Lee H. Hamilton, a former congressman in the House of Representatives, wrote, The Case for Congress, to share some of the criticisms he has heard over the years and to explain the effects of such opinions. Hamilton speaks of three main criticisms: “Congress is run by lobbyists and special interests”, “Congress almost seems to promote total gridlock”, and “There’s too much money in Politics” (Hamilton 2004). For each of these criticisms, Hamilton explains these thoughts and his opinion on the matter. The strongest point of Hamilton’s argument was in defending the lobbyists in Congress. Hamilton (2004) said the public opinion of lobbyists is that “Congress is manipulated by powerful wheel-dealers who put pressure on legislators and buy votes through extensive campaigns and other favors” (p. 83). Hamilton (2004) argues these opinions in saying, “ Lobbying is a key element of the legislative process- part of the free speech guaranteed under the constitution… lobbying is simply people bonding together to advance their interests” (p. 83). Instead of lobbying being manipulative, as people seem to think, Hamilton explains it as being helpful to Congress and an import part of debates. …show more content…
While he does defend this criticism, he too feels it is somewhat true. He believes the main criticism is that legislators can be bought, whether by money or by gifts (Hamilton 2004). Hamilton talks about how the money is mainly to support people who already have the same ideas rather than to get Legislators to change their opinions (Hamilton 2004). While that may be true, he is still saying that interest groups are giving money for legislators to support their ideas. He talks about how we need campaign reform because too much money is being spent (Hamilton
From the time the Constitution was adopted in 1789 to the Missouri Compromise in 1820 a shift in power occurred, this resulted in an expansion of the national governments authority over political and economic matters at the states expense. Hamilton’s economic policies, Marshall Supreme Court decisions, and the Louisiana Purchase were the fundamental factors that lead to this transfer of power. Though not without a fight from the Jefferson Democratic Republican party who supported a limited government and a strict construction, whereas the ultimate contributors to this exchange, the federalist, wanted to extend the powers of the government in order to create institutions that could strengthen the new country. However, despite opposition and pleas against these matters, the means and support behind the federal government proved to strong to prevent this sway and power.
Peter Choi Professor Gadarian PSC 121: American National Government 1 October 2015 Congressman Billy Long of Missouri In 2010, Missouri’s 7th Congressional District elected Republican Representative Billy Long to office. Representative Long triumphed over his Democratic opponent by receiving 63% of the popular vote, which translates to 141,010 votes. Interestingly, the Republican primary election in 2010 was more closely contested than the general election. Similar election results occurred in 2012 as well.
Lectures Lecture 14 “Questions to Consider #1”: Why did the Anti Federalists object so strongly to the Preamble to the Constitution? The Anti-Federalists objected so strongly to Preamble to the Constitution due to the fact the Preamble establishes powers for the three branches of government, states’ relations, mode of amendment, debts, national supremacy, oath of office, and amendment ratification. This group felts as though when the federalists wanting to create a strong central government would not be strong enough if the Preamble was not put into place. Lecture 14 states, “Anti-federalists suspicious of central power fought the new Constitution tenaciously…..
The topic I would be doing would be on/about Alexander Hamilton in regards to The Federalist Papers. This topic is significant, because it draws on the Founding Father whose writing influenced/shaped the composition of the Early American Republic, and has given rise to many institutions/developments that can be traced to this day. As quite a controversial and well-debated document, The Federalist Papers was designed as a series of essays used to defend the Constitution—upon which we still call upon today. The five sources that provide a basic foundation to begin the project are: “To Begin the World Anew” by Bernard Bailyn, “The Political Psychology of the Federalist” by Daniel Walker Howe, “Ethos in Law and History: Alexander Hamilton,
Federalism was an influential political movement that supported ratification of the US Constitution and was discontent with the Articles of Confederation that limited the central government’s power. The outlook and vision of the Federalist Party called for a stronger national government, a loose construction of the Constitution and a mercantile, rather than agricultural, economy. Leading Federalists Alexander Hamilton and Chief Justice John Marshall helped shape the development of our nation’s government branches with their views that they expressed about ratifying and interpreting our Nation’s newly drafted Constitution. For Federalists during this time period, upholding and honoring the United States Constitution was extremely important in order to safe guard
The political theorists David R. Mayhew, Gary W. Cox, and Matthew D. McCubbins argue on how the US Congress functions. They focus on the members of Congress and their actions. The basis of disagreement between the theorists lies in what Congress members find of importance. Mayhew argues that members of Congress, primarily concern themselves with reelection, as such, any action taken only benefits that. Cox and McCubbins’, however, formulate that Congress functions on the basis of majority party control and unity.
