/disabled claimants had to prepare for work. | 1998 National Minimum Wage Act. While not a welfarist act, it still complemented welfare reforms. -Starmer working to ban zero hour contracts, raising minimum wage, sick pay for all, expanding free childcare ( helping parents stay in work ) , expanding free school meals in phases. Ending section 21 no fault evictions, social housing policies. Though, currently working on £5 billion ( by 2030 ) cuts to health benefits ( PIP overhaul included ) which will go alongside £1 b investment into support to help disabled and sick get jobsGVC Foreign affairs: improved and ambitious relationship with european partners (manifesto), commitment to nato (manifesto), rest Law and Order: Create a new border security command to smash criminal boat gangs, crack down on antisocial behaviour with more neighbourhood policing and tough new penalties for offenders (manifesto), visible neighbourhood police (manifesto), Labour will fix this by introducing new Respect Orders – powers to ban persistent adult offenders from town centres, which will stamp out issues such as public drinking and drug use. Fly-tippers and vandals will also be forced to clean up the mess they have created (manifesto), end the practice of empty warnings regarding knife crime (manifesto), ban more types of knives and have stringer laws around online sales of knives manifesto), offer young people a pathway out of violence with youth mentors and pupil referral units, fast track rape cases (manifesto), Other: Economy; 2024 Great British Energy, 1998 Minimum Wage Act, 1998 Competition Act ( compliance with EU Law, banned anti-competitive agreements like price fixing. Increased market competition. ) LIBERAL DEMOCRATS: Economy: A fair, prosperous and innovative economy that promotes opportunity and wellbeing., make taxes fair not burden and help with cost with living and create job which uphold fiscal responsibility Welfare: Fair access to good public services and a strong social safety net.. A flourishing environment, with fair access to nature for all. Cut nhs time , to see GPs quicker , mental health contact , recruit and train more doctors and nurses . Education - free school meals, extend opportunity for young people to study , Bring down energy bills and help end fuel poverty Law and Order: . A truly fair democracy, where everyone’s rights are respected and individuals and communities are empowered.Restore porous community policy , invest in a criminal justice system , improved rehabilitation Foreign policy: looking to rejoin EU single market. Support international institutions (NATO, UN, EU, WTO). Abandon renewal of Trident nuclear missile system. 2017 manifesto – commitment to taking 50,000 Syrian refugees by 2020. Support international aid. 2024 Advocated for an immediate Gaza ceasefire. Examples for libdems: * In 2013, the LibDems sided with the Conservatives in opposing Mansion Tax, which they had previously supported which made the coalition government seem strong and united, however this meant the Lib Dems lost support from their traditional no voters as they abandoned their ideology. * The Liberal Democrats, particularly under the leadership of Nick Clegg, opposed the proposed Communications Data Bill, often referred to as the "Snooper's Charter." The bill aimed to expand the government's surveillance powers, requiring internet service providers to retain and provide access to individuals' communications data. The Liberal Democrats argued that the bill posed a threat to civil liberties and privacy rights, leading to their opposition during the coalition government. The Liberal Democrats have been vocal advocates or reforming stop and search powers to address concerns about racial profiling and excessive use of these powers. * During the lead-up to the 2016 EU referendum, the party campaigned for "Remain," actively supporting the UK's continued membership in the EU. They argued that EU membership brought economic advantages, enhanced cooperation on security issues, and provided opportunities for cultural exchange and collaboration. * In the coalition government with the Conservatives (2010-2015), the Liberal Democrats championed the Pupil Premium policy. This policy aimed to provide additional funding to schools based on the number of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds. * Throughout their time in coalition with the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats expressed concerns about the impact of welfare cuts on vulnerable individuals and families. While compromises were made as part of the coalition agreement, the Liberal Democrats sought to mitigate the effects of austerity measures on the most vulnerable in society * in the 2019 GE, the party’s pledge to cancel Brexit without a second referendum was seen by some as disregarding democratic principles - this approach ignored the 2016 ref result, which went against the party’s historical stance of respecting public opinion through democratic means 2.3 Emerging and Minor Parties * SNP: Welfare : SNP Government has now offered our 154,000 NHS Scotland Agenda for Change staff a substantial pay rise, rejecting the 1% proposal made by the Tories – and offering a proper pay rise of at least 4%, We will always keep Scotland’s NHS safe in public hands and improve mental health Law order : → working together to get rid of terrorism, helping to tackle the assault of women , SNP calls for the end to VAT charges on our police and fire services, the UK Government finally relented. → UK Government refunds the £175 million in VAT owed to Scotland’s emergency services. → A 5.6% increase to Police Scotland’s day-to-day budget Economy : → ‘The SNP believe that the tax burden should be proportionate to the ability to pay.’ - taken from the SNP website! → investment of up to £372 million in the scottish freeport and investment zones programmes → £1.15 billion-worth investment into growth deals Foreign policy: * Rejoin the EU - significantly diverges from the views of other parties * Scottish independence Green party: * Led by Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) and Adrien Ramsay (Waveney Valley) Welfare : Replace Personal Independence Payments (PIP) cash payments with ‘vouchers’, introduce a Universal Basic Income. Build more better-insulated homes (150,000) to reduce emissions and heating prices. Reduce waiting lists for NHS. Better access to NHS dentists. Increase school funding by 8 billion pounds, 2 billion for a pay uplift for teachers. Law and order : Legalisation of cannabis, promote community policing and de-prioritising stop-and-searches of young people. An important goal of theirs is reducing knife crime, particularly in Bristol, by providing better emergency health aids and fixing CCTV Blind Spots. scrap the police crime sentencing and courts act, the public order act and any other legislation that erodes the right to protest and free expression. Aim to increase protection for women. Economy : Wealth tax on top 1%, special tax on large banks, minimum wage of £15/hr regardless of age with the costs to small businesses offset by reducing their national insurance payments. Drive fossil fuels out of the economy. Phase-out nuclear power. Repeal anti-union legislation and replace it with a positive Charter of Workers’ Rights, move to 4 day working week, no single individual or company can own more than 20% if any media market, scrap university tuition fees, nationalise railways, water and energy big 5, Social: Votes for 16 year olds. Ban on all blood sports including trail hunting Other: votes for 16 year olds, PR, rent controls and no fault evictions ban, Reform Uk: Welfare : Belief that reducing illegal migration will reduce pressure on the welfare system, two strike rule for job offers- all jobseekers and those fit to work must find employment within 4 months or accept a job after two offers otherwise benefits are withdrawn. Law and order: Increase funding towards policing and increase funding for better police technology. Against illegal migration and support points-based systems for skilled migrants. scrap diversity, equality and inclusion roles and regulations to stop two tier policing, drug dealing and trafficking to get mandatory life imprisonment, more bobbies on the beat and less time with paperwork, automatic life imprisonment for those committing second violent or serious offences Economy : Lower tax, lift threshold for 40% income tax bracket to £70,000, raise first tax bracket to £20,000, oppose net zero as it increases energy bills, simplify the tax system, scrap net zero to boost the economy, tax relief on school fees Foreign affairs: Leaving the european convention on human rights (like Russia and Belarus), no more small boats, immigration tax on businesses who employ foreign workers, remove british armed forces from the horizon programme so they can be independent, leave WHO unless there is fundamental reform to its structure and funding, reject the influence of the world economic forum, Other: ban "transgender ideology" in schools, scrap HS2, scrap bbc licence fee, cut bureaucracy, PR Other: * Reform Voting system: Abolish FPTP and introduce Proportional Representation * Reform HoL by introducing a representative, elected second chamber. * On an LBC podcast, Sunak was talking to a conservative voter who has decided he wants to vote for reform in the upcoming election, Sunak responded with “A vote for Reform is a vote for Starmer”, and “There will be one of two PMs, me or Keir Starmer” (could be used when referring to evidence for a two-party system in the UK and the influence of minor parties) * London Mayoral election 2021 saw the influence of independents such as Niko Omilana, Count Binface and Max Fosh gain considerable footing, indicating minor party power Current polling trends for UK parties, May 2024: * Labour Party: 44% (major) * Conservative Party: 24% (major) * Reform UK: 11% * Liberal Democrats: 10% (major in specification) * Green Party: 6% * Scottish National Party (SNP): 3% * Plaid Cymru: 1% Voting intention survey by YouGov, 9-10th March 2025 * Labour = 24% * Reform 23% * Conservative = 22% * LibDem = 15% * Green = 9%. * SNP = 3% * Plaid Cymru = 1% * Other = 3% * 1983 Labour left-right divided…4 MPs had left and created the SDP in 1981 -> Tory majority. * 1997 Major’s Tories divided over Europe -> Labour landslide * 2017 May’s government divided over Brexit * 2019 Johnson suspended moderate Tories and filled his Cabinet with hard pro-Brexit MPs for a unified front. * 2020 Conservatives MPs opposed to the Huawei new 5G network plan due to the concern of Chinese government interference on the UK national security and the accusat/.ion of no disclosure of impact of COVID (from financial times), which forced Johnson to abandon the plan * 2023-24 exit of numerous Labour MP’s due to disagreements over Palestine - Israel conflict like Naz Shah, Afzal Khan, Jess Philips etc. * 2023-24 Tory division on Rwanda scheme (tension between Sunak and ex Home Secretary Suella Braverman) and shifting position in economic policy after the resignation ex-PM Liz Truss (45p tax cut to raising tax until late 2023) * Around one in five MPs say they are stepping down including more than 70 Tories, over 20 from Labour and nine from the SNP * According to analysis, the Conservatives lost 23% of their vote share to Reform UK in the 2024 GE. PARTY LEADERS * Neil Kinnock: negative media coverage due to the Left wing manifesto - The Sun “Will the last person to leave Britain please turn out the lights” showed the incompetence of Neil Kinnock to become the Prime Minister (valence) * Tony Blair: good media presence (‘The Sun Bagged Johnson’s recorioooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosw in office - poor valence led to changes in PM - Sunak’s weak valence also causes massive loss in 2024 local elections Blair’), tight control over his party’s messaging — New Labour, moderate, reform of Clause IV (commitment to nationalisation). 7 * But his image was destroyed by contentious decisions i.e. Iraq war, increase in tuition fees. Boris Johnson: clear party’s messaging “Get Brexit Done” on the 2019 Conservatives manifesto — announced Hard Brexit as the main goal of the Conservatives which brought the party together. (after May’s infamous soft Brexit approach in 2017-19) Helped the Conservatives to gain 80 majority seats * Partygate damage * The D-Day incident with PM Sunak leaving D-Day early to attend an Channel 4 Interview that was airing 9 days later caused massive controversy in the beginning of the Conservative campaign for the 2024 General Election. POLICY SIMILARITIES: Economy * Labour and Conservatives do not want to have further tax raise: Labour’s first duty is economic stability; Conservatives pledged to deliver tax cuts if they win the general election (Jeremy Hunt) Welfare and education: Welfare * Labour aligns with Conservatives to keep the Universal Credit (but seek to reform it) * Cutting NHS waiting lists: Labour pledged to provide 40K appointments in NHS each week by using the money collected from the “non-dom loopholes” and tax avoidance; Tories: will cut waiting lists (no clear plan yet) Education * Labour: no plan to abolish tuition fees as the country cannot afford it (2023) Foreign Policy Gaza * Both Labour and the Conservatives have adamantly backed Israel (bipartisan) * Labour response has been broadly unified; contrast deep divisions over Israel-Palestine (and foreign policy in general) under Jeremy Corbyn (labelled as antisemitic) * Starmer: “Israel has the right to self defence”; arguably mirroring government due to upcoming election = consensus * In October 2023, Starmer defended the Israeli “right to withhold water” from Palestines in an interview on LBC with Nick Ferrari (aware it is a breach due experience as human rights; values election victory smore) * Shadow Cabinet Member David Lammy emphasised that Labour supported Israel and its “right to defend itself”; response must be proportionate and within the bounds of international law * In November 2023, 56 Labour MPs rebelled in favour of a ceasefire; resulted in 10 front bench resignations (e.g. Shadow Minister for Domestic Violence and Safeguarding Jess Phillips) * Over 70 councillors across the country that have resigned over disapproval on the Labour stance on Gaza; 9 in Oxford (no longer in Labour control) * Regional Mayors Sadiq Khan (London) and Andy Burnham (Greater Manchester) called for an immediate ceasefire; did not receive sacking due to their importance to the party in these areas * Both parties support Ukraine in the ongoing conflict with Russia, Starmer expressed interest in working with US/Russia in peace talks to benefit Ukraine → Apr 2025 temporary ceasefire called and supported by Starmer. EU * Both Sunak and Starmer turned down a free movement deal around the EU for 18-30 year olds * The parties can be aligning together to show the US support for their approach to foreign policy. Countries against US foreign policy are usually considered as an enemy to America. (comparable to Blair supporting Bush's “war on terror” despite protests against the Iraq War); too much at stake for the British economy if they deviate from the US in foreign policy. SMALL/MINOR PARTIES: European Parliament elections * In 2019, the Brexit Party won the seat for the UK European Parliament election * In 2019 European Parliament elections Green party won 12% of the vote electing 7 MEPs Policy absorption * Conservative manifesto 2019 promises to reach net zero by 2050 , may have been due to rising popularity of the Green party. Local elections and by-elections * 2024 local elections: Lib Dem (+104 = 522), Green (+74 = 181), Independent (+ 93 = 228) * By-election in Rochdale: George Galloway from Workers Party of Britain won the by-election * Nigel farage claims that the end of “two party politics” has come as his party make significant gains in local by elections * Closest majority in UK local elections history as reform gain a tight majority of 6 in Runcorn and Helbsy 2.4 Parties in Context 1. Definition and Role of Political Parties * Definition: Political parties are organized groups that seek to influence public policy and gain political power by participating in elections. They serve as key instruments in democratic systems, shaping governance, policy-making, and public discourse. * Key Functions of Political Parties: * Representation: Parties articulate the interests of social groups (e.g., working class for Labour, business interests for Conservatives). * Political Participation: Through elections, parties mobilize voters, encouraging engagement in democratic processes. * Policy Formulation: Parties develop policy platforms that reflect ideological stances, addressing societal needs (e.g., Labour’s welfare state vs. Conservative free-market policies). * Recruitment and Leadership: Parties act as vehicles for training political leaders (e.g., Tony Blair, Margaret Thatcher). * Government Formation: Parties organize around policy ideas to form governments and influence legislation (e.g., the Conservative Party forming the UK government in 2019). 2. Party Systems: Types and Characteristics • Single-Party System: • Example: North Korea. A single party holds all political power, suppressing opposition and dissent. • Analysis: While such systems can ensure political stability, they often undermine political freedom, creating autocracies. • Two-Party System: • Example: UK (Conservatives vs. Labour) and USA (Democrats vs. Republicans). • Analysis: Two-party systems, often found under First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) electoral systems, tend to limit voter choice and lead to policy convergence, where major parties present similar platforms to appeal to the center. • Evaluation: A drawback is the “wasted vote” phenomenon in FPTP, where votes for smaller parties (e.g., Liberal Democrats) often do not translate into seats, limiting democratic representation. • Multi-Party System: • Example: Germany (CDU, SPD, Green Party, FDP) operates under Proportional Representation (PR). • Analysis: PR systems lead to broader representation but can result in unstable coalition governments, as evidenced by Germany’s 2017 Grand Coalition, where CDU/CSU and SPD struggled to find common ground on key issues. • Evaluation: Although multi-party systems promote inclusivity, coalition politics often result in compromises that dilute policy effectiveness, particularly in times of crisis. 3. Political Ideology and Party Identity • Left-wing vs. Right-wing Ideologies: • Left-wing: Focus on social equality, state intervention in the economy, and progressive values. Example: The Labour Party in the UK, advocating for a welfare state and nationalization of key industries. • Right-wing: Support for free-market capitalism, limited government intervention, and traditional values. Example: The Conservative Party in the UK, advocating for lower taxes ac, privatization, and deregulation. • Centrist Parties: • Example: The Liberal Democrats (UK), which advocate for a balance of social justice with free-market policies, also focusing on civil liberties and electoral reform. • Analysis: Centrist parties often appeal to voters disillusioned with extreme ideologies, though they may struggle to maintain a distinct identity as they adapt to shifting political trends. • Case Study (UK): The rise of the SNP (Scottish National Party), which emerged as a major political force in Scotland, is an example of how regional parties can challenge traditional ideologies and realign national politics. The 2015 UK general election saw the SNP win 56 out of 59 Scottish seats, demonstrating the shift toward regionalism and nationalism. 4. Party Funding and Influence * Sources of Funding: * Private Donations: Corporations and wealthy individuals can donate large sums, often influencing party policies. Example: The Conservative Party’s close ties to business groups. * Public Funding: Some systems, like the UK’s, allocate funding based on electoral success to ensure fairness and reduce the influence of wealth. Analysis: Public funding aims to create a level playing field but may also stifle grassroots parties that struggle to gain traction. * Short money: Given to the opposition to assist policy research and fulfil their role as a ‘government-in-waiting’ * Cranbourne money: Similar to short money but for the opposition in the Lords Issues of Influence:, * Corruption and Elitism: Large donations from wealthy donors can skew political agendas toward the interests of the elite, undermining democracy. Example: * Ecclestone Affair 1997 * Concerns over “cash for access” scandals (Peter Cruddas) involving political donations in the UK. * 2022: Peter Murrel (charged with embezzlement of party funds) * Moral & legal corruption: * 2006/2007: Cash for Honours scandal * Phillips Report 2007 * 2023: Johnson Honours List -> Peter Cruddas * 2024: Frank Hester donation scandal * Ed Davey: “we must also cap donations to political parties. So that even the wealthiest racists cannot buy power and influence over the Conservative party” * 2025? : Elon Musk offering to donate £100 million to Reform UK… * Loopholes: Transparency International - explained how loopholes in the law are allowing “dark money” to infiltrate UK politics * ‘almost £1 in every £10 donated to parties and politicians comes from unknown or dubious sources’ * Regulation: In response to public concern, the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (2000) was introduced in the UK to regulate donations and ensure transparency. Conservative Party has repeatedly claimed that their donations do not breach the Act and satisfy conditions that all donations should be: taken from the electoral roll and/or only received from UK citizens. This reflects a lack of transparency. 5. The Decline of Political Parties • Partisan Dealignment: • Trend: Traditional party loyalty is in decline, with many voters now identifying as independent or switching allegiance between elections. Evidence: Studies by David Sanders (British Election Study) show a significant decline in the proportion of voters identifying with a party. • Analysis: This reflects changing political dynamics, with voters more focused on specific issues (e.g., Brexit) rather than party affiliation. • Rise of Populism: • Populist parties, like UKIP in the UK or Front National in France, challenge traditional party structures by focusing on issues such as nationalism and anti-elitism. Example: Brexit Party’s rise, which led to the UK’s departure from the EU, highlights the growing disillusionment with traditional party politics. * E.g. Since Farage's return to leadership in mid-2024, the party has experienced unprecedented growth, with membership expanding from 65,000 in July 2024 to over 230,000 by April 2025 . This represents a staggering 260% increase over eight months . • Political Fragmentation: • Analysis: While party dealignment suggests a decline in traditional political parties, the rise of single-issue parties and populist movements indicates new forms of political engagement, such as through social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook eg-Farage making cameos to increase influence within younger voters. 6. Challenges Facing Political Parties • Electoral Systems: • Different electoral systems impact party success. For instance, First-Past-The-Post (FPTP) in the UK favors larger parties, while Proportional Representation (PR) systems tend to benefit smaller parties, as seen in countries like German. • Analysis: FPTP often leads to majoritarian systems, where one party controls most government seats despite receiving less than 50% of the vote (e.g., Conservative victory in 2015 despite not winning a majority of the vote). • Media and Digital Influence: • Social Media: The rise of social media allows parties to engage directly with voters but also makes them vulnerable to manipulation by online movements or misinformation campaigns. Example: Cambridge Analytica and the role of social media in the 2016 US election. • Traditional Media: The traditional media also plays a significant role in shaping public perception, with partisan outlets reinforcing party ideologies. • Voter Engagement: • While traditional parties struggle with declining membership, new forms of engagement, such as through political activism (e.g., Extinction Rebellion), show that political participation is evolving. However, the traditional party model remains central in many democratic systems. 7. Conclusion and Evaluation Political parties play a vital role in the functioning of democratic systems, providing representation, policy alternatives, and leadership. However, they face significant challenges, including declining loyalty, increasing fragmentation, and the evolving nature of voter engagement. The rise of populism and new political movements indicates that while traditional parties may be in decline, political participation and engagement are evolving in new and unpredictable ways. • Final Evaluation: The future of political parties may depend on their ability to adapt to changing political landscapes, engage with new forms of communication, and respond to voter concerns outside traditional ideological frameworks. Whether traditional parties can regain public trust or whether new forms of political organization will dominate remains an open question in democratic politics. Evaluate the view that political parties no longer fulfill their functions in UK democracy: My essay will argue that the parties no longer fulfill their respective functions. (Themes: Representation, Political Participation, and Education Function) (To be continued) Political Participation: Political parties fulfill their function as they play a crucial role in mobilising the electorate to ensure that there is wider political participation. For instance, parties may encourage the electorate to be members or to vote in major electoral events. Their effectiveness in fulfilling this function can be seen in 2025, where Reform UK was able to stir the electorate through populist campaigning against issues such as immigration. This prompted a significant number of voters to join Reform UK, which went from having 5000 members in March 2024 to over 200,000 members as of April 2025. HOWEVER, While Reform UK had stimulated the growth of political participation through campaigns, parties had failed to encourage a wider scale of participation such as imploring the electorate to utilise their right to vote. E.g: 2024 GENERAL ELECTION: Despite campaigning programmes from both major parties to utilise their right to vote, the voter turnout ended up being 59.7%, which was 7.6% lower than the 2019 General Elections. 3 Electoral Systems 3.1 Electoral Systems * In 2024 elections, Labour got 63% of seats with only 33% of the vote, whereas the Reform party secured 14% of votes and only 1% of seats / in addition to this the amount of popular votes that Labour earnt in 2024, was less than what David Cameron’s Conservative party won in 2010, yet they were unable to form a government as they only had 306 seats and so had to form a coalition with th Liberal Democrats * In 2019, votes cast per seat for Green was 866,400 whilst for Conservative it was 38,300 * In 2019, there were 141 marginal seats, where candidates led by less than 10%. In Lanark & Hamilton East, the top 3 candidates had around 16,000 votes. * In 2024, there were 46 marginal seats, where candidates led by less than 2%, for example in Hendon the Labour MP had a majority of 15 votes giving a measly 0.04% majority, leaving 25.401 constituents of Hendon to have wasted their votes and not voted for their MP * Lord Hailsham – ‘elective dictatorship’, FPTP * 1974-79 Labour gov had a 3 seat majority, yet still able to push forward aspects of social and economic reform agenda (Industrial relations, legislation and nationalisation e.g. British Leyland) done through the Lib-Lab pact and heavy party whipping and exploiting divisions within the opposition. – this is an example of elective dictatorship which is an indirect consequence of FPTP and it means they can pass whatever policies with little notice for the opposition even with a small majority 3.2 Referendums * 1975 Referendum on the UK staying in the EU: 67% remain, 64% turnout * 1997 Establishment of Scottish Parliament: 74% Yes, 25% No, 60% Turnout 1997 Welsh Assembly Referendum: 49.7% turnout, 50.3% yes * 1998 Approval of the GFA: 71% Yes, 29% No, 81% Turnout * 2011 AV referendum: 32% Yes, 67% No, 42% Turnout * 2014 Scottish Independence referendum: 45% Yes, 55% No, 84% Turnout * 2016 Brexit referendum: ‘Get brexit done’ 48% Remain, 52% Leave, 72.2% Turnout 80% of MPs supported remaining in the EU, 77% of them still voted to article 50 to leave the EU because of the referendum City-wide referendums - Not all ref turnouts are equal - Greater Manchester Congestion Charge referendum – 46% turnout – overwhelmingly rejected it. * The Electoral Commission is an independent body responsible for checking the wording of one question to ensure it is objective. It also monitors rival campaigning groups. Set up by the 2000 Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act (PPERA). Weakness: is a reactive body that investigates violations after they’ve had their impact (Leave campaign overspending) 3.3 Electoral System Analysis impact of the electoral system on the government or type of government appointed * FPTP: single-party government. There are “clear winners” in the general elections. Also, as “the winner takes all”, the winner party has the winner bonus of elective dictatorship in the House of Commons, e.g. 1997 landslide victory of Labour (179 majority seats) paved the way for Blair’s government to pass constitutional reform, HRA 1998, etc. without gridlocks; 2019 victory of Conservatives (80 seats majority) enabled Johnson’s government to pass the Coronavirus Act 2020 without significant challenges. * Not every time FPTP can produce a single-party government. 2010-2015 coalition government, 2017-20 19 minority government were hung parliament, so the unstable government faces more challenges during legislation, e.g. 2017 May faced challenges in Parliament tackle EU issues in Soft Brexit approach, later used sub-committees and cabinet committees to pursue soft Brexit (failed, she stepped down and called for an election & 2019) * AMS: two-party coalition government/one-party minority government. Promote multi-party system AMS reduced tactical voting - allow voters to vote for their preferred party in the regional seats (close list) AMS reinforces coalition government — SNP-Green Pact (2021-) * Closed list is drafted by the party and the candidates are not chosen by the voters * FPTP is still used in constituency seats — share the same problems * Vague accountability: don’t know who to turn to when issues raised STV reinforce power-sharing due to the political nature in Northern Ireland (The Trouble and Good Friday Agreement 1998) Sinn Fein-DUP coalition STV ensures no wasted votes as ranking candidates can ensure elected MLAs are the representing electorate’s preference (no tactical voting) * No stable government: Northern Ireland Assembly suspended for 3 times and the longest time is 5 years (2002-2007), recent suspension is during 2022-2024 due to the controversy on first minister ion and protocol. In the case of Stormont, this is perhaps more due to party political tensions than the voting system itself * Extremely confusing voting system: voters rank the candidates and votes transfer to other candidates if their 1st preference is elected (until 6 seats are filled) * Confusing accountability: 6 MLA in one constituency although increases representation but don’t know who to turn to and who has the “most power and liability” * SV: single candidate as mayor (not in use after Elections Act 2022), two party system as only the majority parties can usually get into the final round. The impact of different systems on party representation and of electoral systems on voter choice 4 Voting Behaviour and the Media 4.1 Factors affecting voting behaviour AGE * Millennials are 15 points less conservative than the national average which breaks the rule that the older you get the more conservative you get * Ipsos MORI (2017): 62% of voters at age 18-24 voted for Labour (27% voted for Tories), 69% of 65+ voters voted for Conservatives (19% voted for Labour) * YouGov (2019): the vote preference diverge at the age of 39 * CHECK: Millennials are shattering the oldest rule in politics * In 2019 only 21% of 18-24yr old voters voted Cons. (This is 8% in 2024)- * In 2019 only 14% of 70+ voters voted Labour. (This is 20% in 2024) * YouGov described age as the “biggest dividing line in British Politics” GENDER * “Blair's babes”, “Browns Sugars”, “Labour Lovelies” are examples of how the media in particular focuses on the “physical attributes of female candidates”. This could be said to be a major problem for female candidates. * 2019 - Nearly all parties had clear policies to address gender with the Conservatives having a commitment to tackle issues relating to violence against women including a commitment to appoint a violence against women commissioner. * Traditionally, women were believed to favour the Conservatives - this changed under Blair in 1997 with Labour winning a larger share of the female vote under him. * 1997 - Blair introduced all-women shortlists to increase the number of women in parliament. * 2024 - Gender wasn't as big a factor in the GE as an almost equal percentage voted for each party, e.g. 34% of men voted Labour and 35% of women did the same, while 12% of men voted LibDems and 12% of women did the same. * Recent survey in the UK by Hope Not Hate found that 45% of young men aged between 16 to 24 have a positive view of Andrew Tate. The rate among women is 1%. 36% of men now believe that feminism has done more harm than good. Additionally, 16% of young men feel that feminism has done more harm than good and young men are far more likely to say that they themselves have suffered as a result of women and positive change with regards to women. (The News Agents Podcast) REGION * The North is most likely to vote Labour e.g. Liverpool Walton with 87% vote share to Labour MP Dan Carden - last 4 GE’s Walton’s labour vote share hasn’t dropped below 72%. * 2019 General Election - Conservatives broke down Labour’s so called “Red Wall” in Northern England (Dennis Skinner in Bolsover turned Conservative after 49 years of Labour control) where there were/are traditional Labour strongholds - due to Brexit and perceptions of party leadership. * 2024 General Election - Seats that went to Reform UK were coastal due to their anti-immigrant rhetoric which instilled fear in their voters, thus manipulating them to vote reform CLASS * Class dealignment after 1970s — people no longer identify with a particular social class and social mobility is promoted * 2019 Red Wall: the North which is traditionally dominated by working class (C2,DE) had voted for Conservatives * 1997: Blair gained votes from class AB and floating voters (~33%) * However, this can be argued that Blair’s centrist manifesto (New Labour) attracted AB votes due to the party disunity in Conservatives on European issues * : 59% of class AB voted for Labour in 1997 whereas only 40% voted for Labour in 2010; only 21% of class DE voted for Conservatives in 1997 but 41% voted for Conservatives in 2019 * 2024 GE, declining importance of class, 36% of ABC1 and 33% of C2DE voted Labour + 25% of ABC1 (upper classes) & 23% of C2DE (working class) voted Conservatives ETHNICITY * BAME voters are more likely to vote Labour- 2019 elections 20% of BAME voters voted for Conservative, 64% BAME voters voted Labour * However, the proportion of BAME voters in classes C2 and DE is greater than the proportion of white people in those classes, so the preference for Labour may not be based on ethnicity, but on social class EDUCATION * 2017 elections - 47% of voters with degrees voted labour/lib dem, 36% voted conservative. 23% of voters with no qualifications voted labour/lib dem, 53% voted conservative * However, in 2019 the conservative party was the most popular party amongst all education groups - can make the argument that in more recent times education does not greatly influence voting behaviour * 2024, 42% graduates voted Labour & only 18% graduates voted conservatives MEDIA Press - print media (e.g. newspaper, magazines, tabloids, broadsheets) * “No Press barrage” didn’t work for Corbyn — The Sun increased negative media coverage of Corbyn (e.g. 'Don't chuck Britain in the Cor‘BIN’) and Daily Mail published a 15-page anti-Labour spread. But Labour still gained 32.1% of vote share in 2017. It could be because of factors like increased votes in age 18-24 (62% of the 18-24 voters voted Labour), popularity of party leaders, etc. * YouGov: 74% of Daily Mail readers voted Conservatives in 2017 * Not every reader accepts the view of the newspaper, 26% people still didn’t vote for Conservatives * Press only reacts to the prevailing mood (opinion polls) of the time — “Save Brexit, Save Britain” (12 Dec 2019), opinion polls (Survation, 11 Dec 2019): 34% for Labour, 45% for Conservatives (actual vote share: 42.3% Conservatives, 32.1% Labour * pression of party leader: vote share of Lib Dem only increased 1% and lost seats compared to 2005 * May’s refusal to participate in a live TV debate caused her to further decrease her popularity. * TV debates may not show “clear winners” in debates, e.g. 2019 Corbyn and Johnson — dull and repetitive arguments. Therefore, there is no need to appear on TV. Social media * Labour in April 2024 appointed a dedicated employee to work with influencers in TikTok and Instagram to promote a positive image of Keir Starmer. (The Guardian, 2024) Also, this is to attract young voters (18-24) as young people are tech-savvy and the largest proportion of the population in consumption of social media. Labour has gained 186 seats in the local election 2024. (+16%) * Conservatives won the 2019 general election despite a halved cost of advertisements * UKIP attracted voters in 2015 to support Brexit and push Conservatives to start the 2016 EU Withdrawal Referendum — UKIP will dilute votes from Conservatives if Tory did not take actions on Brexit * Social media is an echo chamber — it requires skills to attract the algorithm and bring new opinions to different users' pages when they already have opinions and preferences in political parties and issues. * Labour made use of social media (viral videos) and campaigns with activists — Corbyn interjecting during Theresa May’is Facebook Live chat on ITV received 4 million views. Corbyn challenging May to a debate reached 1.4 million people. * News reposted in social media which also presented in broadcast and digital press, e.g. BBC on Instagram and TikTok, Sky News and The Guardian on X. Therefore, the information in social media is only a copy of the mass media. * 2019 Conservatives had 2500 live paid-for adverts (Facebook Ad library), whereas Labour only has 250, showing that Conservatives won the election partially because of the advertisement in Facebook (arguably with a larger user population of older voters - 21% for tory in 18-24 voters, 67% for tory in 70+ voters) * Lib Dem lost 1 seat, albeit a larger amount of adverts (3000 adverts, more than the tories) CAMPAIGN Evidence that suggests that campaigns are important: * Although some campaigns may simply reinforce existing attitudes, others may challenge them, especially if it's a tight race. The growth of partisan dealignment suggests that campaigns do increasingly matter as voters have become more flexible in their voting intentions * In 1992 John Major’s decision to abandon stage managed events and take his soap box to town centres was in marked contrast to Neil Kinnock’s over-confidence at the Sheffield rally. This changed the dynamic of the general election, giving the conservatives an unexpected victory * In 2010, a strong Liberal Democrat campaign, including Nick Clegg’s impressive performance in the televised debates, significantly increased the Liberal Democrat support, mostly at the expense of the conservatives, leading to a hung parliament and a conservative Liberal democrat coalition * In 2017 Jeremy Corbyn’s optimistic rallies and popular manifesto commitments such as ending tuition fees contrasted sharply with Theresa May’s uninspiring campaign appearances and the widespread unpopularity with the ‘dementia tax’. As a result, Labour drastically increased its support as the campaign progressed, from less than 30% of the vote at the beginning of the election to 40% in the general election * In 2024, Ramsay’s and Denyer’s targeting of specific constituencies and paying attention to issues important to those specific constituencies (knife crime, housing, greener farming) scored them 2 out of the 4 Green seats. * Sunak started campaign in the rain, Negative image of his campaign from day 1 Evidence that suggests that campaigns aren’t important: * According to some political commentators the influence of the campaign can be exaggerated since voters in general have already made up their mind * In the 1950s and 1960s the class allegiance that political parties could depend on meant that campaigns made very little difference in swaying voters. For example, the 1955 and 1959 general election campaigns simply confirmed expected Tory victories under Anthony Eden and Harold Macmillan * Although Harold Wilson’s dynamic presidential campaign in 1964 was supposed to make his appeal to the voters as a British John F Kennedy, in fact, Sir Alec Douglas-Home’s low key dogged earnestness proved more appealing. In the end, Wilson increased Labour’s share of the vote by only 0.2% on Hugh Gaitskell's lacklustre performance in 1959 * In 1970 Edward Heath’s campaign was dismissed as bland and uninspiring. Plans had been drawn up by top Conservatives to force his resignation when he lost. His victory over Harold Wilson was completely unexpected * Although praised by the media, Labour’s television-friendly 1987 campaign hardly dented Margaret Thatcher’s political domination and she was returned to government with a 102-seat majority. The satirical magazine Private Eye ironically commented on ‘Labour’s brilliant defeat.’ In 2019, the conservatives ran a more effective campaign by relentlessly focusing on Brexit. However, during the campaign, polling hardly changed, suggesting that many voters had already made up their minds before the campaign began. * In 1997, Labour had a runaway lead in the polls and party workers were therefore encouraged to adopt a “sit tight and shut up” attitude to avoid any scandals that would damage Labour’s lead. This suggests voters had largely made up their minds before heading to the polls. POLICIES AND MANIFESTOS 2019 * Dubbed the ‘Brexit’ election; another referendum on Brexit * Conservative Party slogan = ‘Get Brexit Done’; key policy that helped break the Redwall (long-standing Labour safe seats) * Jeremy Corbyn = no clear plan for Brexit; ⅓ of his voting base were Brexiteers * Labour manifesto was too wordy; Conservatives opted for a very slim manifesto (different from Theresa May in 2017) Counter Argument: People don’t read manifestos and policies; slogans resonate better * Corbyn was extremely unpopular due to anti-semitism scandal; ran a poor campaign * Media did not like him; Sun would villainise him (‘THE SUN SAYS If Boris Johnson wins today, a bright future begins… but if Jeremy Corbyn gets in, the lights will go out for good’) * Corbyn dubbed the ‘most dangerous man to run for high office’ by the Sun. * Johnson’s personality was well-liked; Corbyn was seen as boring * Analysis: less about policy areas (unlike 1997 election) 1997 * Labour Party had modernised to “New Labour”; and had a manifesto to reflect their modern party attitudes * Labour promised to build the economy; policies were widely embraced * Abolished ‘Clause 4’; Labour looked and felt less socialist and more ‘mainstream’ centrist BY-ELECTIONS * Sunak - 13 by-elections since becoming PM in October 2022 * Several produced 20%+ swings to Labour from the Conservatives (e.g. Selby, Mid Bedfordshire and Tamworth, Blackpool South) Constituency Date Reason for by-election Result City of Chester 1 December 2022 Resignation of Christian Matheson; 21 October 2022 Samantha Dixon (Labour hold) Stretford and Urmston 15 December 2022 Resignation of Kate Green; 10 November 2022 Andrew Western (Labour hold) West Lancashire 9 February 2023 Resignation of Rosie Cooper; 30 November 2022 Ashley Dalton (Labour hold) Uxbridge and South Ruislip 20 July 2023 Resignation of Rt Hon Boris Johnson; 12 June 2023 Steve Tuckwell (Conservative hold) Selby and Ainty 20 July 2023 Resignation of Nigel Adams; 12 June 2023 Keir Mather (Labour gain) Somerton and Frome 20 July 2023 Resignation of David Warburton; 19 June 2023 Sarah Dyke (Liberal Democrats gain) Rutherglen and Hamilton West 5 October 2023 Successful recall petition against Margaret Ferrier; closed 31 July 2023 Micheal Shanks (Labour gain) Mid-Bedfordshire 19 October 2023 Resignation of Nadine Dorris; 29 August 2023 Alastair Strathern (Labour gain) Tamworth 19 October 2023 Resignation of Christopher Pincher; 7 September 2023 Sarah Edwards (Labour gain) Wellingborough 15 February 2024 Successful recall petition against Peter Bone; closed 19 December 2023 Gen Kitchen (Labour gain) Kingswood 15 February 2024 Resignation of Christopher Skidmore; 8 January 2024 Damien Egan (Labour gain) Rochdale 29 February 2024 Death of Tony Lloyd; 17th January 2024 George Galloway (Workers Party of Britain gain) Blackpool South 2 May 2024 Resignation of Scott Benton; 25 March 2024 Chris Webb (Labour gain) Runcorn and Helmsby 1 May 2025 Labour MP Mike Amesbury was convicted of assault (punched someone) 24th February 2025 Sarah Pochin (Reform Uk gain) won by 6 votes 4.2 Influence of the Media * Decline in trust of broadcast media: * BBC: 81% in 2003 -> 47% in 2020 * ITV: 82% in 2003 -> 41% in 2020 * 2019 GE viewed as the ‘Brexit election’ by and broadcast media - power to shape what the public thinks when casting a vote * Journalists as directors of communications for parties: - Allistair Campbell (Blair) - former political editor of the Daily Mirror - Andy Coulson (Cameron) - former editor of News of the World - Seamus Milne (Corbyn) - ex-Guardian journalist * Daily Mirror and Guardian investigation into whether Dominic Cummings broke lockdown rules (2020) became lead story across social and broadcast media: print media lead on issues and more trusted broadcasters follower * influence of media in the sacking of Suella Braverman- pressure mounted on Rishi Sunak after criticism of police in regards to pro-palestine protests/demonstrations * Rochdale by-election 2024 - George Galloway used the media to put out his pro palestine views, appealed to the muslim voters and voters concerned with the issue using media and was able to win the election. * 2020- circulation of The Sun - 1,000,000 down from 3 million in 2010 * OFCOM - regulates the media in the UK - some requirements of the media include having balanced reporting. GB News is an example where this may not be the case as they hire mostly conservative MPs. Ofcom finds GB News guilty of breaking impartiality rules - March 2023 interview with Jeremy Hunt- the investigation found that in discussing these (HS2, Cost of living crisis, Corporate tax etc) matters, the programme was overwhelmingly reflective of the viewpoints of different strands of opinion within the Conservative Party. * * Ofcom upheld three complaints against GB News for breaching impartiality in 2023. The GB News model of serving politicians as presenters has broken previous boundaries and is also subject to ongoing investigation. * In January 2024, the ITV Drama “Mr Bates vs The Post Office” re-exposed the Post Office scandal to the public, where nearly 1000 postmasters were wrongly prosecuted for stealing information between 1999 and 2015. The BBC re-aired their Panorama episode on the scandal in January. This mass coverage caused the government to announce an upfront payment of £75k to postmasters. * A 2015 election survey found that 62% of people cited television as the strongest influence in helping them form an opinion. The leaders' debate in 2010 was watched by 10 million viewers. * A YouGov survey after the 2017 election found that 26% of adults reported that social media had influenced their vote. 50% of 18-24 year olds claimed that it had influenced them, as opposed to 28% being influenced by newspapers or magazines. * In 2017, Labour used more than 1200 different social media advertisements to ‘micro-target’ specific groups. This could explain the ‘youthquake’, with a turnout of 58%, and a percentage of 63 18-29 year olds voting Labour in 2017. * In January 2024, Keir Starmer dismissed ‘nonsense’ reports that he will duck TV debates, instead stating that he is happy to debate Sunak. This is perhaps because he doesn’t want to look like a weak leader, reminiscent of how In 2017, then PM Theresa May infamously refused to debate with Jeremy Corbyn, making her appear as an insecure leader. Green Party * leader Caroline Lucas summarised this succinctly: "(the) first rule of leadership is to show up… You don't say it's the most important election of our lifetime and not be bothered to show up." https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-4010532 * David Cameron met with Rupert Murdoch 26 within his first 15 months of being PM. * The University of Oxford Reuters Institute found that people with right-wing views are more likely to favour offline news, while those with left-wing views prefer it online. This accentuates party alignment with age, Conservative supporters are older and therefore more likely to read a newspaper. * Media is an echo chamber. For example, the 79% of Telegraph readers who voted Conservative in 2017 may not have done so because they read the Telegraph, but they read the Telegraph because they vote Conservative. * 2025 Two-Tier Policing Row: Telegraph and GB News brought the issue to public attention, shaping public opinion. Eventually led to Starmer to introduce legislation to stop sentencing guidelines proposed ESSAY PLAN: Evaluate the view that social media is, now, more influential than traditional media in shaping voting behaviour. Define traditional media in comparison to social media. Acknowledge that voting behavior is not only explicable through media but other factors. It is important that you talk about elections which have happened recently in response to these types of questions. Para 1: 2017 Influence of traditional media: * YouGov found that 74% of daily mail readers voted Conservative in the 2017 general election * The Sun ran stories claiming that Corbyn was a terrorist sympathiser following the manchester bombing, and published headlines such as “Dont put Britain in the CorBin” * However, after all these attacks on Corbyn, his personal approval rating seemed to always improve, possible because newspapers had been so hostile towards him for 2 years that nothing they threw at him could change fixed public opinion. * Media is an echo chamber, people read things because of their ideology, rather than media shaping their ideology. Influence of social media: * Tories spent 600,000 more than Labour on facebook, as a means for advertising, spending around £230,000. * Liberal Democrats weren’t far off how much Labour spent, possibly illustrating that money spent on advertising through social media sites can be largely representative of the outcome of the election. * A conservative video on youtube attacking Corbyn for being weak on defence was viewed over 8 million times * However, anti-tory, pro-labour news stories were far more widely shared online than articles supporting May’s party Evaluation: Para 2: 2019 Influence of traditional media: * The Sun: “Save Brexit, Save Britain” by voting conservative. Broadcast media highlighted that the 2019 GE was largely the ‘Brexit election’ so that was what dominated their news. * In 2019, right-wing papers, the daily mail and the sun averaged a circulation of around 4 million whilst the guardian’s circulation averaged at around 3.7 million. * Higher social grades AB,C1 are more likely to to read the Guardian, the Times and BBc whilst the lower social grades C2, DE use ITV, The Sun and The mirror. 48% of C2, DE voted Tory in 2019 Influence of social media: * Evaluation: Para 3: 2024 Influence of traditional media: Influence of social media: Evaluation: General election case studies. 1979 The reasons for and impact of party policies and manifestos: conservatives' key policies were about economic reforms and curbing the power of trade unions also wanted a free market, labour also promised economic reform but the public didn’t trust them. ​ Techniques used in their election campaigns: Labour isn't working poster and slogan- this was new in British politics because it wasn’t just dry political information, Crisis what crisis?, the media played a much bigger role in this campaign than it had before, people liked Callaghan more than Thatcher, Thatcher had a reputation as 'Maggie Thatcher milk snatcher' so the conservatives tried to cultivate an image of her as a careful housewife and mother and explained managing the economy through domestic sense. ​ The wider political context of the elections: Had just been the winter of discontent- lots of trade union strikes, lots of issues with unemployment, Callaghans labour minority government had just lost a vote of no confidence​ Class-based voting: Conservatives won in AB and C1 categories and gained in C2 and DE (thatcher had attempted to appeal to voters in these categories with right to buy schemes etc) but labour still won in C2 and DE​ Partisanship and voting attachment: perhaps more issue voting with labour offering radical change with economic policies and right to buy but this wasn’t as big (she hadn't talked about her big changes like nationalisation)​ 1997 The reasons for and impact of party policies and manifestos: conservatives tried to focus on economic recovery whereas Labour focused on five specific pledges such as cutting class sizes, fast track punishment for persistent young offenders and cutting NHS waiting lists and not to raise income tax- this was new labour. The NHS and the state of education were really important issues. ​ Techniques used in their election campaigns: the development of new labour, they had been courting the journalists for years with stories which meant that labour was controlling the narrative, Blair as a character was central for the campaign (what a sexy sexy man) whereas Major was old, boring and untrustworthy. Tight media election campaigning especially from labour- soundbites like 'Education education education'. The campaign was 6 weeks- a lot longer than it had been before. ​ Wider political context of the elections: issues of the Exchange Rate Mechanism failure the conservatives had messed up the economy which is something that was always associated with labour but it showed that the conservatives were also bad- and labour really harped on about it. Major's affairs and scandals despite preaching and promising a 'Back to basics' family orientated Britain. Major's lack of control over his party 'I lead my party, you follow yours' and 40-60 of his MPs worked with Labour to defeat key parts of legislation and backbench MPs were constantly interviewed on TV tearing each other apart. Conservatives were disunited over Europe. The conservatives had been in power for 18 years, had been responsible through the bad economic recession of the 1980s and 1990s and were tired. ​ Class-based voting: labour gained across all groups (though conservatives still won the AB group) because labour had been recentering itself with middle class voters as part of its centerist new labour policies. ​ Partisanship and voting attachment:​ Gender: men and women both equally likely to support labour, they had closed the gender gap.​ Age: labour dominated every age group except the over 65s​ Ethnicity: labour won the white vote with 43% and won the BAME vote with 70%​ Region: Labour gained votes across all regions, conservatives were wiped out in scotland and wales and only had 11 seats in london so it made them a party of english suburbs and shires​ Turnout and trends: 71% which was quite low compared to previously. Labour had 418 seats. Conservatives had 165 seats. LibDems had 46 seats. 2024! The reasons for and impact of party policies and manifestos: immigration was a big focus. Labour focuses on economic stability instead of flashy policy to try and absorb as many floating voters as possible and not scare anyone off. But did offer some distinct policies like re nationalisation of some services. But labour was wary about tax changes.​ Techniques used in their election campaigns: labour focus on 'Fourteen years of conservative government'. Eventually the conservatives focused on telling voters not to give labour a supermajority- this was not very effective. Ed Davey looked silly but it helped to raise the profile of his party, he also talked about the care sector and his disabled son which made him seem heartwarming. Conservatives tried to use national service to renew support- but it didn’t work. Sunak left a D-Day remembrance early-oops. Craig Williams placed a bet on the outcome of the election- oops. Labour focuses on marginal seats. Lots of money spent on digital advertising. ​ The wider political context of the elections: partygate, Truss economic failure, scandal after scandal after scandal- PPE and covid. Rwanda. Hs2. Inflation. ​ h) and conservatives were behind in all groups- shows that class based voting isn't as important any more. Reform attracted 20% of C2DE voters and 11% of ABC1 voters​ Partisanship and voting attachment: tactical voting- lots of people wanted the conservatives out so they lent their vote to the party who they thought would unseat the conservatives. Voters disillusioned with conservative party had to find someone new to vote for- reform?​ Gender: little difference for labour and conservative, but men were more likely to vote reform. ​ Age: very important, labour had around 40% of 18-24 year olds compared to 20% of 70 year olds. Unlike previous years the labour vote share was consistently high among all age groups up to 50 instead of declining with age. ​ Ethnicity: labour increased and led in white voters, they led in ethnic minority voters but their support fell. Greens and independent parties increased in ethnic minority voters. (could this be linked to Rwanda/immigration/Israel and Hamas)​ Region: red wall voters who had voted conservative in 2019 returned to labour because the conservatives had not kept their promises. Scottish voters who had been disappointed with the SNP returned to labour and put most of the seats back into labour. ​ Turnout and trends: 60%- really bad. 400,000 voters barred from voting due to lack of appropriate ID. Labour won 63% of seat son 34% of the vote​ ________________ Component 2: UK Government and Non-core Political Ideas 1 Constitution 1.1 Sources of the Constitution * SCCLAT: Statute law, Common law, Convention, Landmark decisions, Authoritative Works, * Treaties * Easy way to remember: SCCREW (Statute law, Common law, Conventions, Royal prerogative, External constitutional agreements/treaties, Works of authority e.g A.V. Dicey) 1.2 Development and Changes to the Constitution Focus is on post-1997 constitutional reforms -> keep evidence modern and relevant! 1. 1215 Magna Carta - guaranteed certain basic rights including citizens shouldn’t be imprisoned without a trial 2. 1689 Bill of Rights - Limitations on power of monarch and enhanced the power of parliament, banning cruel and unusual punishment 3. 1701 Act of Settlement - outlines succession to the throne 4. 1707 Acts of Union - created Great Britain by formally joining Scotland to England + Wales 5. 1911 Parliament Act - removed from the House of Lords the power to veto a Bill, except one to extend the lifetime of a Parliament 6. 1928 Representation of the People Act (women’s voting rights) 7. 1949 Parliament Act (re-written) 8. 1970 Equal Pay act (men can no longer be paid more than a woman for the same jobs) 9. 1972 The European Communities Act 10. 1997 Devolution 11. 1998 Human Rights Act 12. 1999 HoL Reform - abolition of all but 92 hereditary peers and 26 CofE bishops 13. 2000 Freedom of Information Act - provides public access to documents held by public authorities 14. 2005 Constitutional Reform Act - creation of UK Supreme Court 15. 2010 Equality Act 16. 2010 Constitutional Reform Act - elected chairs of committees 17. 2011 Fixed Term Parliament Act (Repealed & replaced with the Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Act 2022, hence Sunak was able to call an election before the Conservative’s full 5 year term) 18. 2014 Wales Act - power to make primary legislation imposing taxes was to be devolved to Wales. 19. 2014 House of Lords Reform Act - members can resign (previously impossible as Lords held seat for life). 20. 2015 Recall of MPs Act 21. 2015 (-2021) English Votes for English Laws (EVEL). 22. 2016 Scotland Act 23. 2017 Burns report suggested reducing the number of Lords, and implementing term lengths. 24. 2019 Johnson’s failed attempt to prorogue Parliament (R v Miller 2) 25. 2020 UK left EU (officially) 26. 