In the book, Hamilton’s Blessing, Gordon’s premise is that the national debt of the United States has become so high that concerned individuals no longer think of it. Gordon uses economic history and theory to explore the start, rise and decline of the United States Debt. The first sentence in his book reads “The United States was born in debt.” The book traces the ‘curse’ of the national debt dating back from 1792 when Alexander Hamilton proposed the virtues of America’s debt. Gordon offers a ‘biography’ of the debt making the book a human drama as he explains the positive myriads ways that it has influenced and shaped the history of America economy.
After a fiercely fought revolution, the newly independent American nation struggled to establish a concrete government amidst an influx of opposing ideologies. Loosely tied together by the Articles of Confederation, the thirteen sovereign states were far from united. As growing schisms in American society became apparent, an array of esteemed, prominent American men united in 1787 to form the basis of the United States government: the Constitution. Among the most eminent members of this convention were Alexander Hamilton, Aaron Burr, James Madison, and Thomas Jefferson. These men, held to an almost godly stature, defined the future of the nation; but were their intentions as honest as they seemed?
Throughout roughly the last one hundred years of U.S. history, one significant way lawmakers have attempted to address corruption within the government has been by implementing stricter regulations on the campaign finance system, while opponents of these regulations have argued they do not prevent corruption and have characterized them as limitations on freedom of speech guaranteed by the Constitution. From this, we see the problem is a tension between Congress’s authority to regulate and maintain fair and democratic elections and a disproportionate focus on freedom of speech. After examining current federal campaign finance laws, one would assume the United States has always had relatively weak laws in this field; however, that is not the
Today, we still find significant concerns for how vast and powerful interest groups and their associated PACs have become over the past few decades, and their far reaching ability they have to affect even the highest court in the
“There is a certain enthusiasm in liberty, that makes human nature rise above itself, in acts of bravery and heroism.” Alexander Hamilton once said with great confidence. Even though being so inspiring,throughout his time he had many bad relations with people. People such as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Maria Reynolds. Alexander was a great man.
I think that before reading this book, I did not see lobbyists in a very positive light just because it’s always something that I have associated with deceit. Yet, the way that they are portrayed in the book was the opposite of what I thought they were. Rosenthal discusses how lobbyists have to be honest because senators do utilize them as a source of information and the lobbyists do want to have a positive relationship with the senators. I think that the relationship between the lobbyists and the senators is what stuck out the most to me. I also thought it was interesting that the book went in depth not only about the basic function of a bicameral legislature, but also about what senators need to think about and how they make decisions.
My essay is about the book called Alexander Hamilton will be summarizing the book from chapter one - forty. The very first chapter of the book was about a Lady named Rachel faucette, which is Alexander Hamilton mother. Rachel father died and left her all of his property which she had became rich. When she was sixteen years old she was forced to marry lavien. In 1745, there wedding took place at the grange ,Rachel wasn't happy with her husband .
1. They are important source of information. A member who is part of congress has to evolve themselves with many policy areas. But a lobbyists can confine themselves to one area and can by providing specialized expertise. If the information is powerful, then the lobbyist can be an allies. 2.
However, as Sarbaugh-Thompson, Thompson, Elder, Strate and Elling (2004) demonstrate, there has been as significant shift in the role of lobby groups that spend more time finding resources to educate new legislators. Different interest groups have become stakeholders in candidate recruitment processes. Each year since the term limits were enacted, there has been a significant increase in the monetary contributions by these interest groups. The interaction between the legislators and the lobby groups has been limited owing to the term limits (PowerPoint). However, it has also been established that the interest groups have been the scapegoat of underperforming legislators who hope to re-capture their electoral positions before their stipulated terms