2024 debate of HoL (Hereditary Peers) Bill, seeking to remove the 92 remaining hereditary peers 2015 Recall of MPs Act- all examples of use Successful: Fiona Onasanya (Peterborough, 2019) Christopher Davies (Brecon and Radnorshire, 2019) Margaret Ferrier (Rutherglen and Hamilton West, 2023) Peter Bone (Wellingborough, 2023) - sexual misconduct Mike Amesbury (Runcorn and Helsby, 2025) - Arrest for Assault Unsuccessful: Ian Paisley Jr (North Antrim, 2018) Scott Benton (Blackpool South, 2024) 1.3 Devolution * UK constitution remains unitary despite devolution: Quasi federalism? * The Scotland Act 1998 was used in 2023 to block the Gender Recognition Act passed in the Scottish Parliament. * In 2016, Greater Manchester became the first local authority to have granted power to control its own budget for health and social care * A proposal to establish an assembly in north East England was defeated by a 78% ‘no’ vote in a 2004 referendum * Spending per head in England is lower than any other region in the UK: REGION: SPEND PER HEAD (2022-2023): SCOTLAND £14,456 NORTHERN IRELAND £14,453 WALES £13,967 ENGLAND £12,227 * Establishment of Stormont based on the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 and the Northern Ireland Act 1998 successfully ended The Troubles (1968-1998) * Local government decides to gain devolved power or not: Local Government Act 2000 gives local government the power to hold a devolution referendum to decide if a devolved power is needed * Northern Ireland assembly still dominated by Westminster: dissolved on multiple occasions, eg. 2002-2007, 2022-2024 * Breaking down of `the Bute House agreement in Scotland, 2024 * Different sets of electoral systems used: Scotland, Wales and Greater London Authority = AMS; Northern Ireland = STV; mayoral elections (until 2021) - SV * The turnout of mayoral election is low - showing that people are not bothered to have a mayor in their local area (low public support and legitimacy) * London: 2024 - 40.5%; 2021 - 42.2%; 2016 - 45.3%; 2012 - 38.1% * Manchester: 2024 - 32%; 2021 - 34.7%; 2017 - 28.9% * West Midlands: 2024 - 29.8%; 2021 - 31.2%; 2017 - 26.7% * EVEL (2015-2021) - West Lothian questions only asked and answered by English MPs, while questions about devolved areas should only include decision making in groups of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland MPs * However, this was repealed because MPs of constituencies near the boundaries complained for the unfairness while discussing issues in devolved bodies 1.4 Debates on Reform 1.5 Rights in Context Major milestones in the development of rights since Magna Carta 1215 * Bill of Rights 1689 * Representation of people act 1918 * Social Chapter 1997 * Protection of workers' rights under EU law, including anti-discrimination * HRA 1998 * Incorporates ECHR into UK law * Freedom of Information Act 2000 * ‘Right to access’ information * Equality Act 2010 * Single act protecting people from discrimination 1215 Magna Carta - oldest statement of rights in the UK, to limit royal power 1965 Race Relations Act - banned racial discrimination in public places 1984 Data Protection Act - gave new legal rights to individuals whose personal info was held on computers go 1998 Human Rights Act - Act of Parl which gave people legal protection of their human rights 2000 Freedom of Information Act - Provides public access to information held by public authorities * Infected Blood inquiry Scandal, the government and the NHS hid from the public about infected blood given to patients, giving the HIV and Hepatitis C, causing many deaths 2010 Equality Act - Protects people from discrimination in the workforce & in wider society 2013: Marriage (Same-Sex) Couples Act - same-sex couple marriages are legal in all parts of Britain 2016 Investigatory Powers Act - Gave greater surveillance and data access powers to police 2022 Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act - gave police greater powers around protests and criminalises one person protests 2023 Public Order Act - Gave police further powers to prevent protest tactics deemed "disruptive" such as those used by climate protestors (e.g. “locking-on”, disrupting national infrastructure such as roads). Both the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and Amnesty International criticised the act. * S.C declares governments 2004 Civil Partnership Act incompatible with HRA in 2018-government amended act in 2019 * Shamima Begum had her citizenship stripped on the basis of national security in 2019, after she left England for Syria to join IS in 2015. Her appeal to regain her citizenship and entry to the UK have been unsuccessful multiple times and on multiple claims, and most recently, the Court of Appeal, in Feb 2024, upheld the previous decision of denying her entry again. * Poundland case: Cait Reilly won her claim that it was unlawful to force her to work at Poundland for free as a condition to her claiming jobseekers allowance. The court ruled they had acted unlawfully by not giving people enough information. * Madonna: Petitioned against the right to roam. A compromise was made that the right to roam would still be there but the route would be slightly away from their house * Blair Gov: Blair wanted to extend the period people can be held before charges from 14-90 days. This was not approved by the Commons so failed, but Parliament protected our rights in this matter, which makes this positive. * Abu Qatada: Was concerned over fair trial and evidence found from torture, so was unable to be deported back to Jordan for 8 years, until the UK and Jordan signed a treaty that that evidence wouldn’t be used, and AQ was deported and tried. However it can also be used as an example of people using rights such as the HRA in unfair ways - AQ was a radical muslim cleric promoting radical views and was considered a threat by security services. * In 2018, the UK Supreme Court ruled in favour of Ashers Baking Company (run by Evangelical Christians), a Northern Irish bakery, over a "gay marriage cake" case. The bakery refused to make a cake with a message supporting same-sex marriage, claiming it was discriminatory. The court ruled that the refusal was based on the bakery's owners' objection to the message on the cake, not the customer's sexual orientation. The court held that bakery owners were entitled to refuse to express a message that conflicted with their religious beliefs be used, * UK Supreme Court ruling on definition of what a woman is under the Equality Act 2010. Ruling suggests that definition of a woman is based on biological facts. 2 Parliament 2.1 Structure and role of Commons and Lords REPRESENTATION: * 264 MPs (41%) are women in the House of Commons; 222 peers (28%) in the House of Lords. In UK general population this is 51% (2021 census) * 14% of MPs in the House of Commons are of BAME background; 6% of peers in the House of Lords . In the UK general population it is 18% (2021 census) * UK 71 MPs (11%) are LGBTQ* in the House of Commons general population 3.2% ( 2021 census , although number likely to be higher because question in census was voluntary) * Only 2% of MPs are aged under 30, while 52% are over 50 * 23% of MPs went to Oxford or Cambridge * 23% of MPs were privately educated; 46% in the Conservative party and 15% in the Labour party * 85% of MPs have a degree (went to uni). Yet, only 33% of population in England have a Level 4 qualification (Official Statistics, 2021) * 650 MP’S in house of commons * Youngest MP is 23- sam carling-labour * Average age of MP is 48 * Average age of the Lords is 71 * In 2024, 263(40%) female MPs were elected 2.2 Comparative powers of Commons and Lords * Parliament acts can be used by the House of Commons to resolve disagreements between the houses and push legislation past the House of Lords. Blair used this 3 times during his premiership, with the most recent being a ban on hunting with dogs in 2004 (Hunting Act 2004) * The Safety of Rwanda bill went through the process of parliamentary ping-pong in 2024: the HOL met twice to consider outstanding issues on the bill that were rejected seed by the HOC 2.3 The Legislative Process WHIPS: * If MPs ignore a three-line whip, they can be removed from the parliamentary party as a sanction (Boris Johnson did this to 21 Conservative MPs who opposed his EU withdrawal Bill in 2019). Included senior MPs like Ken Clarke, Rory Stewart, David Gauke and former Chancellor Phillip Hammond. Starmer suspended 7 MPs for voting against scrapping the two-child cap. * However, MPs can rebel against the party whip, and even occasionally go as far as to resign from the party. For example, protracted debates on a third runway for Heathrow, led to resignations. In 2016 Zac Goldsmith resigned as a Conservative MP over the issue, and in 2018 Greg Hands resigned from the government. The Brexit debates resulted in eight MPs resigning from the Labour Party, and three from the Conservative Party. They formed a new party, the Independent Group for Change. * Free vote allowed over the smoking ban. 2025, Assisted dying (2024), Marriage (Same-sex Couples) Act 2013. * Whip scandals: Chris Pincher (Deputy Chief Whip) sexual misconduct (last straw of Johnson years), Gavin Williamson as Chief Whip found by independent inquiry to have been bullying (forced to apologise). * Assisted Dying Bill 2024 - SNP unwhipped - only affected England and Wales, some SNP chose to abstain from voting - also example of west lothian (as healthcare is a devolved power) By his former PRIVATE MEMBERS’ BILLS: * From 2016-17, 25 out of 28 government bills that were introduced managed to gain royal assent, however only 8 out of 163 PMBs succeeded in the same way. * Discussing proposed government bills takes up over 1/3 of the commons time in any parliamentary session. The discussion of PMBs takes up less than 5% of the time. * Wendy Chamberlain (Liberal Democrat) = Carer’s Leave Act (2023): provides employment rights for those who juggle unpaid caring responsibilities with paid employment. * Wera Hobhouse (Liberal Democrat) = Worker Protection Act (2023): prevent sexual harassment in the workplace and drive a culture change (substantially watered down by Lords to avoid exposing employers to costly lawsuits). Can link to Lords being undemocratic - Hobhouse is rep. her constituents * PMBs introduced by backbenchers are only likely to pass if they come from the ruling party. For example, during the coalition government, 41 out of 42 PMBs passed were from either the Conservatives or Lib Dems. * cc regarding Brexit, voted on against government wishes (emergency debate, not pmb). * 1967 Abortion Act, introduced by a Liberal MP David Steel during Harold Wilson’s no government, passed as gov was supportive * 2024 assisted dying bill (Kim Leadbeater - labour MP) 2.4 How Parliament interacts with the Executive BACKBENCHERS: * The 1922 Committee (led by Graham Brady) were responsible for triggering a leadership contest in 2022, following 55 submitted letters. Just a scheduled meeting with the committee caused Truss to resign * In July 1993, backbench revolts meant that John Major was only able to pass the Maastricht Treaty by one vote (the foundation treaty of the EU). * In 2020, The European Research Group (ERG) challenged Theresa May * In January 2021, the Covid Recovery Group wrote a letter to PM Boris Johnson. It stated his “leadership will be on the table” if he did not publish an exit strategy for lockdowns. * In July 2021, there was backbench resistance during a vote on a proposed cut to the UK's foreign aid budget. The government had announced plans to reduce the country's commitment to spending 0.7% of its Gross National Income (GNI) on foreign aid to 0.5% due to the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. * In December 2021, 99 Tories rebelled against Covid passports under Johnson; influenced by the Covid Recovery Group * In March 2022, The Dissolution and Calling of Parliament Bill was only allocated two days in the House of Commons * In March 2022, the Liaison Committee, formed by all the chairpeople from each committee, grilled Boris Johnson for misleading the Parliament in COVID lockdown and partygate scandal. * In December 2023, backbench rebellion defeated the government on compensation for victims of the contaminated blood scandal (22 rebelled) * In January 2024, 30 back bench rebellion on Rishi Sunak’s Conservative government Rwanda Bill. * In May 2024, threat of a rebellion by 40 MPs caused the Conservative Home Secretary, James Cleverly, to reverse plans to further criminalise homelessness. SELECT COMMITTEES * Frank Field was elected to become the head of the Work and Pensions Committee in 2015 and was re-elected in 2017. He has had years of experience, having been a politician since 1979, and had spent much of his career looking at issues concerning welfare and poverty. He was one of the only Labour supporters of Brexit and was well known for being rather straight talking. This confrontational nature is helpful, especially when pushing the government for answers and holding them accountable. * The turnover of members within committees can damage the effectiveness of it. There was an 83% turnover during the 2010-2015 period in the Defense Committee. Replacements for these people might not be as informed or motivated as their predecessors. * The Exiting the EU committee that is chaired by Labour’s Hilary Benn is testing cross-party cohesion. In May of 2018, Conservative committee members John Whittingdale, Andrea Jenkyns and Jacob Rees-Mogg publicly criticised the committee for being too pro-remain. According to Jenkyns only 7 of the 21 committee members voted leave. * In 2018, The committee invited Amber Rudd to give evidence for its inquiry into the Windrush Scandal. In her interview, she denied that the Home Office had targets for deportation of Illegal Immigrants. Leaked emails after this inquiry revealed that there were targets that Rudd was very much aware of. After this she resigned from her post and took full responsibility. * Gracie was the editor for BBC China until 2018, where she resigned over gender pay equality. She said that the BBC was working under a “secretive and illegal pay culture.” She was interviewed by the committee that month and the inquiry into BBC pay is ongoing. This case stands as an example of the responsiveness of committees to current issues. * In June 2023, the Commons Privileges Committee found that PM Boris Johnson knowingly misled Parliament over Partygate; recommended his suspension. Johnson quickly resigned as MP rather than risk a recall petition. Police investigations and fines over Partygate are ongoing. * Johnson failed to attend the Liaison committee 3 times (in 2019) * Dominic Cummings repeatedly asked to attend the ‘fake news’ committee and did not attend. * Only 40% committee recommendations are accepted by the government on average (from departmental committees). * KEY PAC investigation = 2015 into effectiveness of cancer care by NHS - they were highly critical of variations in cancer treatment in different regions for different age groups. criticised low cure rates/inc waiting time. The impact of this was the publicity caused gov to launch review into cancer treatment and set up independent cancer task force to improve delivery of cancer treatment across UK by 2020 * Key DSC report- 2015 treasury -Proposals for stricter regulation of banking sector -insisted gov should implement recommendations of parliamentary commission on banking standards.policy pushed forward into banking regulation * 2016- business innovation and skills-into alleged bad working practices at sports direct-company forced to pay compensation to its workers for paying below minimum wage ( shows DSC working in interests of the people) PRIME MINISTER'S QUESTIONS:] * Sir Gerald Kaufman, long serving MP and ex minister said that PMQS had become an “exchange of pointless and useless declamations.” * One of Tony Blair's first acts as prime minister was to replace the two 15-minute sessions with a single 30-minute session on Wednesdays, initially at 3 p.m. but since 2003 at noon * 2023- The shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves stated that Jeremy Hunt the chancellor has failed with their costs due to Hunt raising taxes in his Autumn statement. Reeves spoke about Hunt's affair to unfreeze thresholds for income tax, and she stated that working people are still worse off. Jermey Hunt has reduced the rate for employees from 12% to 10%. It means that people will have to pay extra hundreds of pounds which will amount to £27 million. This illustrates that the shadow ministers are able to scrutinise the government in the house of commons and are allowed to challenge the government and hold them to account for the actions that they take. * Speaker Lindsay Hoyle stated that the PMQ is “Pure theatre” that the “world watches” which supports the notion that PMQs are not taken seriously by PM/ministers which undermines influence of backbench MPs. * David Cameron * aides were found to be planting questions by sending emails of suggested questions to backbencher conservative MPs NO CONFIDENCE: * In January 2019, Theresa May’s government faced a vote of no confidence the day after they had suffered the largest ever government defeat in the House of Commons over their Brexit deal. She survived by a majority of 19. * In June 2022, A vote of no confidence was held by Conservative MPs against Boris Johnson. Johnson won the vote with the support of 211 Conservative MP’s, 58.8% of the total. Out of 359 Conservative MP’s, 148 (41.2%) voted against him * 1979, James Callaghan lost vote of no confidence triggering a general election as a result PARLIAMENTARY SCANDALS: Sex Scandals * In 2017, there were several Westminster sex scandals. Michael Fallon resigned on the 1st of November 2017 because his behaviour towards women had “fallen short” previously. He told the BBC: “The culture has changed over the years. What might have been acceptable 10, 15 years ago is clearly not acceptable now”. * Stephen Crabb, the former Secretary of State for Work and Pensions was reported by The Daily Telegraph (28 October 2017) to have sent sexually suggestive text messages to a young woman he had interviewed for a position in his parliamentary office. * Mark Garnier, the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Trade, admitted to calling his assistant Caroline Edmondson by an inappropriate nickname and asking her to purchase sex toys for his wife and a constituent. * Kelvin Hopkins (Labour MP) was suspended by his party in 2 November 2017 following a report l The Daily Telegraph of sexual harassment allegations. * Clive Lewis (Labour MP) was accused of groping a woman at a party conference. * In June 2022 Neil Parrish MP watching “tractor porn” in the House of ²Commons * In April 2024, William Wragg MP stood down after he leaked personal phone numbers of a number of MP’s on Grindr * Mark Menzies (Conservative) under scrutiny for purportedly engaging in questionable financial activities to settle a distressing situation * After allegedly groping two men while he was drunk, Chris Pincher resigned as Deputy Chief Whip on 30 June 2022, and had the Conservative whip removed. * 2025 MP Dan Norris arrested on suspicion of child sex offences and rape Discrimination Antisemitism in the Labour Party: * In 2010, Labour MP Martin Linton said, “There are long tentacles of Israel in this country who are funding election campaigns and putting money into the British political system for their own ends. * In April 2016, it was revealed that Labour MP Naz Shah, during the 2014 Israel-Gaza War, had shared an image of Israel’s geographic outline superimposed on a map of the US under the headline “Solution for Israel-Palestine conflict-relocate Israel into United States”, with the comment “problem solved.” - She was suspended for 3 months by Corbyn which exacerbated tensions * The antisemitism (anti zionism) row has continued in Labour, even leading to resignation from the party by MPs and Peers. * Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn was even suspended from the party in October 2019, for his failure to deal satisfactorily with the issue. Corbyn has been readmitted to the Labour Party but has not yet been given back the Labour whip - is now an independent MP after 2024 election * Currently the labour party under Keir Starmer is trying to distance itself from past anti-semitism claims. Some 41 of Labour's 197 sitting MPs have accepted money from the Israel lobby, Declassified has found. The value of the donations amounts to over £280,000, with Israel lobby groups paying for Labour MPs to visit Israel on over 50 occasions since 1999 Other Scandals * In 2021, the Conservative Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, was found to have broken Covid Restrictions by “kissing” someone who was not part of their social bubble. Later the Health Secretary resigned. * The 2009 MP Expenses Scandal caused huge backlash in MPs across the Parliament, 6 ministers stepped down, 3 Labour backbenchers resigned, 3 Labour MPs imprisoned, and all Conservatives MPs related to the scandal announced retirement or stepping down at the next general election; 2 peers were also imprisoned. Lords and peerages * Lord Dannatt (crossbencher) - before chief of staff (UKs most senior soldier) lends huge knowledge of military matters to HoL in 2015/2016 campaigned for UK ground troops to be deployed to Iraq to fight against ISIS. * Baroness Owen (Conservatives) - before appointed by Johnson at the age of 29, she was the special advisor who served Johnson and Truss during their term as PM * Lord Cameron (Conservatives) - the former PM was elevated by Sunak and entered the cabinet as Foreign Secretary in 2023 * Baroness Morgan of Cotes used her expertise as Minister for Women and Equalities to put through an amendment on the Domestic Violence Bill (improved quality of legislation) * Government was only defeated 69 times in the Lords under Theresa May 2017-2019 showing lack of opposition. * Immigration Act 2014 had 11 committee sittings and received 66 pieces of written evidence. (in the HOL) * The government has suffered five defeats in the House of Lords over its bill to revive its proposed Rwanda deportation scheme. Reflecting its controversiality. * Corrupt system of appointments- large Tory donors being appointed like Peter Cruddas who donated £500,000 to the party. * Rishi Sunak denied Stanley Johnson (Boris Johnson's father) peerage upon the recommendations of HOLAC. * 411 government Lords defeats in the 2019-24 Parliament, showing its importance in scrutiny and opposition * 13% of peers never or rarely attend * £1 in every £14 raised since donations were first published in 2001 came from peers either before or after they entered the second chamber. (2024 discovered by the Guardian) 3 Prime Minister and Cabinet 3.1 The structure, role, and powers of the Executive 3.2 Ministerial responsibility INDIVIDUAL/COLLECTIVE MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITY: What is the difference between individual and collective ministerial responsibility? Individual Ministerial Responsibility: Each minister is accountable for the actions and performance of their own department as well as their personal life and so if they fail to do so they should take responsibility and resign. Collective ministerial responsibility: A constitutional convention whereby ministers should maintain a united front for the party until decisions have been reached. (All ministers are jointly responsible for government policies and decisions, if they disagree they must resign.) Examples of IMR: * In July 2022, Conservative whip Chris Pincher was threatened with suspension after drunkenly groping two men in the Carlton Club. He resigned from his government post, prompting the Tamworth by-election. Arguably, Boris Johnson backing his close ally hastened his own resignation as prime minister. * In October 2022, former Home Secretary Suella Braverman resigned after sharing secure information from private email. * In November 2022, former whip and Secretary (during COVID) Gavin Williamson, resigned over bullying allegations. * Amber Rudd resigned as Home Secretary after she misled the Home Affairs Committee over her department’s targets for deporting illegal immigrants in 2018 * Liam Fox resigned as Defence Secretary after he brought a close friend along to 18 foreign business trips despite him having no official role * Louise Haigh resigned due to a previous conviction, the first cabinet resignation for the Labour Party. (2024) * Tulip Siddiq resigned as Treasury Minister after growing pressure over an anti-corruption investigation in Bangladesh which she was named in, although no evidence to support it (January 2025) * Andrew Gwynne resigned over Whatsapp messages revealed that he said he wished a pensioner would ‘die’, and was involved in bullying (2025) (Collective Ministerial Responsibility: All ministers are jointly responsible for government policies and decisions, if they disagree they must resign). Examples of CMR SIGNIFICANCE: 2022 10 members of Boris Johnson’s government resigned after his partygate scandal. This included Rishi Sunak and Sajid Javid from the cabinet. This pressured him to resign as PM. David Davis resign in 2018: In July 2018, David Davis resigned as Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union as May's decision to pursue closer ties with the EU was a "step too far", and his role should be filled by someone who was enthusiastic and not just a "reluctant conscript" Robin Cook resigned in 2003: From Tony Blair's government over its preparations against war in Iraq, as he was unconvinced Suddam Hussain was a threat to UK national interest 13 Govt ministers defied collective ministerial responsibility by disobeying their whips when debating a motion to reject a deal of a no deal brexit 2025 Anneliese Dodds resign: From Keir Starmer’s government over its decrease in foreign aid spending from 0.5% to 0.3% in favour of defence INSIGNIFICANCE OF CMR: * Theresa May - when Boris Johnson was foreign secretary in her government, he consistently leaked dissatisfaction with government policy. He also wrote critical weekly articles but due to his popularity within the Conservative Party especially amongst the brexiteers she wasn't able to sack him. 3.3 Prime Minister and Cabinet 3.3.1 The power of the Prime Minister and Cabinet * Patronage - e.g. Boris Johnson appointed Dominic Cummings as Chief Advisor in July 2019 due to the same view on the EU (VoteLeave campaign); Margaret Thatcher appointed the ‘dry’ tories because of the difference in political views between the ‘wet’ and ‘dry’; Blair appointed Brown as the Chancellor due to a consensus on policies and power exchange (Blair did not want to step down on 2005 tho, he eventually stepped down as PM anyways) * Reshuffle the cabinet - e.g. Rishi Sunak reshuffled the cabinet in November 2023 and sacked former Home Secretary Suella Braverman, who was replaced by James Cleverley and Lord Cameron entered the cabinet to become the Foreign Secretary. Reasons for reshuffle were thought to be Suella Braverman’s the Times article criticising the Police conduct favouring protestors, and the dichotomic view on Rwanda scheme between Sunak and Braverman. Also theorised to be a strategic preemptive move by Rishi, anticipating the SC ruling on Rwanda scheme. 7 * PM may not always use entire cabinet, eg. Blair & sofa cabinet * All committees except for the parliamentary affairs and accommodation are chaired by the PM. * Harold Macmillan postponed a cabinet attempt to suggest he step down by leaving it out of the agenda. * Harold Wilson refused to discuss devaluation between 1964-67. * Blair and Brown gave interest rates to the Bank of England within days of P power and did not consult their cabinet. Example that the PM doesn’t dominate cabinet:/undermine uk unis. (May 2024) 3.3.2 The powers of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet to dictate events and determine Rishi Sunak backtracks plan to restrict graduate visas after cabinet opposition from James Cleverly, Jeremy Hunt, Gillian Keegan and David Cameron - after fierce cabinet backlash saying that driving away foreign students could hit growth policy CASE STUDIES: Liz Truss * In September 2022, the international finance markets delivered their negative verdict on Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng’s mini budget. LORDS Lords Dannatt (crossbencher)- before Chief of General Staff (UKs most senior soldier) lends huge knowledge of military matters to HOL in 2015/201W6 campaigned for UK ground troops to be redeployed to iraq to fight against ISIS 4 Relations between the Branches 4.1 The Supreme Court + its interactions with, and influence over the legislative and policy-making processes. SUPREME COURT: * In 2005, Parliament passed the Constitutional Reform Act which was designed to improve and guarantee the independence of the UK judiciary. * The SC argued that the government didn’t follow proper procedure during Brexit - as removal from the EU meant changes in the law - which the government lacks the power to do, SC said an act of parliament needed to be passed - article 50. Additionally - led to criticisms over people arguing SC is too ‘pro-remain’. However in the end parliament quickly passed the law. * 2,400 judicial reviews in 2022. Decreased since 2010. 2013 - 15,000 judicial reviews * 2016 Miller Case - Gina Miller on Article 50 for leaving the EU, reinforced parliamentary sovereignty through unanimous agreement that parliament consent was needed to leave the EU. Led to questions about judicial bias. * 2019 Miller Case - unlawful proroguing of parliament by BJ blocked by the SC, confirming again Parl. Sovr. * 2025 FWS case - SC ruled that biological women are recognised as that sex - JK Rowling paid £70,000 to the cause DEVOLUTION: * Scotland scrapped tuition fees in 2008, going against the Higher Education Act 2003 passed in the Westminster Parliament. * In 2023, the government threatened to withhold funding from South Cambridgeshire Council after it trialled a 4-day working week. * 2022 IndyRef 2 struck down by Supreme Court * Scotland’s Gender Recognition Reform Bill (2022) vetoed by Government under Section 35 in January 2023, not Supreme Court 4.2 The relationship between the Executive and Parliament The aims, role and impact of the European Union (EU) on the UK Government * Factortame case in 2000 demonstrated that EU law rules over the acts passed by parliament How parliament hold the executive to account * Amendments to legislation - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 * 4.4 The location of sovereignty in the UK political system. Sovereignty = ultimate power and no branch can overrule peacefully; Parliament is sovereign in the UK If the Parliament is sovereign: Devolution is asymmetrical and gives Parliament the ultimate right to veto * Quasi-federal power decentralised since 1997 during Blair’s era (from manifesto) * The Supreme Court denied the decision of second Scottish Independence Referendum in 2022 as the Westminster Parliament is sovereign * 2023 Gender Recognition Reform Bill was struck down by the Westminster Parliament: Stephen Flynn MP (SNP Westminster Leader) - This is a “collateral damage” to Scotland democracy * Devolution control repatriated back from Northern Ireland to Westminster Parliament during Stormont suspension (2022-24)Technically Parliament can retrieve power from devolved bodies and scrap parliaments and local assemblies (Devolution is not entrenched) * The Supreme Court can only interpret laws instead of making laws (as indirect laws) because of judicial independence (not exerting influence over legislation as they have moral authority and would face public pressure) - rulings are based on statute laws (uncodified constitution) * The Supreme Court cannot stop legislation of Rwanda Plan despite several amendment of the bill had made based on the rulings of the Supreme Court * The Supreme Court has judicial power to prevent executive being ultra vires - the Supreme Court rejected prorogation in 2019 proposed by Johnson to prevent constitutional chaos in legislation * Popular sovereignty: Results of referendums are not legally binding * Referendum results act as advisory information for Parliament. Due to a lack of codified constitution, referendum results are not legally binded and statute laws can ignore the results and legislate against the public will in representative democracy * e.g. The Supreme Court does not back Holyrood and Scottish people will to start a second Scottish Independence Referendum because the devolved power is originated from Westminster (align with Parliament) If the Parliament is not sovereign/parliamentary sovereignty is dispersed: * Local sovereignty - it is inconceivable to reverse devolution because devolved bodies are democratically legitimate (formed by referendum approval) * e.g. devolution Acts (the Scotland Act 1998, 2016 (power to adjust tax); the Northern Ireland Act 1998; the Government of Wales Act 1998, 2006 (promote to Senedd); the Wales Act 2017) -> all Acts had a legitimate foundation from referendums: * 1997 the Scottish Devolution referendum (75:25); * 1997 Welsh devolution referendum (51:49); * 2011 Welsh devolution referendum (law-making power) (60:40) Therefore: if Westminster would like to reverse devolution it definitely will cause political suicide and lose public support which challenges government status quo * Judicial sovereignty - it is a constitutional duty to keep power of executive in checks (fusion of power: executive sits in legislature/Parliament) * Increase in use of ECHR (European Convention of Human Rights) and the legally binded version - Human Rights Act 1998 -> can question if Acts are constitutional * Judicial independence in the origin of power: detached from Law Lords sitting in the House of Lords by constitutional reform (Constitutional Reform Act 2005) -> checks without influence in legislature e.g. Terrorist-Asset-Freezing Act 2010 (DNA recognition violated human rights: presumption of innocence, demonstrated protection of freedom); Civil partnership Act 2019: allowing heterosexual couples to register civil partnership -> oblige to make law amendments * Popular sovereignty - it is inconceivable to not firstly resort to people via referendum * Parliament should respect the results produced by electorates * Increase in use of referendum demonstrates that representative democracy is in decline: MPs and their constituents hold different view on issues (unrepresentative), e.g. EU referendum: 52% vote Leave while most of MPs prefer remain in 2016 Is there any evidence of judicial neutrality / independence being broken or becoming worse? * Decline in importance of the Kilmuir Rules (1950s) which prevented the Judiciary from engaging with the media * Broken numerous times around Brexit * Lack of social diversity - all but one are oxbridge educated, no BAME, all come from relatively similar backgrounds * Right wing critics say that it has an inbuilt liberal bias especially after the miller cases in 2017 and 20 19 where it ruled against the government * Media has undermined neutrality - judges faced extreme scrutiny from the press during the 2017 miller case - the Daily Mail found that 6 justices had personal relationships with people who had been openly supportive of the EU and 5 had expressed sympathetic views towards the EU * Politicians have attempted to politicise the judiciary - Johnson, after the 2019 miller case, announced the creation of the Constitution, Democracy and Rights Commission to look into reforming the SC and the judiciary, one proposal that was floated was that each justice should be confirmed by parliament like in the US where SC judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate * Growing willingness of ministers criticising the the courts whilst the SC is taking an increasingly judicially active role - Priti Patel called the judges ‘lefty-lawyers’ and ‘do-gooders’ Dominic Cummings said that he wants to "get the judges sorted" * Johnson threatened "consequences" after the SC forced him to reopen parliament in 2019 * Growing attack by the media - in 2016 the Daily Mail's front page story called the 3 judges "enemies of the people" * Mps and prime ministers are scrutinising the supreme court too much- reduces their ability to follow their own decisions with sufficient neutrality- e.g Rishi sunak commented on the Rwanda Bill- which supreme court had stated did not align with the the HRA- he said I'm tired of a foreign court blocking flights. My Patience has been drawn thin. The british public's patience as been worn thin’. * 2025 Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr wrote to the government about concerns that Starmer’s comments made at PMQs threatened judicial independence. Starmer had said that the SC’s decision regarding resettlement of a Gazan family, was a ‘completely wrong decision’ and that it should be Parliament instead to decide immigration policy. He also said he would use secondary legislation to close this loophole. Neutrality and independence is maintained * Judges have substantial legal training and have had long careers as barristers or judges whereby they have practised neutrality - they sign up for judicial neutrality when they become justices - they cannot make decisions without foundation in the rule of law, they’ve had years of legal reasoning and precedent * Justices have to recuse themselves if any conflict of interest arises within a case like if a family member or acquaintance is involved - this protects judicial neutrality * Peer Reviews protect neutrality - When a case concerns aspects covered by the ECHR, decisions may be referred to the ECourtHR for review + as the SC has no higher court to answer for in the UK, cases are often heard by at least 5 other judges which means that no single personal preference is likely to influence the final decisions as it has to be fully explained to other members * CRA 2005 greatly improved independence - separated the judicial and legislative branches by removing law lords and separated the 3 branches by reducing the role of the Lord Chancellor * The JAC weakened the government's influence over appointments, gave judges the final say on 97% of appointments to the lower courts * SC is increasingly likely to challenge the government- 2012, 4 Zimbabwean refugees were able to stay in the UK when the government was trying to deport them + the Gina Miller cases of 2016 and 2019 - 2012 Abu Qatada case - but there were questions over neutrality - judges favour rights of individuals over security of state (declaration of incompatibility with prisoners voting) * SC is immune from outside interference - Contempt of Court Act bans the media from publishing information that could prejudice active court proceedings, protecting independence - in 2012 the Daily Mail and the Daily Mirror were fined £10,000 and had to pay a further £25,000 in costs for breaking contempt of court rules * Security of tenure - Judges cannot be removed from office based on decisions they make, only if they're found to be corrupt can they be removed but this hasn't happened yet * Sub Judice - any servant of the government cannot interfere with proceedings or .even comment on a case in public as it is considered contempt of court * Judicial pay - Senior Salaries Review body decided salary of judges - salaries cannot be cut and there are strict rules on what expenses can be claimed - ensures no political manipulation of their pay - They cannot be threatened with loss of income if politicians are unhappy with their choices - also cannot be bribed by politicians * SC practises judicial restraint (Nicklinson case in 2014, assisted death) whilst ministers are committed in public to protecting the independence of the judiciary Ideologies: Conservatism Thomas Hobbes (traditional conservative) * humans exhibit a “a restless desire” for power = leads to conflict and turning the state of nature into a “war of every man against every man” * absolute government at the consent of the people; sacrifice many freedoms for safety (entering a social contract which surrenders all natural rights minus self-defence to whom they grant authority) * negative view of human nature = humans are inherently violent/destructive and power hungry; must be kept in line by a higher authority * in the state of nature, life of a man would become “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short” Edmund Burke (traditional conservative) * tradition is needed to promote social solidarity and continuity = history roots/ties people in society * the human need for security is met by society’s institutions; provide identity and social cohesion * society resembles a living organism = all areas work together and can be gradually/gently changed to adapt to new circumstances. * reform should be limited and cautious; take accounts of the past and based on empiricism and tradition * ‘change in order to conserve’ * ‘Society more akin to a plant than a machine’ (theory of organicism) * (Reflections on the Revolution in France, 1790) * "Society is indeed a contract... between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born." Micheal Oakeshott (one nation) * “to be a conservative is to prefer the tried over the untried” * humans are imperfect “but not immoral”; “fallible but not terrible” * parliamentary institutions have developed pragmatically (practical demands of governing) * political thinking and action should be guided by pragmatism and practical experience; ensures public acceptance and maintains social cohesion and stability * the state existed to “prevent the bad rather than create the good” * rational attempts to make sense of society’s behaviour will inevitably distort/simplify that facts; due to human imperfection * Oakeshott’s critics, especially the new right, claim his philosophy is too fatalistic and underestimates our ability to shape circumstances. For new right philosophers the ‘Oakeshott mentality’ was ‘lazy’ and had allowed socialism ideas to advance unchallenged after 1945. * (On Being Conservative, 1956) * ‘In political activity... men sail a boundless and bottomless sea’ Ayn Rand (new right) * “the small state is the strong state” * the pursuit of rational self-interest is morally right; based on the “virtue of selfishness”The Voice of Reason- 'Abortion is a moral right' * rejects welfare/wealth redistribution = relies on implicit threat of taxation (opposition to this is known as the nonaggression principle) * condemned personal altruism = acts created an artificial sense of obligation and expectation * supports a pure, laissez-faire capitalist economy; claimed it offered a set of principles covering all aspects of human life Robert Nozick (new right) * “tax, for the most part, is theft” * humans are rational, self-aware beings with free; shouldn’t be treated as mere things or used against their will as resources * self-ownership is based on the ideas that individuals own themselves, their bodies, talents, abilities and labour * only a minimal state can be justified = taxes levied for state welfare are immoral as they treat the individuals as a means of resource rather than an end in themselves * The only state that can be justified is one where powers of the state are limited to those necessary = protects people against violence, theft, fraud etc. Liberalism John Locke (classical liberal) - 1632-1704 * “where there is no law, there is no freedom” * optimistic view of human nature = people are rational * society is made up of self-seeking individuals * mechanistic view of the state = it is a servant to the people * the social contract = individuals must sacrifice some of their liberties in return for protection from the state Mary Wollstonecraft (classical liberal) - 1759-97 * “virtue can only flourish amongst equals” * all humans are capable of being rational; everyone should be treated as such * society has infantilised woman which inhibits individualism * women should receive formal equality under law; establishes foundational equality * liberated women can thrive independently and enhance a free market economy John Stuart Mill (classical liberal) - 1806-73 * key concept = harm principle * human nature desires to be free of control by others (negative liberties) * wants a limited state; intervention leads to the death of liberal democracy * laissez-faire capitalism = no state involvement within the economy * was critical of democracy(didnt outright reject it)>claims that it could undermine the principles of pluralism as it could lead to the tyranny of the majority. Remember, mill was a huge defender of pluralism, and advocated for a ‘marketplace of ideas’ * Feminist philosophy John Rawls (modern liberal) - 1921-2002 * “a just society is one where the worst off are well off enough to get by” * Adapted JSM theory of higher and lower pleasures in her campaign for civil rights * women are as rational as men * society needs to reform in order for women to experience individualism * enabling state = must provide childcare so woman can work * liberated women are an asset to the economy Betty Friedan (modern liberal) - 1921-2006 * Adapted JSM theory of higher and lower pleasures in her campaign for civil rights * women are as rational as men * society needs to reform in order for women to experience individualism * enabling state = must provide childcare so woman can work * liberated women are an asset to the economy Liberalism essay plans Socialism Karl Marx (revolutionary socialist) * “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” * our good human nature is corroded by capitalism = loss of meaningful bins between human that should hold society together * “dictatorship of the proletariat” = would be necessary to protect against counter-revolution in the aftermath of a revolution * religion is a tool used by the powerful; helps keep the proletariat suppressed * capitalists extracts the maximum level of surplus value (i.e. profit) from workers; due to the existence of a reserve army of labour Rosa Luxemburg (revolutionary socialist) * “freedom is how free your opponent is” * fraternity and altruism still flourish in working class communities, despite the oppression of capitalism * the proletariat dictatorship would be a problem (contrasts Marx’s perspective) * revolution would come about spontaneously through the workers * a capitalist economic system requires people to demand products beyond what they actually need Beatrice Webb (evolutionary socialist) * “matters may be resolved sensibly… by rational, educated and civic-minded officials” * the state should be expanded rather than overthrown * humanity needs to be gradually guided back to its original cooperative condition * high level of worker’s control within businesses * an early thinker on the need for welfare state (via her Minority Report paper) * gradual change is preferable to the bloodshed and chaos caused by revolutionary socialism; there is an inevitability of gradualness Anthony Crosland (social democrat) * “what one generation sees as a luxury, the next generation sees as a necessity” * human nature has a powerful sense of fairness and an innate objection to huge inequalities of outcome * socialists must adapt to new circumstances (evolutionary not revolutionary) * the state is responsible for delivering both a greater equality of opportunity and greater equality of outcome * focused on ending poverty via comprehensive education, the welfare state, social housing etc. * hates grammar schools: ‘if it's the last thing I do, i'm going to destroy every last grammar school in England’ Anthony Giddens (third way) * “welfare system should be restricted in order to give people a hand-up, not hand-out” * human nature has been shaped by changing socio-economic conditions; pro-fairness instinct is still present * welfare recipients should be active rather than passive * New labour figure Peter Madelson ( cabinet minister in Blair's government) famously said “ We don't mind people being filthy rich, as long as they pay their taxes” like Anthony Giddens this shows acceptance of the free market and the states role as social investment in infrastructure and education. * Free market is most effective and efficient economic system ‘get used to it’ * Capitalism is corrosive but too well established to be removed Feminism Charlotte Perkins Gilman (socialist feminist) * Argued that sex and domestic economics are intertwined; women are compelled to depend on their sexuality and bodies to please their husbands. * Highlighted societal pressures where young girls are socialized to conform to domestic roles through gender-specific toys and clothing. * Criticized the misuse of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution to justify male dominance in society and the home. * Advocated for the destruction of the traditional nuclear family, proposing communal living and equal roles for men and women. * Believed that women are equally intelligent and capable as men, deserving equal economic opportunities. * Key works include The Yellow Wallpaper (1892) and Women and Economics (1898). ________________ Simone de Beauvoir (radical existential feminist) * Famously stated, “One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman,” emphasizing that gender is a social construct. * Introduced the concept of “Otherness,” where men are seen as the norm and women as deviations, leading to their subordination. * Argued that women have historically lived according to rules imposed by men, which she termed “bad faith.” * Believed that women must become conscious of their own identity and liberate themselves from roles imposed by men. * Emphasized that progress requires women to escape domestic and family roles dictated by patriarchal society. ________________ Kate Millett (radical feminist) * In her seminal work Sexual Politics (1970), Millett argued that female oppression is both political and cultural. * Believed that dismantling the traditional family structure is essential for true sexual revolution, as it mirrors patriarchal society. * Critiqued the portrayal of women in art and literature, asserting that patriarchal culture has produced works that degrade women. * Highlighted that masculine authority is taught from childhood and reinforced through culture, perpetuating women’s subjugation. * Advocated for the overthrow of traditional romantic love concepts, viewing them as tools of patriarchal control. ________________ Sheila Rowbotham (socialist feminist) * Argued that capitalism forces women to sell their labor to survive while also supporting their families, leading to double exploitation. * Criticized Marxism for its narrow focus on capitalism and class, neglecting oppression in domestic life and society. * Believed that the family is not just an instrument for disciplining women but also a place where men seek refuge from capitalist alienation. * Asserted that liberation for women requires an end to both capitalism and sexist culture, necessitating a “revolution within a revolution.” * Emphasized the interplay between economic and cultural forces in causing inequality between the sexes. ________________ bell hooks (postmodern feminist) * Introduced the concept of intersectionality, highlighting how race, gender, and class intersect to create unique experiences of oppression. * Criticized the mainstream feminist movement for focusing predominantly on the concerns of white, middle/upper-class women. * Brought the cultural concerns of women of color into the mainstream feminist discourse. * Emphasized that understanding individual circumstances is crucial, as women often suffer from multiple forms of discrimination simultaneously. * Advocated for a more inclusive feminist movement that addresses the diverse experiences of all women. Nationalism ________________ Component 3: Government and Politics of the USA US Constitution and Federalism 1.1 The nature of the US Constitution * Vagueness of the document, codification and entrenchment * Example of vagueness of the Constitution: The power of Congress 'to provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States' (Article I), the power of Congress to make all laws “necessary and proper” for its ability to rule (Article I, Section 8 e.g. to provide for common defence and general welfare for the US. In the 1816 case of Mculloh v Maryland, the Supreme Court ruled that this clause (necessary and proper) granted Congress implied powers along with its enumerated powers. Also in Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution stated that Congress has the power to “Regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states.” * The 1964 Civil Rights Act used the commerce clause to end racial segregation in hotels, as accommodation was involved in interstate commerce. The Supreme Court upheld this in the Heart of Atlanta Motel v United States case in 1964. Though the Supreme Court limited this power in the United States v Lopez in 1995: 1990 Gun Control Free Zones Act as it was deemed unconstitutional as the measure had nothing to do with interstate commerce. * Example of the specificity of the Constitution: The power 'to collect taxes' (Article I), the power to name post offices. * The constitutional framework (powers) of the US branches of government * The amendment process, including advantages and disadvantages of the formal process. * Advantages * Protects the rights of smaller states against larger states - Article V states ¾ of the US states must ratify an amendment * Means knee-jerk amendments will not be implemented - 2001 Tax Reconciliation Act would have meant the US government could not raise tax levy and would need to consider alternatives (due to high taxes that year) BUT criticise this with patriot act of 2001 which is controversial * Prevents populist amendments - Trump tweeted he would get rid of birthright citizenship, but this right is protected by the 14th amendment * Founding fathers intended for this process to be difficult * Prevents abuse of power - rejected of Bush’s request for a line-item veto power in 2006 * Disadvantages * Smaller states have the same say in constitutional amendments as larger states - Wyoming has a population of 580,000 but California has nearly 40 million * Difficult to adapt to modern day scenarios - Equal Rights Amendment was passed in both Houses in 1972, but not ratified due to not gaining ¾ majority of the states * Amendment process is undemocratic - only 13 out of 50 states need to oppose an amendment to block it - 2006: Rejected Bush’s request for a line-item veto power → prevents abuse of power * 1.2 The key features of the US Constitution and an evaluation of their effectiveness today. * Federalism * A key principle of US democracy where power is delegated to individual states * Policies implemented under Republican presidents like Reagan Separation of powers and checks and balances * Bipartisanship * Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019 - Aimed to set out government spending for the next two fiscal years. * The overriding of President Trump’s veto of the NDAA (National Defense Authorisation Act) in January 2021 was a bipartisan attempt, with an 81-13 vote result in the Senate. * There is a difference between Bipartisan Rhetoric and Bipartisan Action - Ted Cruz blamed the 2013 government shutdown on Senate Democrats refusing to accept a "bipartisan bill" from the House that defunded the Affordable Care Act, despite this bill having no Democratic support. * The government shutdown of Dec 2018 - Jan 2019 over funding for Trump’s wall could be perceived as a result of partisanship, as Democrat opposition led to gridlock and a 35 day shutdown. * Electoral Reform Act of 2022 - Aimed to clarify election processes, in order to avoid manipulation as previously seen in Trump’s attempts to make VP Mike Pence delay the vote count. The VP’s role of counting was heralded as solely ceremonial from this act, and it was created by 16 senators (9 Democrats, 7 Republicans). * April 2024 The House has approved $95 billion in foreign aid for Ukraine, Israel and other U.S. allies * Limited government * Only 3% of the bills will be passed and reached to the president * All the 50 states have their autonomy on legislation and independent judiciary, e.g. DeSantis’ transgender bill which attempts to block puberty blockers and hormones for transgender people is struck down by the federal judge in Florida, demonstrates that the state judiciary limits legislation to protect Americans’ positive freedom from being restricted by state laws. * Bills die easily during the committee stage in the House Rules Committee because the members intentionally timetable the bills to delay legislation and voting on the bill. Therefore, bills are usually dead before they reach the debates, e.g. 27th Amendment had waited for over 200 years since the initial debate on adjusting the salary rate of congresspeople was in 1789. The debate was reintroduced in 1982 and the constitution was amended in 1992. This shows that the complex process of constitutional amendment prevents the government overpowering by amending the constitution so often when the US sovereignty lies on the constitution. * Separation of powers and Checks and Balances * The constitution has mentioned in Article I, II and III that the election cycles of the Congress and the president (executive) are different, and the judiciary is protected by life tenure and fixed salary rate to prevent threats on tenure and salary to make political verdicts. * The government power is shared between 3 branches - they can scrutinise one another. The Congress can control the presidential nominees to the SCOTUS by arranging hearings, e.g. the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee refused to hold a hearing for Merrick Garland, the presidential nominee of SCOTUS from president Obama. The president can veto passed legislation and the bill will be sent back to the Congress. The SCOTUS can hold a judicial review when some people start a case and take it to the SCOTUS, and the judiciary can strike down laws, e.g. * McCain-Feingold Act 2002 (BICRA) was repealed by Citizens Utd v. FEC (2010) to ensure companies as juridical persons are seen as individuals, so companies can donate to the super PAC for presidential and congressional campaigns. 1.3 The main characteristics of US federalism * The nature of the federal system of government and its relationship with the states. Federalism means a theory of government where political power is divided between national and state government, there is jurismendmentdiction for each and some decentralisation is involved. Federalism is written in the enumerated powers. The term ‘federalism’ is an implied power, but it is indirectly mentioned in Article IV and directly mentioned in the 10th A. Also, it is a concurrent power found in the powers of the federal and state governments. * Concurrent powers * Levy and collect taxes (Article IV, Section 1: Full Faith and Credit Clause) * Borrow money * Establish courts (federal courts and state courts), e.g. Sen. DeSantis’ Transgender bill is blocked by the Florida state court * Define crimes and set punishments, e.g. marijuana, alcohol, abortion * Claim private property for public use * National powers (power shared with Congress and president) * Coin money * Regulate interstate and foreign trade * Declare war * Raise and maintain armed forces * Govern US territories and admit new states, e.g. West Virginia * Conduct foreign relations * State powers * Regulate intrastate trade and business * Establish public schools Pass licence requirements for professionals * Regulate alcoholic beverages * Conduct elections (refer to Shelby County v. Holder (2013)) * Establish local governments Evaluate the view that Federalism is protected by the US Constitution and promoted in the modern day. Evaluate the view that the US is no longer a federal nation. Agree: * States are clear policy areas * Whilst there has been growth in the Federal Government, states still maintain significant control over Education, driving and law enforcement in their states, e.g. abortion rights * States are policy labs * Policy differs from state to state with some states legalising cannabis use for recreational purposes which showcases the flexible nature of Federalism in nation, e.g. California * Strong state government and legal systems * State government still plays a large role and is not as weak as local government in the UK, and can still enact policy which is significantly different to that of the Federal government * US state courts are also strong and pose a challenge to the federal government, e.g. challenges to the Trump Travel Ban, Dobbs v. Jackson Disagree: 1.4 Interpretations and debates around the US Constitution and federalism * The extent of democracy within the US Constitution, its strengths and weaknesses and its impact on the US government today * The debates around the extent to which the USA remains federal today * Arguments that the US is less federal: * 10th amendment allows different laws across US states (eg. Oregon has no sales tax, minimum wage differs state to state. ) * Some powers are reserved for states (eg. the power to conduct their own elections, protected by supreme court rulings such as Shelby County v. Holder) * Role of states in the ratification of amendments maintains their significance (eg. ¾ of states are needed to ratify an amendment) * Colorado legalised cannabis in 2014 whereas in Kansas for example, it’s still illegal. It also still remains illegal above federal level. * California implemented pollution permits in 2008 * Federalism allows better representation of people, allowing those who voted for the party other than the Presidents’ to feel represented such as Florida, New Mexico, Illinois, Iowa and Wisconsin that have Republican Governors but voted Democratic in 2012 Presidential election * Under Republican presidents from the 1980s to 2000s, there was an increase in state delegated power * Block grants were given under Reagan to each state with little federal guidance under the period of New FederalismBush * Roe v Wade overturned allows each state to ban abortion * Arguments that the US is still federal: * The interstate commerce clause gives the federal government the authority to regulate commerce across states (eg. the ACA used the commerce clause to force each person to sign up to a minimum amount of health insurance coverage or face a penalty) * Federal mandates can be used to impose national standards against states (eg. clean air and clean water acts, no child left behind) * Grant conditions can limit the powers of states as they are forced to meet certain standards in order to receive grants (eg. Real ID Act 2005 - The federal government tied certain Department of Homeland Security grants to compliance with Real ID standards.) * Congress tends to lead the country in times of economic crisis - Bicameral Budget Act 2013, CARES Act 2020, Dodd-Frank Act 2008 after the financial crisis * Supreme Court rulings undermine federalism - Obergefell v Hodges, Colorado and Maine trying to remove Trump from the presidential ballot 2024 overruled, Bush v Gore TO BE DISCUSSED: GUANTANAMO BAY 9 US Congress 2.1 The Structure of Congress * Bicameral nature, the membership of Congress and the election cycle. * The House is elected every two years, representatives are elected by constituents and the number of representatives in a constituency is proportional to the size of the constituency; Senate is elected every six years (⅓ is elected every two years) and each state has two senators 2.1.1 The distribution of powers within Congress * powers given to Congress in the Constitution, the exclusive powers of each House and the concurrent powers of Congress. 2.2 The functions of Congress: 2.2.1 Representation: * Congressional elections and the significance of incumbency * Factors that affect voting behaviour within Congress: * parties and caucuses, constituency, pressure groups and lobbyists. * Caucuses: * In response to the Affordable Care Act (2010) for Democrats Progressive Caucus: * The Congressional Progressive Caucus, made up of the most liberal House Democrats, strongly pushed for including a public insurance option or government-run health plan to compete with private insurers. * ep. Raúl Grijalva and Sen. Bernie Sanders from the progressive wing argued a public option was essential to provide a more affordable alternative and increase competition. * However, this progressive priority faced opposition from conservative and centrist Democrats wary of an overly expansive government role in healthcare. Blue Dog Coalition: * The Blue Dog Coalition of moderate and conservative House Democrats from swing districts raised concerns about the overall cost of the ACA and specific provisions like the individual mandate requiring all Americans to purchase insurance. * Members like Rep. Mike Ross from Arkansas fought against the individual mandate, viewing it as overreach of federal authority over individuals' personal choices. * The Blue Dogs' opposition to the public option and individual mandate put them at odds with the Progressive Caucus' demands. * This also consists of others such as West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin who is viewed as a Blue Dog due to his 60% Party Unity score and his voting record where he has consistently voted against his party in favour of the republicans. This further contributes to the idea of a 50 party system whereby the ideology of parties is separated across all 50 states. New Democrat Coalition: * This pro-business, centrist Democratic group favoured market-based approaches over expansions of government-run programs. * They aligned more with the Blue Dogs in opposing the public option pushed by progressives as anti-competitive. * But some New Democrats like Ron Kind also had reservations about the individual mandate's impact on employers and the private insurance market. Societal and Ethnic Groups Representation in Congress * The 118th (2023) Congress is the most racially and ethnically diverse in history. Overall, 133 lawmakers identify as Black, Hispanic, Asian American, American Indian, Alaska Native or multiracial. Together, these lawmakers make up a quarter of Congress, including 28% of the House of Representatives and 12% of the Senate. Despite this growing racial and ethnic diversity, Congress remains less diverse than the nation as a whole. Non-Hispanic White Americans account for 75% of voting members in the new Congress, considerably more than their 59% share of the U.S. population. * There are 153 women in congress, accounting for 28% of all members. A record 128 women are currently serving in the House, making up 29% of the chamber’s membership. With the election of Becca Balint, a Vermont Democrat and the first woman and openly LGBTQ+ person elected to Congress from the state, all 50 states have had female representation in Congress at some point. * Thirteen voting members of Congress identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual – the highest number in history. Rep. Sarah McBride (D-DE) is the first transgender member of Congress * The share of Millennials and Gen Xers in Congress has grown slightly in recent years. In the current Congress, 12% of House members, or 52 lawmakers, are Millennials. This share is up from 1% at the start of the 115th Congress in 2017. 166 members of the House (38%) are part of Generation X – ages 43 to 58 in 2023 – up from 27% in the 115th Congress. However, older generations still account for the largest share of lawmakers across both chambers. ‘Baby Boomers’ (aged between 59 and 77) make up 45% of the House’s voting membership, in addition to 66 of the 100 senators. Average age is 58 years old. * Christians’ share in Congress is greater than their proportion of the broader American public. Nearly nine-in-ten congressional members (88%) are Christian as of Jan. 3, 2023, compared with 63% of U.S. adults overall. * North Carolina is one of the most gerrymandered states in 2023 that the ratio of seats in control by Republican and Democrats will increase from 7:7 to 11:3. 2.2.2 Legislative: * The legislative process, including * The strengths and weaknesses of this process * The differences between the legislative process in each chamber * The House holds the ‘Power of the Purse’ - only the House can control the actions of another group by withholding funding, or putting stipulations on the use of funds. * Border Wall Funding Battles (2018-2019) - The Democratic-controlled House used its spending power to deny funding for Trump's proposed border wall, leading to a 35-day government shutdown. * The policy significance of Congress – impact and effectiveness of laws passed. * The length of the process of turning bills into acts is good as it ensures scrutiny of the bill, also meaning that necessary legislation gets through. 2023-present 47 bills have been turned into acts compared to in 1977 804 bills were turned into acts showing that they used to be effective and slowly after time become worse at fulfilling this role. This can also indicate that the precedent is using different forms of passing legislation like executive orders. * However thousands of bills fail as it is hard to always have both the senate and the house of representatives on your side. It can also lead to gridlock and then prevent important legislation from passing through. 2.2.3 Oversight: * Factors that influence the relationship between Congress and the presidency : * Party Control; There is evidence to suggest that congressional oversight of the executive is only really effective when Congress or one house of congress is not controlled by the President’s party. * For example, Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016 was defeated by the Republican controlled senate. * Whereas, in times of united government, oversight can drop significantly. * This happened during George W. Bush’s 8-year term, where congressional oversight was often non-existent. * From homeland security, to the conduct of the Iraq war, from allegations of torture at Abu Ghraib to the surveillance of domestic telephone calls by the National Security Agency (NSA), Congress had mostly ignored its responsibilities. * Party polarisation; Party polarisation causes a strain on the relationship between parties and the president. * Party polarisation is exacerbated in times of divided government. * Sometimes party polarisation prevents Congress and the president from cooperating. Party polarisation often means that the opposition party will oppose the president’s policy programme, which sours the relations between the two branches. * However, there are times of bipartisanship which enable a working relationship between congress and the president. * This was shown in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (CARES) in 2020, the Bipartisan Budget Act in 2013, and the 21st Century Cures Act (2016). * Policy area; Congress's ability to influence the president is greater for domestic policy than it is for foreign policy. * In areas of foreign policy, the president often uses executive agreements to circumvent the senate. * This was shown by Obama passing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015 concerning the Iranian nuclear programme with very little oversight from the senate. * Similarly in 2018, Trump was able to abandon the Iran Nuclear Deal with little insight from the Senate. * Congress has much more influence on the president in terms of domestic policy. * This was seen when Obama was frustrated by Congress which thwarted his attempts to pass legislation on gun control and immigration. * Trump also struggled with Congress over his immigration policies, and also failed to repeal the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). * Election cycle; Members of Congress are more likely to please their district/state rather than the president in the run up to the election. They essentially prioritise their own re-election above the wishes of the president. * Congress overrode Obama’s Justice against Sponsors of Terrorism bill in 2016. Democrats did not wish to seem ‘soft’ on terrorism in the run up to their re-election, despite many of them supporting the legislation. Therefore, as an outgoing president, there was little that Obama could do to persuade anyone to support his stance. * Presidential approval rating; Congress can exert less influence when approval ratings are high, and more when they are low. * In 2005, when George W. Bush was attempting to reform social security, Congress was able to capitalise on his low approval ratings in order to frustrate his attempts. At that time his approval ratings were around 35% according to a GallUp poll. * This was entirely different from September 2001, where W. Bush enjoyed the highest presidential approval rating ever recorded, following the 9/11 attacks. He enjoyed a 90% approval rating. * Biden’s current approval rating sits at only 38%. His low approval rating, and the fact that he is considered to be a ‘lame-duck’ outgoing president, means that Congress, especially the opposition party are able to exert a much higher level of influence over him. * Trump’s approval ratings have been the lowest of any president since WWII. He averaged at 41% approval during his entire presidency. * Congressional approval rating; Congressional approval ratings are important too, and recent years have seen approval ratings of Congress at historic lows. * Polls have linked this low approval rating of congress to long-standing trend of low trust in government among Americans, which started after the Vietnam War and the aftermath of Watergate. * Congress is seen by Americans as self-interested and unproductive - given that it only has a success rate of around 2-3% in passing new legislation. * Whilst president approval ratings are often low, they have not reached the same lows as seen in Congress. As a result, Congress can often find it hard to exert influence over the president. * In 2019-20 Trump’s approval rating was at 41%, whilst Congress’s was down to just 18%. In this case it was hard for Congress to argue that it possessed greater legitimacy than the president when Congress members criticised his policies. * National events; In times of national emergency, Congress will often defer to the President in the short-term. * For example, after 9/11 when George W. Bush passed the Patriot Act 2001. * However, this is not always the case. Congress assisted Trump in passing the CARES act in 2020, but it had also been very critical of Trump’s handling of the crisis. Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Speaker of the House of Reps at the time, regularly rebutted the President and acted as the leader of the Congressional Opposition to his policies. How partisan and policy dynamics shape congressional oversight in the post Trump era * The checks on the other branches of government and the extent of its institutional effectiveness * Checks by Congress on the President; The Constitution does not grant Congress oversight responsibilities explicitly, but over the years oversight of the executive branch has come to be seen as an implied power of Congress. * It is in Committee rooms where most oversight of the executive takes place. Standing Committees of congress are permanent policy specialist bodies and can wield a considerable degree of clout. * Standing Committees; These exist in both houses of Congress, and are permanent, policy-specialist committees. * Their membership is proportional to the chamber in which it operates. * Examples of Senate standing committees include; Agriculture, Foreign Relations, Energy and Natural Resources, Nutrition and Forestry, Budget, Judiciary, and Finance. * Examples of House standing committees include; Agriculture, Rules, Judiciary, Armed services, Administration, Financial Services, Appropriations, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, Oversight and Government Reform, Homeland Security, Foreign Affairs and Budget. * There are also sub-committees; The House Science, Space, and Technology Committee is divided into the following sub-committees; Energy, Environment, Oversight, Research and Technology, and Space. * Standing committees have two functions in both the House and the Senate, and a third function in the Senate only. * Conducting the committee stage of bills; This involves holding hearings on the bill at which witnesses appear. These committees then decide, via a vote, whether to or not pass the bill onto the full chamber for debate and vote. * Often this can act as a barrier to Presidents who might wish to introduce legislation through Senators, as their bill might be defeated in the committee stage. * Conducting investigations; This enables congress to fulfil its oversight function. * Investigations are often launched into perceived problems, crises or policy failures. * Questions are raised such as ‘Is current legislation proving effective?’ * Examples of this include; the House Homeland Security Committee which investigated ISIS in the pacific: assessing terrorism in Southeast Asia. * Confirming presidential appointments; This is the Senate’s third function. * The two committees which do this are the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Foreign Relations Committee. * Overwhelming yes votes confirm the appointment, but a close vote will indicate problems ahead. * Should the majority of the committee vote ‘no’ then the nomination is certain to be defeated. * It was the Republican-Controlled Senate Judiciary Committee that refused to hold hearings on President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. * Amy Coney Barrett , the nominee of President Trump, is confirmed by the Republican-Controlled Senate Judiciary Committee within 2 weeks before the presidential election. Therefore, this confirmation was criticised by some Republicans including Sen. Susan Collins, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, and Sen. Mitt Romney for inconsistent decisions on hearing and confirming nominees under similar circumstances (near the presidential election period). * Impeachment; The House of Representatives has impeached three presidents. * Most recently, Donald Trump, which happened twice - (2019 and 2020). However, the senate acquitted on all four occasions. * Some argue that the failure to convict any of the presidents is evidence that impeachment is an ineffective power. * However, on all 4 occasions, the process has worked as it should have done, and Nixon (Watergate scandal) resigned in order to avoid an inevitable impeachment, suggesting that this power to check on the president is indeed an effective one. * ASSESSING; The effectiveness of Congress’s oversight of the President; * Congressional scholars Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann (2017) ‘Whilst the constitutional arsenal of Congress is powerful, it has limited ability to quickly reverse the course set upon by a determined president.’ * The president can veto laws; seen by Trump vetoing the Iran War Powers resolution (May 2020). * However, the Congress can override vetoes by gaining an agreement of a supermajority (⅔ of the congresspersons). This can be seen by the overridden veto by Trump on the defence spending bill in 2021, showing that the Congress can balance the executive formal power on influencing legislation. * Furthermore, the President can circumvent Congress’s power of ratifying treaties by signing executive agreements, such as a Joint Comprehensive Plan to Action that Obama signed with Iran in 2015, joining the Paris Accord in 2015 signed by Obama, the withdrawal from Paris Accord in 2020 by Trump, and rejoining the Paris Accord in 2021 by Biden. * However, this can be argued that executive orders can be restricted especially when it relates to military actions. The president cannot continue taking military actions or send troops by themself over 60 days without congressional approval, due to the restrictions from the War Powers Resolution 1973 (President cannot declare war). * As discussed, oversight can drop considerably at times of united government, making checks on the executive weak and ineffective. * Congress has also been criticised for being unsuccessful in utilising its impeachment powers. * Checks by Congress on the Judiciary; * Constitutional amendments; Congress can check the power of the judiciary and overturn a ruling of the Supreme Court by passing a Constitutional Amendment. * For example, Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) on allowing racial segregation was overturned by the 14th amendment that African Americans are citizens and therefore they enjoy the rights protected by the constitution. (Citizens Clause, Equal Protection Clause) * However, (links to US constitution topic), constitutional amendments have a very specific procedure, and require ⅔ supermajority in BOTH houses of Congress and require ¾ support from state legislatures. * As a result, this has happened 26 times. (27 times but the 18th amendment was repealed by the 21st amendment to end the prohibition on manufacture, sale, and transportation of alcoholic beverages.) * Impeachment; Congress has the power of impeachment over the judicial branch. * However, there has only ever been one Supreme Court justice put on trial by the senate- Justice Samuel Chase in 1804, after being impeached by the HoR. * More commonly, justices have been known to resign before they can be impeached, which brings into question the effectiveness of this check on the Judiciary. * In 1968, Justice Abe Fortas resigned from the Supreme Court rather than facing impeachment. * Nine district judges have been impeached by the House and then dismissed by the Senate - some of these having resigned rather than being found guilty. * The most recent was Thomas Porteous in 2010 for accepting bribes and making false statements under penalty of perjury. * Size of the court; Under article III, Congress retains the power to change the composition of the court. * If change were to occur, it would probably undermine the independence of the Supreme Court because it would then be possible to change its ideological position. * Joe Biden promised to appoint a bipartisan commission to examine whether the Supreme Court should be expanded. * ASSESSING; Effectiveness of Congress’s oversight on the Judiciary; * The institutional effectiveness of Congress’ abilities to check the power of the Judiciary is very limited. * The practical difficulty in enacting constitutional amendments, increasing/decreasing the size of the court, and impeaching justices, makes these largely ineffective at checking the powers of the judiciary. * Often, Congress sees Supreme Court rulings as controversial, or considers them to be a judicially activist court, with rulings such as Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) and United States v. Windsor (2013) which both effectively legalised same-sex marriage,striking down the fate of the Defence of Marriage Act (1996).Can you be? 2.3 Interpretations and debates around Congress * Changing roles and powers of Congress and their relative importance, and debates about adequacy of its representative role * Congress and domestic policy; Expansion of the federal government * From 1933 to around 1980, Congress played a role in the expansion of the federal government - in both US society and the economy. * It passed legislation often with bipartisan cooperation that recognised the rights of its citizens. Some of this includes; * Civil Rights Act (1964) - Prohibited racial, religious, and sexual discrimination and racial segregation in schools. * Voting Rights Act (1965) - Prohibited discrimination in voting. * Medicare and Medicaid Act (1965) - The first public healthcare insurance programmes. * Housing and Urban Development Act (1965) - Provided federal funds for urban renewal. * This was the most successful era of the passage of legislation in congressional history. * However, this can be argued to be as a result of less ideological difference/party polarisation between the two parties, which made compromises much easier to achieve. * 1980s to date; Era of party polarisation; * Parties have become increasingly polarised in their ideological makeup. * This has changed the way Congress works and has seen parties refuse to vote for keynote legislation of their opponents. * Republicans - disinterested in cooperating with Obama’s healthcare reforms. * Democrats - disinterested in cooperating with Trump’s tax and jobs reform. * The rate of success for modern congress in passing legislation is only 23%. It is easier to prevent rather than enact laws. * The presidential appointments process has become intensely politicised, i.e the refusal to consider Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016. * In 1988, the support for Obama’s nomination to the Supreme Court with Amy Coney Barett was entirely on party lines - not one Democratic senator supporting her. * Bipartisanship is more of an exception than a rule. Although the CARES act was an act of bipartisanship, this is not often the case. Even still, Democrats were critical of this legislation. * Congress and foreign policy; * The constitution gives Congress the power to declare war. However, this power has not been used by Congress since 1914, when they declared war against Japan. * In the era of Nixon, the president was conducting wars that the president had not even heard of. * Congress attempted to take back power with the War Powers Act (1973). * This ensured that if the president did take unilateral action they must inform Congress within 48h. * It also crucially allows the president to carry out military operations for up to 90 days without congressional approval. * But, the War powers act has had limited effect in preventing the president from going to war. In 2020, Trump even argued that he could use twitter to inform Congress of future airstrikes. * The House Foreign Affairs Committee responded, via twitter, arguing ‘You should read the War Powers Act. And… you’re not a dictator.’ * How effective is Congress in performing its functionsd * Legislation: Congress still follows the principle of the constitution - Limited government. Only 3% of the proposed bills are passed which shows that the legislative process is complex and difficult for bills to be passed. This can prevent ill-thought bills or bills that are only in favour of a particular party’s interest or a temporary benefit on an issue (political wohim). The House Rules Committee is to timetable the legislative agenda and they can ask the house to amend the bill (especially revenue bills) or they can put the bills behind. So, most of the bills go and die. * Representation: The 118th Congress has the most radical and diverse membership ever. The Congress is moving away from the ‘Old, Pale, Male’ framework’: The average age of the House is 57 (117th: 58), while the Senate is 65 (117th: 65). The number of white Rep. is 307 (117th: 319), white Sen. is 88 (117th: 89). The number of male Rep. is 310 (117th: 313), male Sen. is 75 (117th: 76) * Separated electoral cycles in the Congress increase the representation and participation of the electorates. The House is elected every 2 years, while ⅓ of the Senate is elected every 2 years (6 years needed to have a new Senate). Therefore, representatives and senators are elected in different mandates which can serve different people starting from different periods. The bicameral Congress is also elected from congressional districts and states, which can increase the representativeness of the congresspersons that different politicians from their political party can serve them in different levels of interests. * Incumbency is a significant factor to determine an electoral success of congressional candidates who seek re-election. From OpenSecret, 94.5% of the Representatives are re-elected and 100% of the Senators are re-elected. This is due to the name recognition from the pork barrel politics while the congresspersons hold meetings in town halls to ‘bring back the bacon’ to the constituencies and demonstrate their effort of bringing benefits to the corresponding constituencies, which is also a form of accountability. Besides, the incumbents face less challenges even when the congressional districts are gerrymandered, and the relationship and networks between media can converse into electoral support. Hakeem Jeffries has the most fundrasion raised with $14 million while running for New York District 08. * Oversight: The Congress successfully impeached two presidents in these 32 years, and 3 impeachments were made in total. Clinton was under the impeachment initiated by the House on the scandal with Monica Lewinsky and the executive office. Trump was first impeached due to the Russian interference in 2016 presidential election, and later he was impeached again due to the Ukraine scandal which included Trump asking for Zelensky’s assistance to attack Biden (i.e. his presidential rival) by investigating and exposing Biden’s scandals (if there were at that moment) * The Congress sent subpoenas to officials during the investigation to oversee the executive branch. During Trump’s first impeachment, former FBI director James Comey was one of the people who received subpoenas to give their witness testimony to the Congress. In Trump’s second impeachment, subpoenas were sent to officials like former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to give witness testimony on the Ukraine Scandal. * Changing significance of parties in Congress * Party Leadership; Party leadership in Congress is affected, and limited, by the Constitutional principles of the separation of powers, federalism, and bicameralism. * Separation of powers; Party leaders in congress hold little sway in other branches of government, such as over the President, even when the president is a member of their own party. * Federalism; Party leaders in Congress have little to no control over the 50 state parties in the country. * * Bicameralism; Party leaders operate within their own chamber. They cannot always be sharing the same ideas as their counterpart in the other chamber. * Evidenced by Mike Johnson as the House speaker and Chuck Schumer as the Democrat senate majority leader. * Theories of Party decline have been exaggerated; * Significance and effectiveness of the powers outlined in the Constitution US Presidency (All examples with reference to presidents since 1992) 3.1 Formal sources of presidential power as outlined in the US Constitution and their use. * The role as the Head of State and as the Head of Government * All powers are outlined in Article II of the constitution * Can appoint their own cabinet * The President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the laws created by Congress * Nominates Supreme Court justices * Joe Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson to replace Justice Stephen Breyer in 2022. * Trump had made 3 appointments to the Supreme Court from 2017-2020. He nominated Neil Gorsuch in 2017, Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 (49 Rep, 1 Dem), and Amy Coney Barrett in 2020. It was Trump’s three nominations that shifted the ideology of the Supreme Court to overwhelmingly Conservative with a 6-3 majority. * Can veto bills * Biden 2023: vetoed Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act * Trump: 10 vetoes, 1 overridden * Biden: 13 vetoes, none overridden * Obama: 12 vetoes. 1 overridden * Chief diplomat in * Trump saying he will end the war between Ukraine and Russia in 24 hours (how?) * June 2024: Biden proposed a ceasefire plan between Israel and Gaza * January 2021: Biden rejoined the Paris Agreement * Power of pardon * Biden pardoned 6500 people for simple possession of marijiuana 2022 * Trump pardoned 237 altogether * Biden pardoned many of his family members including his son Hunter. He also pardoned many people pre-emptively (not committed any crimes) as they may be targeted by Trump Eg. Anthony Fauci (key leader of Covid response) + Jan 6 riot panel * Trump pardoned 1600 people who were at the Jan 6 riots incl leaders * Treaty making authorities * 2010 New START treaty that obama signed with Russia, arms reduction treaty ratified by senate in 2011 - limit warheads + mutual inspection 3.2 Informal sources of presidential power and their use. * The electoral mandate, executive orders, national events and the cabinet * If granted a strong electoral mandate, a president can exercise their power with few restrictions. * * Executive orders allow the president to implement policy in the way they wish without Congress’ approval * Obama issued an executive order to create the White House Council on Native American Affairs * Creation of Homeland Security 2001 under Bush after 9/11 * Joe Biden signed more than 60 executive orders in his first 100 days of office. 24 of these directly reversed Trump’s policies. This included halting funding for Trump’s border wall, reversing Trump’s travel ban targeting largely Muslim countries, and imposing a federal mask mandate in wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. * Trump signed 26 executive orders on his first day in office, declaring national emergency on the southern border and granting pardons for the capitol riots. * National events play a modern role in how much a president how exercise their power * Bipartisanship and popular support was issued for President Bush’s aggressive proposal of war against terrorist organisations after 9/11 * Bush faced during his Presidency: 9/11 & the War on Terror, the Iraq & Afghanistan wars, Hurricane Katrina & the Banking crisis. * Obama faced: health care reform & the Affordable Care Act, the Budget Crisis & stimulus package, Osama Bin Laden & the Government shutdown. * Trump has faced opposition to the Mexican wall, immigration & the Government shutdown, Mueller's Russia Inquiry, a Trillion dollar infrastructure plan & repealing the Affordable Care Act. * Powers of persuasion including the nature/characteristics of each president * Obama’s address regarding gay rights in 2010 led to the repeal of the ‘Don’t Ask’ act in 2011 * When the Democrats controlled both houses in Congress and Bill Clinton was president, he succeeded in 86.4% of Congress votes on issues he supported compared to 36.2% of votes when there was a divided government. * Obama 2013 rose garden speech over Syria. It was an attempt to get congresses support for military action in Syria * Trump and his twitter storms - encouraged his followers to show strength and fight against “bad people” at the capitol * Executive Office of the President (EXOP), including the role of the National Security Council (NSC), Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the White House Office (WHO). * President is dominant over the Executive branch: Cabinet, EXOP, National Security Council 3.3 The presidency 3.3.1 Relationships between the presidency and the following institutions and why this varies: * Congress * Success strongly depends on House and Senate majority * When the Democrats controlled both houses in Congress while Bill Clinton was president, he succeeded in 86.4% of Congress votes on issues he supported compared to 36.2% of votes when there was a divided government. * 2016 : Trump and the Republican held both houses - Trump was in a strong position , he brought in huge tax cuts. 2018 democrats took the house of representatives and Trump's policies hit gridlock. * 2013 government shut down after Obama couldn’t pass his budget - the republican house demanded austerity and wouldn't debate his immigration bill * However, Trump struggled over passing the American Health Care Act in 2017 - suggests that even with a Republican president and a republican congress things are not always straightforward. The bill faced strong republican opposition in both the house and senate. * The Supreme Court. * The president's power over the SC is the ability to make appointments. However they have no control over how many of these they will make and they also need agreement from the senate. The fact that appointments are for life is highly significant. Once in place a president has no power over the judges. * President is required to carry out SC decisions as part of the president's oath to defend the Constitution and the law 3.3.2 Limitations on presidential power and why this varies between presidents: * Congress, the Supreme Court and the Constitution * The election cycle and divided government. * By a simple majority, the House of Representatives can vote to proceed with the impeachment process. On 19 December 2019, the House of Representatives voted to impeach President Donald Trump. They voted on two charges: * abuse of power – the attempt to get the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden * obstruction of Congress – the allegation that Trump withheld evidence and barred his key aides from giving evidence 3.4 Interpretations and debates of the US presidency * How effectively they have achieved their aims * The imperial presidency * The extent of presidential accountability to Congress * Congress can veto a presidential veto - Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act 2016 * The role and power of the president in foreign policy. The POTUS is imperial (power is strong), not imperilled (power is weak) - link back to Article 2 in the Constitution * Commander-in-chief - have significant power on foreign policy e.g. Obama sent drones to Afghanistan and killed Bin Laden (Taliban) without congressional approval/confirmation; Trump withdrew US troops in Afghanistan which ended the US military actions in Afghanistan (officially) * Restrained by War Powers Resolution - the POTUS must notify the Congress if military action is over 60 days * Military bid must pass in the Congress - House is the Power of the Purse * Usually POTUS focus on foreign policies when they are in the last period of their term (lame duck president as power constrained by others like Congress, interest groups, etc) * Chief Legislator - legislation e.g. Veto (formal power) legislation - Trump vetoed at least 10 legislation, including Iran War Powers Resolution (terminate actions in Iran) Bully pulpit (persuasion, soft power) - SOTU 2024 Biden calls for legislation of Border bill The EXOP (bureaucratic department) discuss with interest group and persuade congresspersons to help legislation following the agenda of POTUS (iron triangle) * Congress can overturn vetoes with a supermajority (⅔ of the Congress) - congress overturned Trump’s veto on National Defense Authorisation Act (2021) * The founding fathers see Congress as the superior branch in the government - Constitution: congress = Article 1; executive = Article 2 * Checks and Balances - separation of powers (constitution) that power is shared in the 3 branches Presidents can appoint judicial nominees to extend their legacy through SCOTUS, e.g. Trump recommended 3 judges in the SCOTUS, including Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch -> voted against abortion rights in Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) (except Amy Coney Barrett) POTUS can work with interest groups to exert influence on judicial verdicts through amicus vcuriae (friends of the court) * Congress can refuse to confirm the appointment - Mitch McConnell refused to confirm Merrick Garland’s judicial nomination by Obama * SCOTUS has massive checks on executive orders through judicial review (founded in Marbury v. Madison) - Trump’s Travel Ban was blocked based on 5th amendment -> POTUS has no power to overturn it and must obey the rulings (otherwise it is unconstitutional and ultra vires (overpowering)) * SCOTUS judges are neutral and protected by life tenure (Article 3) -> not necessary to follow the ideologies of POTUS -> Amy Coney Barrett voted for abortion in Dobbs and Jackson's (2022) as a minority, Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the liberals in NFIB v Sebelius, David Souter was nominated by Bush as a ‘slam dunk for conservatives’ but went on to become one of the most liberal justices on the bench Presidential Case Studies Biden (2021-2025) * Bifurcated Presidency: domestically weak, internationally strong * First 100 days = Biden signed more than 60 executive actions in 100 days; 24 directly reversed Trump policies * State of the Union (2022): stated that he was willing to work with political rivals * Republicans believe him t o be too ‘unfit’ for the role of president; many Democratic voters admit that they’re concerned about his age ahead of the his 2024 bid for re-election Trump (2017-21) * Hawkish Pragmatism: aggressive and erratic in his foreign policy approach * In 2017, Trump’s first Executive Order imposed a Travel Ban to Muslim countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Sudan, Yemen and Iraq); decision was upheld in the Supreme Court * Signed an Executive Order to build a border wall between Mexico and the US * In January 2020, he authorised an airstrike on targets in Iran resulting in the death of General Qassem Solemani * In May 2020, Trump vetoed the Iran War Powers resolution, a bipartisanship bill to suppress presidential authority over militant actions against Iran administered without congressional approval * Totalled the most executive staffing changes * Has said he wants to run for a 3rd term. US Supreme Court 4.1 The nature and role of the Supreme Court. * The US Constitution. * Interpretation: founders intent (strict constructionism) v modern standards (loose constructionism) * The independent nature of the Supreme Court. Factors which reinforce the independence of SCOTUS; 1. Although article III of the constitution gives Congress the power to change the composition of the SC, it has remained as nine members since 1869. 1. Consistent structure of 9 judges has prevented the other branches from attempting to pack the court with their allies. This structural rule has enhanced the independence of the court for over 150 years. 2. Article III also states that a SC justice is guaranteed the role for life and cannot be dismissed if Congress disagrees with their decisions. Likewise, their salary is protected by article III of the Constitution, which prevents Congress or the president from using salary as leverage against the justices. 3. Separation of powers grants the supreme court constitutional independence, whilst judicial review allows the Court to check the power of the president and Congress. 4. ,The American Bar Association (ABA) is an interest group which is made up of professional lawyers, rather than just political actors. The ABA rates the sustainability of the nominee and their understanding of the law and the Constitution. 1. Ketanji Brown Jackson (appointed in 2022) was rated ‘well-qualified’ 2. Amy Coney Barett (appointed in 2020) was rated ‘well-qualified’ 5. Finally, justices have security of tenure, once they are appointed, they are there for life. 1. Some justices have gone on to ‘disappoint’ their political patrons - not voting on the ideological lines they were appointed on. * The judicial review process (Marbury vs Madison 1803 and Fletcher vs Peck 1810). * Madison v Marbury: established the principle of judicial review - empowering SC to review and invalidate laws from executive ostaknesses of the process. Strengths * Ensures judicial independence - salary rate is fixed and justices with life tenure cannot be sacked unless they are found guilty in the impeachment. Therefore, they are immune to the threat of tenure. * Ensures judicial ability - In 2005, Harriet Miers as the George W Bush nominee was rejected due to lack of prior experience as a judge and being a close friend and advisor to Bush. * Ensures personal suitability - In Kavanaugh’s hearing, he had an over 32 hours hearing from the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate if he really had sexually assaulted several women due to improper FBI investigations into allegations. Weaknesses * Confirmation process can be used for political purposes because it was a rubber stamp in the past. The confirmation process has changed. Justice Roberts in 2005 as a Bush nominee ,only had a 17-hour hearing with a result of 78-22 vote in congress that some Democrats voted for him, whereas Justice Kavanaugh in 2018 nominated by Trump had an over 32 hours hearing with loads of questions including from the Vice President Kamala Harris whilst Kavanaugh accused Harris that she made him cry. He also had a close vote of 50-48. Therefore, the changes in duration and the tension in hearing can be interpreted as a political appointment process. * The confirmation process is open to abuse because the Senate Judiciary Committee holds the power to decide if confirmation process will be held, e.g. Mitch McConnell as the minority leader of the Senate and the member of the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to hold a hearing to confirm Merrick Garland who was Obama’s nominee. * Presidential nominees can be the political legacy for presidents when they leave the executive office, e.g. Trump successfully appointed 3 justices including Neil Gorsch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to extend his legacy and exert influence over the Supreme Court decisions. Especially Justice Amy Coney Barrett was accepted in a rush, two weeks before the presidential election 2020. * Appointment process is ineffective to investigate the background of the nominees and some of them do not even have judicial ability. Justice Thomas was accepted with a close vote of 52:48 whilst he had only been a judge for a year and he never wrote a legal book, article or brief of consequence. Also, he and Kavanaugh are accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault from ex colleague and several women, yet they still become justices. * Factors influencing the president’s choice of nominee. * Ideological leaning * Originalism/strict constructionist - justices who have strict interpretation on; original meaning (from the literal meaning of the constitution), favour state autonomy over federal power. e.g. Roe v. Wade (1973) was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) and this retrieves the power to control abortion rights to the states. * Justice Antonin Scalia - “the constitution that I interpret and apply is not living but dead. The constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make change difficult” * Dobbs V Jackson’s Womens Health Organisation * Liberal/loose constructionist - justices who have loose interpretation as; constitution is a living, dynamic and thriving document (pragmatic approach on constitution and move/evolve with the society), favour federal power over state control. e.g. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) to allow same-sex marriage in a federal level. * Eg Roe v Wade 1973 * Eg Miranda v Arizona * Judicial ability * Kagan was nominated due to her judicial academic background (Professor of Harvard Law School) and legal career of solicitor general of the US * Alito was nominated with his 15-year legal experience as a justice in the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit * Roberts was nominated by George W Bush with legal career of legal clerk for Justice Friendly and Justice Rehnquist, and 4-year experience of justice in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit * Ketanji Brown Jackson was nominated by Biden with a legal career of United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, federal public defender, and the vice chairperson of the United States Sentencing Commission * Harriet Miers was rejected in the confirmation process due to a lack of prior legal experience as a judge * Political motivations * Sonia Sotomayor was nominated by president Obama with interpretation of Obama’s Hispanic support * Ketanji Brown Jackson was nominated by president Biden with interpretation of Biden’s Black support * Social characteristics * Amy Coney Barrett was nominated by Trump, as a female judge who is anti-abortion from her past legal experience before becoming a SCOTUS justice (but eventually she is pro-abortion) * Clarence Thomas was nominated by George Bush, as a Black man who opposes affirmative actions * Age * Younger justices tend to be chosen due to a longer serve in court to exert judicial influence, e.g. Justice Thomas was accepted at the age of 43. * The current composition and ideological balance of the Court. Chief Justice John Roberts (Conservative): * Appointed by George W. Bush in 2005. * Often serves as a swing vote in closely divided cases. Clarence Thomas (Conservative): * Appointed by George H.W. Bush in 1991. * Known for his originalist views and strong conservative stance. Samuel Alito (Conservative): * Appointed by George W. Bush in 2006. * A reliable conservative voice on the Court. Neil Gorsuch (Conservative): * Appointed by Donald Trump in 2017. * Known for his textualist approach to statutory interpretation. * Replaced Antonin Scalia who was also conservative Brett Kavanaugh (Conservative): * Appointed by Donald Trump in 2018. * His confirmation was highly contentious, reflecting deep partisan divides. * Replaced Anthony Kennedy who was a swing voter and turned the Roberts court more conservative Amy Coney Barrett (Conservative): * Appointed by Donald Trump in 2020. * Known for her originalist views and conservative legal philosophy. * Significant appointment because replaced Justice Ginsburg (liberal) so shifted ideology of SCOTUS to conservative Elena Kagan (Liberal): * Appointed by Barack Obama in 2010. * A prominent liberal voice, known for her pragmatic approach to the law. Sonia Sotomayor (Liberal): * Appointed by Barack Obama in 2009. * The first Latina Supreme Court justice, known for her strong liberal positions. Ketanji Brown Jackson (Liberal): * Appointed by Joe Biden in 2022. * The first African-American woman on the Supreme Court, known for her progressive views. From 2000-2018, 36% cases unanimous votes, otherwise usually a strong majority eg 7-2 8-1, 5-4 only 19% of cases. Consensus is important to maintain reputation of united strong court, clarity and guidance for lower courts in regards to judicial decisions, to enforce legal norms in lower courts 4.3 The Supreme Court and public policy. * The impact of the Supreme Court on public policy in the US, with a range of examples, including examples post-2005. * Judicial review is the implied power by the Constitution since the SCOTUS gave itself the power from Marbury v. Madison (1803) when it first overturned an Act of Congress * NFIB v. Sebelius (2012) ruled that the individual mandate to buy health insurance as a constitutional exercise of Congress's power under the Taxing and Spending Clause (taxing power) * Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. * Roe v. Wade (1973) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the Constitution of the United States generally protected a right to have an abortion. However, this is overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) which returned to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion. * Loving v. Virginia (1967) in which the SCOTUS ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. * Section 4(b) and 5 of Voting Rights Act (1965) are ruled unenforceable by the SCOTUS rulings Shelby County v. Holder (2013) that requiring certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance based on their history of racial discrimination in voting before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices, is unconstitutional. This makes it easier for state officials to engage in vote suppression. * Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2022) has protected school prayers as protected speech that coaches gathering pupils to pray after the game is a protected behaviour. This overturns the separation of religion and schools. * Miranda warning/rights - Miranda v. Arizona (1966) in which the SCOTUS ruled that law enforcement in the United States must warn a person of their constitutional rights before interrogating them, or else the person's statements cannot be used as evidence at their trial. This ensures the arrestee has the right to silence. * SCOTUS blocked Biden’s executive order of the administration requirement for employers to require COVID vaccination and/or testing * Riley v. California (2014) in which the SCOTUS ruled that mobile phones and digital equipment are covered by 4th Amendment (unreasonable search and service) * Snyder v. Phelps (2011) in which the SCOTUS ruled that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous. (7 members of The Westboro Church picketed the funeral of U.S. Marine Matthew Snyder, who was killed in a non-combat accident during the Iraq War. On public land about 1,000 feet from where the funeral was being held, protesters displayed placards that read "Thank God for Dead Soldiers", "God Hates Fags", and "You're Going to Hell", among others.) * District of Columbia (D.C.) v. Heller (2008) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defence or whether the right was only intended for state militias, and D.C. banning gun control violated this guarantee. * Political significance debate: the role of judicial activism and judicial restraint and criticisms of each. The SCOTUS is a quasi-legislative body (SCOTUS uses the ability for agencies to enact rules and regulations despite that agency not possessing the constitutional ability to do so) Judicial review (founded on Marbury v. Madison (1803)) gives power to make judicial or political rulings based on the Constitution (but the power is not derived from the Constitution i.e. this is unconstitutional) Overturn Act of Congress (unconstitutional actions) e.g. Shelby County v. Holder (2013) overturned Voting Rights Act 1965 because secured voting rights no longer need federal clearance and states should be trusted * THEREFORE: Set precedents to amend/abolish laws passed in Congress and make laws, SCOTUS is a “legislative tool” * SCOTUS cannot initiate cases due to judicial restraint (no political bias and maintaining judicial neutrality and independence) * e.g. Johnson v. Texas: burning flags is not supported but not illegal due to freedom of expression (1st Amendment); Citizens Utd v. FEC: companies are treated as individuals and have the right of expression - companies can donate to super PAC; Snyder v. Phelps (2011): members of Westboro Baptist Church displaying cards of “God hates Fags” are not illegal because they are protected by 1st Amendment (Freedom of Speech) * THEREFORE: Judicial process naturally limits the power of judicial review * SCOTUS substitutes the Congress to make social progress * SCOTUS pushed social movement since the 1960s while Congresspersons refused to amend laws for freedom and protection * e.g. Brown v. Board of Education (overturned Plessy v. Ferguson on racial segregation in schools); Roe v. Wade (abortion); Loving v. Virginia (interracial marriage); Obergefell v. Hodges (same-sex marriage) * Overturning of Plessy v Ferguson impacted by dissenting opinion written by losing judges on that case * THEREFORE: SCOTUS acts as a pioneer and takes over the legislative role by exposing the ineffective Congress's weakness (only 3% of the bills are passed). Judicial activism (if you think a conservative court also protects rights…) protects America's civil rights * Only Congress can protect rights and make social progress by codifying laws * e.g. Obergefell v. Hodges (same-sex marriage) is fully protected after entrenched through legislation of Respects for Marriage Act 2022; Roe v. Wade was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson 2022 (not entrenched rights) * THEREFORE: SCOTUS can only make temporal, unentrenched rulings and protection of rights from SCOTUS is fragile -> not exposing the weakness of Congress * SCOTUS strong checks and balances on executive actions * SCOTUS can strike down executive orders that violate human rights * e.g. Boumediene v. Bush (2008) - People have habeas corpus (to protect individuals from unlawful detention and imprisonment) under the Suspension Clause to refuse to be detained in Guantanamo Bay detention camps; Trump’s travel ban (Executive Order 13769) was blocked by Washington v. Trump (2017) with the ruling of abrogation of equality protection under the law * THEREFORE: executive orders are overseen by the SCOTUS, meaning that the legislative and policy-making processes are controlled by the judges who decide their acquiescence on different issues they pay attention to. 4.4 The protection of civil liberties and rights in the US today. * Rights protected by the Constitution, by the Bill of Rights, by subsequent constitutional amendments and by rulings of the Supreme Court. * not protected by federal statutory law. * Free Speech (1st Amendment) * Texas v. Johnson (1989) in which the SCOTUS ruled that burning the Flag of the United States was protected speech under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as doing so counts as symbolic speech and political speech. * Snyder v. Phelps (2011) in which the SCOTUS ruled that speech made in a public place on a matter of public concern cannot be the basis of liability for a tort of emotional distress, even if the speech is viewed as offensive or outrageous. (7 members of The Westboro Church picketed the funeral of U.S. Marine Matthew Snyder, who was killed in a non-combat accident during the Iraq War. On public land about 1,000 feet from where the funeral was being held, protesters displayed placards that read "Thank God for Dead Soldiers", "God Hates Fags", and "You're Going to Hell", among others.) * Right to Bear Arms (2nd Amendment) * District of Columbia (D.C.) v. Heller (2008) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defence or whether the right was only intended for state militias, and D.C. banning gun control violated this guarantee. * Judicial review - Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws and statutes they find to violate the Constitution of the United States.0 * Miranda warning/rights - Miranda v. Arizona (1966) in which the SCOTUS ruled that law enforcement in the United States must warn a person of their constitutional rights before interrogating them, or else the person's statements cannot be used as evidence at their trial. This ensures the arrestee has the right to silence. * LGBTQ+ and women rights * Oregon v. Rideout (1973) was the first trial challenged marital rape since the state revised its rape law in 1977 to eliminate the marital rape immunity. Although Rideout was acquitted, this had eventually led to criminialisation of marital rape across the federal states in 1993. * Lawrence v. Texas (2003) in which the SCOTUS ruled that sanctions including any form of criminal punishment to all forms of private, consensual non-procreative adult sexual activities between two individuals (commonly referred to as sodomy laws which usually apply to homosexual persons) are unconstitutional, based on the ‘right to privacy’. * Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. * Roe v. Wade (1973) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the Constitution of the United States generally protected a right to have an abortion. However, this is overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) which returned to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion. 4.5 Race and rights in contemporary US politics. * The methods, influence and effectiveness of racial rights campaigns and the impact on current domestic policy: * voting rights, affirmative action and representation. * Racial rights * Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) in which the SCOTUS ruled that the US Constitution did not extend American Citizenship to people of Black African Descent, and therefore they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens. In 1865, the Court's ruling in Dred Scott was superseded by the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which abolished slavery, and the Fourteenth Amendment, whose first section guaranteed citizenship for "all persons born or naturalised in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof". * Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) which previously supported racial segregation is overturned by Brown v. Board of Education (1954) in which the SCOTUS ruled that racial segregation in public schools are prohibited. * Loving v. Virginia (1967) in which the SCOTUS ruled that laws banning interracial marriage violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. * Section 4(b) and 5 of Voting Rights Act (1965) are ruled unenforceable by the SCOTUS rulings Shelby County v. Holder (2013) that requiring certain states and local governments to obtain federal preclearance based on their history of racial discrimination in voting before implementing any changes to their voting laws or practices, is unconstitutional. This makes it easier for state officials to engage in vote suppression. * Fisher v. University of Texas (2013) in which the SCOTUS ruled that Affirmative Actions in universities admission should be strictly scrutinised. However, this case is overturned by Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (2023) that race-conscious admissions are unconstitutional. * Allen v. Milligan (2023) in which the SCOTUS ruled that Alabama’s districts likely violated the Voting Rights Act (1965), maintained an injunction that required Alabama to create an additional majority-minority district. However, a similar situation in a different state has an opposite ruling made by the SCOTUS. Alexander v. South Carolina NAACP (2024) in which the SCOTUS ruled that there is no clear evidence of racial and partisan gerrymandering which had the impact of moving African-American voters out of the district. 4.6 Interpretations and debates of the US Supreme Court and civil rights. * The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court. * Living Constitution ideology as against originalism. * How effectively civil and constitutional rights have been upheld by the Supreme Court and the effectiveness of this protection. * The extent of their powers and the effectiveness of checks and balances. * The successes and failures of measures to promote equality, including affirmative action and immigration reform. The Supreme Court justices position is not a political position: * Legal position therefore should be more impartial * e.g. Amy Coney Barrett - swing to pro-abortion in Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) * Fundamental role is to protect the rights of all Americans even as different parties take power * Serve for life until they choose to retire / impeach from office which promotes long term stability compared to the President who has a political role who can only serve for up to 2 terms in office. * Judges are expected to interpret and apply the law impartially regardless of their personal or political views - judges once on the bench prioritise legal principles over political ideology when making a decision - this commitment to the rule of law is seen as a counterbalance to the political nature of the appointment process. * Bipartisan support can be seen as an indication that the nominee is not solely a political choice as there is some agreement over party lines. * Senate has right wing and left wing members so they must nominate a candidate that is likely to be accepted - in the middle * Judges are chosen on the basis of education, however do not need to qualify if they are not born in the USA, however to become the President of the USA, must be citizen-born. The Supreme Court justices position is a political position: * A president nominates someone who is likely to to reflect their ideology * example: Trump’s ion of Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017 who had conservative principles * Although it is not considered a political position, many justices remain close to the President, which could reflect their turnout of bills and legal cases. * example: Abe Fortas had a direct phone line to the president of the United States (L.B Johnson) and even wrote some of his speeches. * Justices also accepted outside income and affiliated with third-party interest groups. * LBJ went so far as to order a direct White House line installed in Fortas’ home and office, enabling the president to reach him at all times of the day * As associate justice, Fortas violated a bright red line when he knowingly shared important information with the president concerning court deliberations and weighed in on matters of policy and constitutional law. In one case, he advised the administration on a matter involving the Interstate Commerce Commission’s approval of a railroad merger and then participated in a court case on the very same matter. * Bush v. Gore (2000) had an influential impact on determining who would win and become the POTUS (George W Bush) * The nomination process becomes a focal point in the national debates with interest groups, media and public - politically motivated * Justice Kavanaugh 2018 faces intense scrutiny/highly publicised confirmation process due to allegations of sexual misconduct * Role of the media for portraying Supreme Court justices - nominated by Bush, accused Clarence Thomas of sexually harassing a lady - tarnished his reputation. * Media were supposed to highlight his good points, however had controversial ideologies - scrutinised by abortion rights activists and voted to overturn Roe vs Wade. US Democracy and Participation 5.1 Electoral systems in the USA 5.1.1 Presidential elections and their significance * The main processes to elect a US president, including the constitutional requirements, the invisible primary, primaries and caucuses, the role of National Party Conventions and the electoral college, and the resulting party system. * The importance of incumbency on a president seeking a second term. Vice President Choosing a vice president should consider if the election partner or the future partner in the office should be; * A balanced ticket - where a political candidate chooses a running mate, usually from the same party, with the goal of bringing more widespread appeal to the campaign. * Party Unity - to pick politician with contrasting view on some topics (similar to big beasts to maintain party unity) * Potential in government National Party Conventions Choosing presidential candidate and the vice president, deciding party platform and presenting to delegates in Conventions. Significance of the role: Yes - * Maintain party unity * Enthusing ordinary voters to make decisions * Enthusing party faithful * Celebrates the glorious past * Chance to identify rising stars in the parties No - * Few significant decisions made * Reduced TV coverage * Unimportant impression of a pre-planned process * Promoting balloons (compromises) rather than policies Electoral College (538 electoral college electors, 270 to win) Electoral College votes = state representation in Congress (No. of Senators (2) + No. of Representatives (1-53)) **Except for Nebraska and Maine which use a District system, the winner of the popular vote gets all the electoral college votes (winner takes all) and the result will be announced by the vice president in Congress in January. Fairness of Electoral College * Over-representation of small states: Maine has a higher population than Wyoming (1.4 million vs 500K) yet they only have 1 vote difference in numbers of electoral college votes * No room for 3rd parties: it is only bonus votes when the majority parties win the election in the FPTP system * System campaigns only focus on small number of key states * Allow potentials for minority-vote winners: 2000: George W Bush won the election without winning the popular votes (47.9% vs 48.4%) but only won the electoral college votes (271 vs 266) after the case of Bush v. Gore (2000) which decided that the electoral college votes of Florida belong to Bush 2016: Trump won the election with only winning the electoral college votes (304 vs 227) and lost in popular votes (46.1% vs 48.2%) Presidential Incumbency - the holding of an office Evaluate the view that presidential incumbency significantly affects electoral success in presidential elections. Yes: * The power of the office * No primary is needed, so no significant internal challenges in the party * Commander-in-chief to exert formal power on foreign policies, e.g. Withdrawal of military from Afghanistan in 2021 * Chief Diplomat to attend summits and/or arrange foreign trips and develop foreign relationships with other countries and open discussion on new trading opportunities between foreign countries, to allow conversation in international conflicts and develop coalitions with other countries to offer supports * Bully pulpit - increase in media coverage to show efforts made (similar to pork barrel politics) * State of the Union - informal power in persuasion on setting legislative agenda No: * The power of the office * Presidents can be blamed for current issues, e.g, Trump’s action on tackling COVID in 2020 * Record to attack/defend, e.g. Former president Bill Clinton was also attacked over issues like Benghazi. Trump as a businessman who did not have experience in the Congress can give electorates the sense of an alternative choice from the experienced politicians, whereas Hillary Clinton had a long record of public service. Thus, Trump’s populist campaign style brought ‘freshness’ in 2016 US politics. * Record of public services can level up the debates (valence and salient issues) * Possibly less money can be raised due to the existing influence on media and campaign finance may decrease 5.1.2 Campaign finance * The role of campaign finance and the current legislation on campaign finance, including McCain-Feingold reforms 2002 and Citizens United vs FEC 2010. * SCOTUS overturned the McCain-Feingold Act (BICRA 2002) by Citizens United v. FEC (2010). SO companies can donate to preferred presidential candidates like individuals (through super PACs and 501(c)4) -> judicial review is unconstitutional as it is not a power mentioned in the Constitution * Super PACs collect unlimited donations to support candidates or attack rivals with adverts, without directly fund the candidates (but they can fund it covertly anyways) * PACs raise and spend money (including soft money) for the express purpose of electing, defeating, specific candidates they supported/opposed, e.g. business, labour groups, ideological groups, single issue groups. A PAC raises money and can directly donate to a candidate but reports to disclose money are required. The system of electing the presidential candidates is fundamentally flawed. * Undemocratic primaries and caucuses Primaries and caucuses are not held on the same day. e.g. New Hampshire: 5th Mar 2024; South Dakota: 4th June 2024. But all the rivals of Trump and Biden had suspended their campaigns already, e.g. Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley -> Voters’ choices are narrowed or wasted because of the time sequence of primaries and caucuses (democratic deficit) * Widen participation Primaries and caucuses engage people to participate in elections to enhance democracy e.g. Open primaries in South Carolina, Texas, and Alabama - any voters in the state can vote, Semi-closed primaries in New Hampshire, North Carolina, etc. - registered supporters and independents Closed primaries in Louisiana, Florida, New York; Caucuses in Iowa, Nevada, Colorado (public meetings in public halls) Different forms of primaries and caucuses encourage people to focus on political issues and have a say on deciding presidential candidates * Electoral college * Tyranny of minority Electoral college contains 538 votes based on population of states -> small states like Wyoming = 586K population; larger states like D.C. = 680K population; both have 3 electoral votes THEREFORE: political power of states is disproportional * Increasing significance of electoral votes over popular votes e.g. Hillary Clinton had won popular votes (48%>46%) but Donald Trump won the election with more electoral votes (304>227) - some electoral votes in some states do not need to conform to the majority of popular votes THEREFORE: Presidential candidates win elections without legitimate electoral mandates from voters * If it works, do not change it - Electoral college exists and works for centuries to achieve a thriving US democracy by: * Protecting minority voices - ensure Populus power of smaller parties would not be limited by their population comparing to other states * Ensure equity of states to have equal power to elect a president * Oversight on campaign funding * SCOTUS overturned the McCain-Feingold Act (BICRA 2002) by Citizens United v. FEC (2010). SO companies can donate to preferred presidential candidates like individuals (through super PACs and 501(c)4) -> judicial review is unconstitutional as it is not a power mentioned in the Constitution * Super PACs and PACs use donations to support candidates or attack rivals with adverts 5.2 The key ideas and principles of the Democratic and Republican Parties. 5.2.1 The distribution of power and changing significance of the parties: Democrats * progressive attitude on social and moral issues, including crime * greater governmental intervention in the national economy * government provision of social welfare. Republicans * conservative attitude on social and moral issues * more restricted governmental intervention in the national economy while protecting American trade and jobs * acceptance of social welfare but a preference for personal responsibility. The democrats in political parties * Divides can be seen as further widening on Israel/Gaza war as Biden declares the ICC charges against Netanyahu as it was "outrageous" to apply for arrest warrants. There was "no equivalence - none - between Israel and Hamas". (BBC- 21st May 2024) * Democrats support greater protection of individual liberty and prevention of discrimination. Also, some of them including the progressive and moderate democrats are more cooperative with unions and focus on labour rights protections. * Modern Democrats support stronger rights for racial minorities and the LGBTQ+ community. * Greater intervention in the national economy, e.g. Infrastructure Act 2022 that allows trillions of dollars funding federal transportation, clean water, electric grids, and broadband access. This acts as a way of providing social justice (similar to social liberals) * Greater protection for lower socio-economic groups who have little control over the economic situation they find themselves in and long favoured government provision of social welfare including higher levels of benefits and funding or social programmers to help those who are the less well off and resolve social problems * Division can be seen on climate policies and economic policies where the conservative Democrats like Sen. Joe Manchin voted against the Build Back Better Act 2021 on climate change and social policy with $1.75 trillion spending. * Some Democrats including the former President Bill Clinton support capital punishment whereas the progressive Democrats mostly oppose it. * The Republicans in political parties * Republicans have moved away from the Eisenhower ideology since the 1980s when Ronald Reagan entered the White House. Reagan moved away from the New Deal, New Look (centrist between liberals and conservatives), and established the identity of the Republican Party as a fiscally and socially conservative party, committed to small government and low taxation (limited government), and the advancement of the agenda of the Christian Right. * When Trump comes to power, the Republican Party is further divided distinctly into ‘Anti-Trump’ and ‘Pro-Trump’ (freedom caucus) positions, where Trump’s ideas has detached from the Republican approach and lean to far-right, nativist, ultra-nationalist, right-populist, extreme economic liberal and extreme socially conservative positions. * The NRA gave 54 million in 2016 to electoral campaigns, including $30 million to the Trump campaign. 5.2.2 The current conflicts and tendencies and the changing power and influence that exist within the parties. * Democrats: liberals, moderates and conservatives. * Progressive (liberals): represent the more radical, left wing elements of the party. They use the federal, national government to achieve social justice by providing welfare, health and education to the disadvantaged, increase taxes on the wealthy, and support more government intervention in the economy and less military intervention abroad. e.g. pro-Affordable care, pro-Infrastructure Act 2022 Individuals: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (member of The Squad, Rep. from New York), Bernie Sanders (independent, senator from Vermont) * Moderate (similar to one-nation tories): centrists who identify with compromise, most typically in areas e.g. economy and welfare, where they take a middle ground approach (e.g. accepting limits of abortion, restrictions on civil liberties like anti-terror laws (Patriot Act), death penalty). They are the dominant force in the Democrat Party at the moment. Individuals: Kamala Harris, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton (increase army in Afghanistan, pro-death penalty), Barack Obama, Hakeem Jeffries, Joe Biden (before presidency) * Conservative (Blue Dogs): socially conservative on moral issues e.g. religion, gun control, while disagreeing with Republican conservative views on trade and tax (e.g. anti-affordable care, anti-abortion, anti-infrastructure act, anti-voting rights). There are only 10 congressional members left in the Blue-dog coalition now so they can be seen as a dying breed in the Democrats. Individuals: Joe Manchin (senator from West Virginia, opposed Obama's energy policies including reductions and restrictions on coal mining, because his family owns a waste coal brokerage company), Mary Peltola (Rep. from Alaska), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA-03) * Republicans: freedom caucus, moderates, social conservatives (religious right) and fiscal conservatives. * Freedom caucus (including Never Kevins): Tea Party movement, the conservative populist social and political movement that emerged in 2009, generally opposes excessive taxation and government intervention in the private sector while supporting stronger immigration controls. e.g. Anti-affordable care, Pro-Border Bill (not in Biden’s term), Pro-Travel Ban, Pro-Border wall, Pro-MAGA, Anti-abortion, Anti-gay rights, Anti-federal interference, Pro-deportation (repeal of DACA and DAPA) Individuals: Donald Trump (not in the caucus but shares similar ideology), Majorie Taylor-Greene (removed from Freedom Caucus in 2023, Rep. from Georgia), Jim Jordan (Rep. from Ohio), Bob Good (incumbent chair of the caucus, Rep. from Virginia, Trump thinks that he betrayed him because he endorsed DeSantis before endorsing him, AP news, 2024) * Moderates (RINO - Republican In Name Only, Never Trump): typically do not share the zeal of the Christian Right for its goals, and are more pragmatic about the role of the state. They emphasise personal responsibility and personal freedom from government control, criticise government’s role as an infringement on personal freedoms and in the national economy, and promote more traditional values. Individuals: John McCain (dead, ex senator from Arizona), Susan Collins (senator from Maine), Brian Fitzpatrick (Rep. from Pennsylvania), Liz Cheney (ex Rep. from Wyoming), Bill Cassidy (Senator from Louisiana) * Social Conservatives: The religious right, ultra-conservative religious response which promotes family values, opposes abortion, LGBTQ+ rights, civil partnership, illegal immigration, and discrimination laws. Individuals: Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell (opposes the Ukraine bid, Infrastructure Act, Chips Act, Respect for Marriage Act), Mike Pence (ex-vice president but some evangelicals are now more leaning to MAGA) * Fiscal conservatives: social and economic liberal conservatives. They support smaller government and laissez-faire policies. Mostly, they support the abolition of estate (inheritance) tax, tax reduction, and cuts in federal expenditure, e.g. Bush’s term: ‘No Child Left Behind’ legislation, Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill, McCain-Feingold Act (2002), prescription drug benefit to Medicare. Individuals: Susan Collins (pro-abortion), Liz Cheney (neo-conservative), Lisa Murkowski (Senator from Alaska), Pat Toomey (neo-conservative, ex-senator from Pennsylvania) 5.2.3 Coalition of supporters for each party. * Voters: how the following factors are likely to influence voting patterns and why, in relation to one recent presidential election campaign (since 2000) – race, religion, gender and education. * All presidents since 1853 are from either Democrats or Republicans * 98.1% of the Presidential election votes go to two major parties in 2020 * 431 House members are Republicans or Democrats (4 DFL members from Minnesota, leaning to Democrats) in 2024 * No independent state legislatures in 2020 * No independent governors in 2020 * Third-party candidates got around 4.9% of the popular vote (Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson = >3% of the popular vote; Green party’s candidate Jill Stein = 1%) * In 2016, the election was close Trump won in Michigan by around 10.7K votes, while nearly 243K votes went to third-party candidates (Trump cannot win the electoral votes without these states, including Winscoin, Arizona, North Carolina, Florida and Michigan) * White Blue-collar electorates (working class) tended to vote for Trump in 2016 (67 Trump: 28 Clinton) * In 2020, Trump earned strong Latino support among Cuban and South American communities in Miami-Dade County and earned 46% of the overall Latino vote in Florida, interpreted as the Latino’s response to the anti-socialist message delivered by the Trump campaign. * White, heterosexual, married men, protestant, Mormons, white evangelical, catholic, over 40 years old, no college degree, veterans, family income over $50,000, midwest, and south voters tend to vote for Republicans Two Party Dominance USA remains a two-party dominant system. * No tradition of third parties or independents having a sustained presence in Congress, or even state legislatures. → Two nominally independent senators in 2021 ( Bernie Sanders and Angus King ) caucus with the democrats, and hence don’t face any serious electoral opposition from the democrats. → Justin Amash, the only non democrat or republican in the House in 2020, initially was elected as a republican in 2018. Left the party in 2019 to become an independent, then joined the Libertarians in April 2020- choosing not to run for re-election in Nov 2020. * No third party or independent candidate has directly won any electoral college votes since George Wallace in 1968. → In 2020, the two-party share of the popular vote was 98%- so, no electoral votes were given to third parties or independents. * Third parties are pretty young. Richard Hofstadter: ‘ The role of third parties is to sting like a bee, then die. ‘ Third parties are largely reactionary. → American Independent Party essentially a political vehicle for segregationist ex-Democrat Alabama governor George Wallace. When he returned to the democrats, AIP basically died. * Even the most high profile independents have got their rise from major parties. E.g Bernie with the democrats, or Michael Bloomberg previously being elected for NY’s mayor as a republican. Significance of Third Parties and Independents They are significant They are not significant In a close election, third parties and independents can influence the final outcome. 2000 → Victory between Bush and Gore for president came down to winning Florida. Green Party’s Ralph Nader won Florida instead. If he hadn’t, it's likely that Gore would have won instead of Bush In most presidential elections, third party or independent candidates fail to make any impact on the final outcome. Last significant independent contender was Ross Perot in 1992, who won 19% of the popular vote. When third parties or independents have attractive policies, they’re often adopted by one of the larger parties. Green New Deal found favour with many progressive democrats in the 2018 and 2020 elections. Though, it in turn took a lot of attention away from the Green Party- and back to the democrats, who actually had the means to carry out these policies. FPTP suppresses third parties → Need for tactical voting asserts third parties and independents as wasted votes Main parties as coalitions. Two major parties tend to swallow up candidates who would usually be independents or belong to third parties, hence carrying these ideas to the forefront. Factionalism enhances this → could be argued that the major parties are simply composed of like 50 third parties, etc. Third parties and independents often lack a high profile social media presence and have limited resources, they therefore rarely are able to take part in televised debates which only want to feature those who actually have a chance at the presidency. Often seen as extremist, irrelevant, or purely reactionary and performative. Oftentimes, they simply don’t have the resources or funding to hold a campaign to the size of the two major parties. Due to them being suppressed by voting system, corporations etc would rather invest heavily in a party that is far more likely to get in and bring them profits Current independents in Senate; Angus King 2013-present. Elected as independent, caucuses with democrats to avoid their opposition Bernie Sanders 2007-present. Used to be a democrat while running for president. Elected as an independent, though caucuses with democrats. Won’t typically find independent representatives → senators usually more high profile as is ( only 2 per state, you want them to be influential ). For an independent to actually get in, you need to be quite well known, qualified, influential, and supported. Representatives usually don’t have all that, otherwise they’d just run for senator essentially. Of course there are exceptions, but this is the general picture 5.3 Interest groups in the USA - their significance, resources, tactics and debates about their impact on democracy. * The influence, methods and power of at least one single interest group, professional group or policy group. * Interest group is an organised body whose members hold similar beliefs and actively pursue ways to influence government but are not seeking success in elections. * Policy groups - to influence a whole area of policy, e.g. League of Conservative Voters (LCV), American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) * Professional groups - to represent economic interests, e.g. American Medical Association (AMA), American Federation of Labour and Congress of Industrial Relations (AFL-CIO) * Single-interest groups - to advocate policy surrounding a limited, specific issue, e.g. National Rifle Association (NRA), National Farmers Union (NFU), Teamsters (truck drivers), National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Black Lives Matter (BLM), Friends of the Earth, Faith2Action, Americans United for Life * Think tanks - a research institute (NGO) that performs research and advocacy concerning topics, e.g. Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), The Heritage Foundation, American Enterprise Institute (AEI) * Pluralist interest groups - the pressure groups represent widely different interests and demonstrate the distribution of political powers among groups -> widen participation * Elitist interest groups - the pressure groups represent interests of a small group who gain power * Through wealth, family status, or intellectual superiority -> increase participation on decision-making * Total federal lobbying revenue in 2023 amounted to $5.6 billion (Open Secrets, 2024), which includes only that income which must be disclosed under federal law. * Clients spend money on grassroots lobbying, public relations, consulting, strategic advice and many other forms of lobbying that make up the Washington lobbying sector. (criticism is the ‘insider’ relationship of groups with policymakers) * Extremists including anti-capitalist or white supremacist groups use direct actions, e.g. protests, sit-ins, violence, etc. to publicise their aims. * A large membership is the revolving door for interest groups to exert pluralist (or populist…?) influence on decision making * Interest groups may cause tyranny of the minority like the significance on judiciary, the interests of interest groups (e.g. Pro-life pressure groups) like the National Right to Life Committee supports the anti-abortion decisions, which can affect the health rights of American women who make up 49.6% of the US population * The interference of interest groups can damage representative democracy because the scorecards not only evaluate lawmakers’ performance and hold them accountable, they also create a sense of scepticism on the elected lawmakers (destroy the trustee model) while not all the leaders of the interest groups are elected. * Iron triangle = the relationship that develops between congressional committees, the federal bureaucracy (e.g. EXOP), and interest groups during the policy creation process * Significance on elections * After gaining the right to donate from Citizens United v. FEC (2010), interest groups fund Super PACs with hidden money for election finance, e.g. Make America Great Again Inc., and advertise to support candidates or attack political rivals * They have their own scorecards on congresspersons to scrutinise how ‘well’ a congressperson is engaged to work for particular interests on public policies that align with the interest groups, e.g. NAACP Civil Rights Legislative scorecard on abolishing filibuster: F = failed (e.g. Sen. Lisa Murkowski in Alaska), A = Pass (e.g. Sen. Bernie Sanders in Vermont), I = incompleted (e.g. Sen. Joe Manchin in West Virginia) * Significance on the Legislature * Pro-LGBTQ+ interest groups exert support and influence over the legislation of same-sex marriage (and interracial marriage) by lobbying congresspeople like Sen. Susan Collins to reintroduce the Respect for Marriage Bill 2022, according to the overturn of Roe v. Wade (1973) by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) and the statement made by SCOTUS judge Clarence Thomas about revising the verdict of Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). * Senator Mitt Romney (Republican) had received over $13.6 million in donations from the NRA over his career; avid supporter of the 2nd Amendment (right to bear arms) * In 2019, the NRA spent $3.22 million on the political campaigns for senators who opposed gun safety legislation. * In 2020, the NRA spent $2.20 million. * In the first quarter of 2022, NRA spent over $600K on lobbying and it is only expected to increase in the second half of this year amid the 2022 midterm elections as well as renewed demands for gun reform by liberals * Insider interest groups work with congresspersons in the iron triangle * NRA publishes an A-F rating of lawmakers that grades elected officials on their voting records with respect to the 2nd amendment (scorecards) * Significance on the Executive * In April 2021, Biden issued an “Executive Order on Increasing the Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors”; increased to at least $15.00 an hour * Maintain strong ties with relevant executive departments on regulatory work of the federal government, e.g. Teamsters president Sean O’brian asked to speak to both Democrats and Republicans at their national conventions while yet to decide which party they are going to endorse * Teamsters’ PAC donated $45,000 to the Republican National Committee but they also donated some money to the Democrats * Trump signed an executive order to limit the budget and regulatory scope of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accompanied by the pro-coals interest groups like National Mining Association. * In 2019 Pro-life group the National Right to Life endorsed Donald Trump for re-election * In 2020 the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence endorsed Joe Biden * Significance on the Judiciary * Amicus curiae (friend of the court) - invited to stand in the court to give information and change the views of judiciary * NRA in 2008 played a significant role in the landmark case of D.C. v. Heller on the Washington D.C. handguns ban * In 2017 ACLU was back at the SCOTUS and fought in Gloucester County School Board v. G. G which was concerning transgender rights and gender discrimination * However, the ACLU amicus brief failed to persuade the judiciary to separate church and state in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District (2 022). Brennan Center for Justice in 2010 also failed to preserve the limits on corporate spending in elections after the amicus brief in Citizens United v. FEC (2010) * Legalised bribery?: In 2023 Justice Clarence Thomas was exposed by ProPublica that he accepted luxury vacations and gifts for over 20 years from billionaire donor Harlan Crow who serves the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) since 1996, which cost at least $4 million and only 27 gifts were disclosed * Significance on the State and Local Access Points * Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) started from the state court with the influence of Pro-life interest groups lobbying through amicus curiae, e.g. The National Right to Life Committee and the Center of Religious Expressions. * Don’t Say Gay Act 2022 is legislated as a Florida state law which states that homosexuality is not mentioned and discussed in public schools. This can be seen as the effort of lobbying state legislators by religious interest groups and anti-LGBTQ+ interest groups. 5.4 Interpretations and debates of US democracy and participation, including: * advantages and disadvantages of the electoral process and the Electoral College and the debate around reform * the role of campaign finance and difficulty in achieving effective reform * the role of incumbency in elections * Incumbency is a significant factor to determine an electoral success of congressional candidates who seek re-election. From OpenSecret, 94.5% of the Representatives are re-elected and 100% of the Senators are re-elected. This is due to the name recognition from the pork barrel politics while the congresspersons hold meetings in town halls to ‘bring back the bacon’ to the constituencies and demonstrate their effort of bringing benefits to the corresponding constituencies, which is also a form of accountability. Besides, the incumbents face less challenges even when the congressional districts are gerrymandered, and the relationship and networks between media can converse into electoral support. Hakeem Jeffries has the most fundrasion raised with $14 million while running for New York District 08. * the ways in which interest groups can influence the three branches of government and policy creation, including the role of PACs and Super PACs and their impact on democracy. ________________ Comparative approaches 6.1 Theoretical approaches Understanding of the three approaches and the different ways in which they explain similarities and differences between the government and politics of different countries. Rational * This approach focuses on individuals within a political system. * A rational approach suggests that such individuals will act rationally, choosing to act in a particular way as it will give them a beneficial outcome. Cultural * This approach focuses on groups within a political system – this could be voters, parties, pressure groups and so on. * A cultural approach suggests that the shared ideas, beliefs and values of these groups often determine the actions of individuals within them. Structural * This approach focuses on the institutions in a political system and the processes within them. * A structural approach suggests that political outcomes are largely determined by the formal processes laid out within a political system. Comparative theories 6.2 Main ideas of liberalism * Human Nature: Locke: human beings are inherently rational, and capable of making decisions based on logic, rather than being driven by impulses. * Nature of States: if states are run by rational people, then the nation state will be inherently rational, as well as able to recognise the value of cooperating with others in order to achieve collective goals, and find solutions to global issues. * Global Actors: liberals recognise the nation-state as an important actor in global relations, but not the only important actor: they argue that IGOs and NGOs have an increasingly relevant role in global affairs * Society of States: Liberals imagine that states will choose to cooperate when they recognise that working together will benefit everyone. This ‘society’ would be based on norms and rules, which become international law; it would also include non-state actors, such as IGOs, that help enforce and interpret those laws. * Complex Web of Interdependence: A theory that suggests that the interests of nation-states are closely connected through interactions, such as economic trade and international treaties, which reduces the likelihood of conflict. - Keohane * The ‘Cobweb’ Model: envisions states and non-state actors being linked up with each other to form the structure of international relations. If one actor breaks, it would cause instability, but the ties between states incentivise each actor to cooperate peacefully. * Balance of Power: liberals argue that a balance of power can be achieved through soft power, as much as hard power. They argue in favour of a multipolar world order as the best means to achieve global stability, as the absence of a global hegemon would encourage states to cooperate more. * Economic Development: liberals argue that developed states have a responsibility to aid the economic development of less developed states. They view IGOs as having a key role in coordinating the efforts of the international community. * Regionalism: liberals argue that states should use their sovereignty to their own advantage, even pooling sovereignty in the pursuit of power. In which case, they support both supranational and intergovernmental organisations as a means of global cooperation, especially for economic interdependence. 6.3 liberalism * Human Nature/ Nature of States: * Liberals have a more optimistic view of human nature, and thereby states. They see them as capable of rationality and cooperation with others. * State Sovereignty: * * Liberals argue that while states are sovereign, that sovereignty is meant to be used to their best advantage, which includes pooling sovereignty to expand a state’s influence. * Centrality of States: * Liberals do see states as important, but they also recognise the importance of non-state actors, like IGOs and NGOs. * Likelihood of Conflict: * Liberals argue that conflict is avoidable through cooperation and strong economic ties between individual states. * Balance of Power: * Liberals argue that a multipolar world, where power is shared more equally between a larger number of states, would be better at reducing conflict. * Power: * Liberals favour soft or smart power, because they argue it is better for limiting the likelihood of conflict compared to hard power. 6.4 Main ideas of the anarchical society and society of states theory: Hedley Bull- ‘liberal realism’, rejects Hobbsian view of society & human nature- link to realism, pessimism or conservatism? Accepts that states desire sovereignty and that their is international anarchy, but believes that states will also realise their common interests, then form a society where they work together, this international governance will then provide order to an anarchical society Probably talk about it in terms of human nature, international cooperation & sovereignty IGOS, and economy?, maybe human rights in that there is a shared culture Rejects supranationalism- difference from liberalism? * 3 Global governance: human rights and environmental non core political ideas the constituion tony blair Evaluate the view that the constitutional reforms carried under Blair should be considered successes Factors: * Decentralization * Democratisation * Human Rights Reform Decentralisation: * HoL Act 1999: reducing the amount of hereditary peers from 1000> → 92 * HoLappointment commission 2000: P.M opportunity to choose small amount of peers WAS SUCCESSFUL : * HoL Reform the amount of hereditary peers from 1330--.669 → meant the more professionalism with and increase of peerages * HoL appointment = new vetting of appointments --. Made the HoL more democratic by decreasing the amount of hereditary peers= more expertise = more professionalism → more scrutiny of legislation by the HoC NOT SUCCESSFUL * Still 92 hereditary peers sitting as members even though it’s on a interim basis → no elected members of the chamber = X legitimacy * HoL appointment commission are still on the recommendations of the P.M → X legitimacy and critics of political patronage This shows that… * Constitutional reforms not a success * The setas of peers = being taken by people who might lack expertise Democratisation: * Electoral reform changing from FPTP to AV WAS SUCCESSFUL : * From FPTP to AV means more accurate reflections on parliament → More proportionate voting , government is based on proportional outcomes and combines representation for constituency MP and choice NOT SUCCESSFUL * Ignored the findings and stayed with the smae voting system * The scottish parliament and welsh assembly were elected using AMS whilst the Northern Ireland assembly used STV → greater willingness to change the electoral system * Human Rights Reform: * Human rights act 1998 = now to some degree are codified and now is a statute law WAS SUCCESSFUL : * Now codified → before the UK was brought to European courts 50 times + lost most of them * Laporte Case of 2006 = right to private life → article 18 and article 10 = freedom of expression demonstrated that the police had acted illegally and 120 anti - iraq protests * Article 8 : intrusive press coverage of naomi campbell → provide judiciary importance with powers that protect civil liberties through courts NOT SUCCESSFUL * Can be amended = any other legislation * Article 14= freedom of discrimination but detained suspected terrorists which goes against legislation northern ireland Evaluate the view that devolution to Northern Ireland has largely been a failure Factors: * Level of sectarian violence * Impact on democratisation * Stability of devolved regions Level of sectarian violence NOT A FAILURE * People killed in the conflict → 3,500 ppl killed in the conflict = 52% civilians , 32% british security forces, 16% members of paramilitary groups CONTRAST 158 deaths after the Good friday agreement FAILURE → 15 aug 1998 (4 months after the good friday agreement ) the IRA set off a car bomb in Omagh = k. 29 people → unionist paramilitaries = responsible for 71 deaths 1998 - 2018 → hotel bombing in the uk e.g brighton hotel that held conservative meeting = 5 people killed in the ira in 1984 Impact of democratisation NOT FAILURE → result of the good friday agreement = 71% of northern ireland voted in favour of democratisation = 81% of electorate → assembly uses STV = proportional representation → maj. Participation in assembly elections = 64% (2022) FAILURE * Human rights → NI executive had not legalised same sex marriage → women had limited access to abortion = only changed in 2019 ( executive formation act ) Stability of developed institutions NOT FAILURE * Numerous successful elections since devolution → 1998-2002, 2007-2017, 2020 to the present FAILURE * 2002-2007 NI assembly = conflict between unionists and republicans →Sus. again in 2016 = scandal with renewable energy scheme (renewable heat incentive scheme) first min. Arlene forster accused of impropriety → enquiry but refused to let ppl dem investigate → deputy first minister martin mcguinness to resign in protest = collapse of govt. cameron reforms * To what extent were cameron reforms successful Factors : * Power of recall * Electoral reform * devolution Intro: * Cameron = conservative p.m that dominated parliament with lib dems 2010-15 * Lost maj after brexit ref 2016 * Power of recall SUCCESSFUL Made MPs more accountable to their constituents → votes had no power to remove MPs inv. In scandals * Recall of MPs act 2011 passes = constituents demanding a by-election if mp given a prison sentence pr sus. From HoC → must be signed by 10% of constituency → Mike Amesbury (labour MP for Runcorn and Helsby) stepped down after assaulting one of his constituents oct 2024 = 10 weeks in prison NOT SUCCESSFUL * Legislation = limited as it only allows for recall petitions to be called for few factors → sarah wollaston (2019) = conservative mp for totnes = changed party to lib dems after brexit disagreements = constituents angry no longer represented the mandate she was elected on Electoral reform SUCCESSFUL P.M deciding the date of the next general election = * fixed term parliament act 2011 ( fixed date every 5 years) election can be held if ⅔ mps want a election of govt lost confidence vote → provided greater stability = system more democratic = prevented P.M from controlling G.E * 2011 referendum on changing the voting system → lib dems wanting a more proportional voting system = AV * 42% turnout= 68% keeping FPTP 32% = wanting a AV system NOT SUCCESSFUL * 2017 theresa may = called a snap election → HoC voting 522-13 in favour → may losing maj= hung parliament and confidence ans supply with the DUP → P.M can still decide election if they have maj and parliaments backing → fixed parliament act 2011 = not caused meaningful change = opposition not wanting to vot against a proposal = make them weak → fixed term parliament act 2011= repealed in 2022 = dissolution and calling of parliament * Voting system = ended keeping FPTP = conservatives historically won under FPTP Devolution SUCCESSFUL * Referendum for wales = granting more powers to welsh assembly → (wales act 2014)= direct law making powers in 20 policy areas like energy , transport etc * Scotland act 2012 = more powers to scotland assembly → Right to borrow up to £5 billion + vary income tax + control landfill tax and stamp duty → scots 2014 referendum = 55% no independence = D.C = more devolved powers * EVEL = eng votes 4 eng laws = fixing west lothian question (scottish welsh and irish mps voting on eng laws ) → used for the first time in jan 2016 = housing bill w/ scots MPs * Oct 2015 = chancellor george osborne local auth = keeping revenue form business rates (local taxes paid by businesses) * Intro of police and crime commissioners = accountable for regional policing NOT SUCCESSFUL * EVEL = did not last long = banned in 21st jul 2021 = unnecessary complication * Turnout for crime and police commissioners = low → 17% of electorate voted in 2016 (durham constabulary) Overall = D.C = unsuccessful = most reforms lack longevity as they were reversed or amended + did not reverse long term tensions parliament Effectiveness of the house of lords * Undemocratically appointed upper chamber = debate scrutinise the work of HoC Factors : * Social representation * Impact of work * Appointments process Social representation: FOR: * Proportion of female peers = steadily rising → 21% of peers were women 2015 = 24% 2022=29% * Increase in ethnic minority = 3.4% increase 2011-2019 → lord woolley of woodford = black man who grew up in a council estate w/ adopted family → Lord Alli - muslim and openly gay AGAINST * 2021 = 94% of peers = white 72% = male 70%= priv. Educated 85% = married 88 peers were either called john or david =10% of the total mem. * Underrepresentation of women and minority = limits effective scrutiny Appointment process: FOR: * Life peers appointed on expertise → baroness chakrabarti = barrister and former director of liberty (pressure group) 2003-2016 → embryologist (lord winston) pioneered IVF = effective in sci +tech select committee AGAINST: * Appointments = lacking transparency → evgeny lebedev = subject to criticism * 27 of the largest donors to the conservatives = made life peers 2010-2022 donating a total of £54 million between them Impact of Work: FOR: * HoL can delay legislation →HoL voted against the sexual amendments act 2000 = proposed lowering age of consenet for gay sex 18-16 * Delay for the war crimes act 1991 = govt. Allowed to prosecute war criminals even if crimes committed outside the uk AGAINST: * HoL known to reject controversial bills → counter terrorism bill 2008 = defeated by 191 votes in the HoL → opposing provisions allowing terror suspects to be detained for 42 days without charge → HoL rejected the brexit legislation (2017-2019) because it violated certain constitutional and human rights but still passed anyway with the uk leaving brexit officially in 2020 --. HoL limited by the 1911+49 parliament acts HoL Effectiveness of the house of lords * Undemocratically appointed upper chamber = debate scrutinise the work of HoC Factors : * Social representation * Impact of work * Appointments process Social representation: FOR: * Proportion of female peers = steadily rising → 21% of peers were women 2015 = 24% 2022=29% * Increase in ethnic minority = 3.4% increase 2011-2019 → lord woolley of woodford = black man who grew up in a council estate w/ adopted family → Lord Alli - muslim and openly gay AGAINST * 2021 = 94% of peers = white 72% = male 70%= priv. Educated 85% = married 88 peers were either called john or david =10% of the total mem. * Underrepresentation of women and minority = limits effective scrutiny Appointment process: FOR: * Life peers appointed on expertise → baroness chakrabarti = barrister and former director of liberty (pressure group) 2003-2016 → embryologist (lord winston) pioneered IVF = effective in sci +tech select committee AGAINST: * Appointments = lacking transparency → evgeny lebedev = subject to criticism * 27 of the largest donors to the conservatives = made life peers 2010-2022 donating a total of £54 million between them Impact of Work: FOR: * HoL can delay legislation →HoL voted against the sexual amendments act 2000 = proposed lowering age of consenet for gay sex 18-16 * Delay for the war crimes act 1991 = govt. Allowed to prosecute war criminals even if crimes committed outside the uk AGAINST: * HoL known to reject controversial bills → counter terrorism bill 2008 = defeated by 191 votes in the HoL → opposing provisions allowing terror suspects to be detained for 42 days without charge → HoL rejected the brexit legislation (2017-2019) because it violated certain constitutional and human rights but still passed anyway with the uk leaving brexit officially in 2020 --. HoL limited by the 1911+49 parliament acts scrutiny Evaluate the extent to which parliament is effective in scrutinising the work of the government. Intro * Critical examination of the work produced by a individual or group to ensure maximum effectiveness * Parliament = effective in scrutinising the work of government * Questioning of ministers * Legislative scrutiny * Work of back benchers Questioning of ministers EFFECTIVE * PMQT takes place every wednesday 12-12.30 → leader of the opposition is granted 6 questions = opportunity to hold the P.M to account * Monday - thursday + PMQT = 1 hour per day set aside for oral questions for govt ministers * Emergency debates becoming more common in recent years → e.g discussing the crisis in Ukraine → govt. Was asked detailed questions * 300 written question being asked per day in HoC 2019-21 NOT EFFECTIVE * PMQT = criticised for being too theatrical = leader of opposition using the time for scoring political points vs. proper scrutiny → e.g PMQT in feb 2023 = for conservative MPs = relating to levelling up policy * Govt ministers not attending question time → suella braverman = only 2 spoken contributions in HoC in jan 2023 = shadow home secretary yvette cooper criticised her for Legislative scrutiny EFFECTIVE * HoL = spend a great deal of time scrutinise proposed legislation → agriculture act 2020 considered 32 hours by HoC but 96 hours by HoL * Peers in HoL have great deal of expertise →Baroness chakrabarti = was director of liberty( advocacy group) 2003-2016 for civil cases and human right cases → lord west = former first sea lord and intelligence = voted 725 times in HoL = improving diplomatic and military matters NOT EFFECTIVE * Avg maj. Since 1945 = 57.4 seats → govt can always nearly always push through a legislative programme → reading from HoL can be ignored as they don't have parliamentary legitimacy Work of backbenchers EFFECTIVE * Some backbenchers are extremely proactive in using their powers to submit questions to govt ministers → munira wilson MP for twickenham = submitted 23 written questions in jan 2023 alone * Backbenchers carry out detailed scrutiny through select committees → Jan 2023 300 MPs taken on additional parliamentary responsibility with 1 /36 select committees = 100 MPs had gone a step further and were members of multiple panels NOT EFFECTIVE * Backbenchers have limited power to affect change when there scrutiny → 2015 and 2022 = 16% of successful legislation started as a private members bill * Back benchers in the HoC are often not experts = they are generalists → conservative backbencher = Huw Merriman’s previous ten questions = all different topics , tourism to knife crime = not effective knowledge to scrutinise executive Evaluate the view that the supreme court operates with sufficient judicial independence Factors: * transparency * Judicial independence * Social representation transparency For: * Supreme court posts live streams of it's hearings and provides video summaries * Cases are open to public * Prior to constitutional reform act 2005 = law lords were appointed through secret soundings * 2014 interview : president of the supreme court ; “ we have been much more visible , it's very easy for a member of the public to get into the building and get to sit in court AGAINST: * 2009 poll carried by the guardian = 72% of the public were unaware of the supreme court and did not understand it's purpose * Constitutional reform act = lord chancellor to reject fruits recommendations without providing motives---> barrier to transparency people are not engaging with scrutinisg the work of govt * Appointment of justices is not public Judicial independence: For: * Supreme court is physically separated from other branches of govt. * Supreme court asserted it's independence by overruling numerous govt decisions → r.miller v. secretary of state for exiting the EU -- s.c ruled against govt. Claim they would start the process of leaving the EU * Case being heard by the s.c? = sub judice (parlaiment and govt. Cannot express opinion on the matter) → expressed opinion = contempt of court AGAINST: * Ministers do still have influence → lord chancellor has legal right to be consulted on appointments and able to reject first recommendation * Numerous occasions where S.C has ruled in favour of govt → 2020 case R ( application of smith) v. secretary of state for defence = SC ruled that the ministry of defence was not responsible for the 2003 death of priv. Jason smith of a heat stroke while in deployment in iraq → 2011 lord phillips = raised concerns of independence undemrind by the govt having control over funding Social rep. FOR: * 5 female justices : lady hale , lady black , lady arden , lady rose and lady simler * Female president = lady hale 9 5th september 2017 to 11th jan 2020 AGAINST: * 2019 Lady rose = only woman amongst 12 justices * Supreme court = 92% male * 2015 lady hale calls for greater diversity = all 13 justices = white holding to account Evaluate the view that select committees are the most effective way for the House of Commons to hold the executive to account. (30) * Points: * Power and influence on the executive/government (how much they can push change) * How they compare to other forms of accountability (other forms of accountability may be seen as more effective because they take less time) * Limitations of power (while the recommendations aren’t legally binding they can create public pressure on the executive and government to implement the changes) * Point 1: power and influence on the executive * Disagree: * Public bill committee * Debate and consider each clause of the bill and suggest amendments to make them clearer * The government has v tight hold on the committee/ process- number of members from each party in the committee is dependent on how big the party is in the commons (how many seats) * Party whip tells members of the party in the committee what to do- v strong alliance w/party so most likely won’t be voting for constituency as much as people want their representative (MP) to do * Example: * Failed to hold gov (and therefore executive) to account with the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 * Controversial as it introduced wide-ranging powers to police including measures to impose more conditions on protests, increase sentences for certain offences * Conservative majority on the committee helped get it passed- amendments from opposition were constantly being voted down regardless of the content of these amendments, undermined genuine scrutiny * Minimal changes were made despite all the criticism- the committee didn’t meaningfully alter the bill even after getting criticised by groups like Liberty and senior judges- bil; threatened the right to protest * Agree: * Public accounts committee (PAC) * Oldest committee in the commons- back to 1861 * Means they have lots of experience/respect * Scrutinises value for money- effectiveness and efficiency of the economy for public spending * Generally holds gov+civil servants to account for the delivery of public services * Collection of taxation and how well its done * Examination of this is crucial as taxation and spending are fundamental activities of government * Powerful: * The chair is always a member of the main opposition party and has great prestige and higher salary than other MPs * Chair and members are all elected by the rest of the MPs (all HoC) * Therefore not controlled by party leaders- Wright reforms 2010 * Members tend to act independently ignoring party allegiance * Therefore more legitimacy and better at holding them to account * Example: * 2015 investigation into the effectiveness of cancer treatment by NHS * Conclusion+recommendations: highly critical of variations in cancer treatment in different regions and for different ages * Criticised low cure rates and increased waiting times for treatment * Impact: publicity of this caused gov to launch a review into treatment and set up an independent cancer task force to improve the delivery of cancer treatment across UK by 2020 * Point 2: compared to other forms of accountability- Urgent questions (UQs) * Against: * MPs can request immediate answers from PM and gov in pressing/unexpected issues * Apply to speaker of the house and answered on the same day * Example: * COVID-19 * Maintained pressure on Johnson so he and the cabinet couldn’t deflect the criticism and scrutiny after he broke his own law of social distancing and staying home when he had a party * Agree: * UQs can make it take too long for the gov to fix the mistake * Means that the PM isn’t fully being held to account for what has happened as they don’t have time to figure out how to fix the issue * Example: * Speaker John Bercow (2009-2019) * Increased the use of UQs significantly which was good but also meant legislation was being delayed by a lot so gov couldn’t get anything done * E.g. In 2018, The committee invited Amber Rudd to give evidence for its inquiry into the Windrush Scandal. In her interview, she denied that the Home Office had targets for deportation of Illegal Immigrants. Leaked emails after this inquiry revealed that there were targets that Rudd was very much aware of. After this she resigned from her post and took full responsibility. * Ministers were forced into daily public defence and damage control rather than focusing on quietly correcting policies and compensating victims * Therefore frequency and intensity undermined internal coordination and made it harder for the gov/PM to put in timely or thoughtful reforms * Point 3: limitations * Against: * Committees have no legal enforcement of power on executive and government * Example: * PAC on Test and Trace- cost the government £37 billion for the scheme which they said was an “eye-watering waste” but the government dismissed the findings+avoided major reforms (2021-2022) * Despite strong criticisms no formal accountability mechanisms were triggered by this * This was one of the most expensive public health programmes in UK history * Chaired by Meg Hillier at the time- they published their findings in March 2021 stating it had “no clear impact on reducing infection levels despite huge spending” * There was poor use of private contracts (Serco, Delottie) * Lack of transparency in procurement (VIP lanes) * Weak integration with local public health services * Limitations: gov largely dismissed the criticism claiming the system had saved lives * Despite exposure of waste and inefficiency there were no resignations, refunds or structural reforms directly resulting from their findings * No enforcement power * Agree: * Can probe issues like the Sarah Everard case + misogyny in policing which helped shift focus of discussions to reforming the police * 2021-2022 * She was kidnapped, raped and murdered by a serving metropolitan police officer * Triggered a national outcry * Home affairs select committee investigated culture of misogyny and abuse within police forces * Failures in vetting and how the police officer Wayne Couzens stayed in the Met despite previous allegations * Slow response but had a big public push conservatism human nature To what extent do conservatives believe in human nature Intro: * Traditional , one nation , new right ( combining neo liberal and neo conservative ideas )strands of conservatism * Trad + one nation agree over imperfection of humans = more disagreement with new right over ideas of human rationality and individualism = more disagreement Para 1 Outline : intellectual imperfection * traditional + one-nation conservatives argue that humans are intellectually, morally, and psychologically flawed * Trad conservatives prioritise stability and order through hierarchical + paternalistic society Comparison : * BURKE dismissed human rationality + had a sceptical view on humanity ( cos of humans achieve what they desire) * Burke promotes pragmatic society with gradual change * HOBBES argued that human nature is irrational + human nature is inimical to self- interest * Human nature limits capacity to be intellectual and weakened by our psychology * Tard conservatives = defendant state intervention ‘born to rule’ * New right = more optimistic → human nature should be left unchecked so that people can reach their full potential * AYN RAND individuals seek autonomy and space therefore human should be left alone so they can flourish * Humans are innovative and enterprising = minimal state Judgement: * More divergent views on intellectual imperfection Para 2 : moral imperfection Outline : * Trad = human morally imperfect → drawing beliefs from the old testament doctrine of o.g sin humans are inherently selfish and greedy = basic impulses crime occurs → to prevent this = strong law and order * New right = morally imperfect but different approach , humans are self -a ware beings with free will so should not treated as things further dissociating with trad conservatives → promoting atomistic individualism (humans are like atoms) Comparison: * HOBBES = humans are most likely to commit destructive acts because of there self interest * One nation OAKSHOTT humans are imperfect BUT not immoral however they both believe that humans have a moral imperfection and therefore they must have a strong state and tradition * New right = humans are morally imperfect NOZICK argued that humans are also rational self aware beings should have free will. Judgement: * Moe different views on human nature new right have a more positive and optimistic view on moral imperfection which reflects on their belief on minimal state and less opinion on law order BUT * Trad/one nation believe in a strong law and order cos human are inherently selfish and greedy Para 3: Outline: * Neo liberals NOZICK believe in atomistic individualism - everybody should be able to make there own decisions in their best interests * Neo conservatives = have a problem with the guiding hand of the state and believe in the damaging effects of human affairs -- to reach full potential = faith is placed on the individual and the market Comparison: * Neo conservatives and neo liberals have do not not like state involvement as it prevents humans from establishing their own decision