Before the Articles of Confederation and their problems, America was (somewhat) whole. Because of the Articles of Confederation, the population was split into two groups: federalists, and antifederalists, both with differing views. The political, economic, and social views of the nation were quite different. Because of the Articles of Confederation, the Great Compromise was created, and, consequently, Congress was made.
But recently gerrymandering has become more controversial because people feel that it has taken away their rights as a voter and it swings the votes to one side by a big percentage. Current cases are before the courts to decide if gerrymandering is legal. Some states have been discussing whether it should still be allowed during elections. “Many efforts are underway to remedy this political
Third party candidates lack political influence in the U.S. due to the overwhelming two major party success rates. Their success can be largely attributed to the many electoral institutional rules that contribute to limiting the rise of third parties, their competition. This historically proven major party dominance is due to many factors including institutional arrangements, election laws, electoral college rules, and campaign finance laws that have shaped the course of American elections; however, there are instances in which third parties can overcome electoral institutional challenges and make noticeable progress. The institutional arrangements in the United States have made major two-party success almost inevitable; however, there is
Which at times is not the best and there are weaknesses that accompany it. One that is both good and bad is that people in these such states have the tendency to bring the higher class to their level, the class that in another society would have become aristocratic or the leaders. Hence there is always movement within the economic classes he said that is the natural inclination people have to act as a leveler. It can also cause what we saw in The House of Representatives where they were uncultured lower and lower class compared to the Senate. The explanation for this is that the majority of citizens are not higher class hence they don’t have much leisure time, and as a result they are not very educated, at least not as much as a Senator.
With problems with racism always occurring, the people who are mostly affected by it cannot be heard due to lack of representation. Minorities cannot be understood either, so the only options that congress has is either ignore the problem or make assumptions because the can only see the problem from their perspective not everyone else’s. There are a few ways that these problems can be solved. One is if people reached out to minorities and said they would like a bigger minority representation.
The modern presidency is an office that many aspire to, but that few hold. The evolution of the office of the presidency has been one from that of a traditional role to that of a modern role that is forever evolving. The modern presidency has in a sense become a double-edged sword in that presidents have become beneficiaries of anything positive that can be attributed to the government, but also can be blamed for anything bad occurring in society. Quite simply, the modern president has become the center of our political system (The Modern Presidency, 2004).
For a globalizing world, people who favor the strong party government suggest that responsible parties are essential for problems such as global warming and terrorism. However, the advantage of party government cannot compensate its disadvantages. First and foremost, the nature of party government would increase the conflicts in American politics. The party government does represent the majority, meaning that there is potential for some minorities and interests groups are not properly represented.
Political parties have been a part of the United States’ government since the end of Washington’s presidency and they have become the backbone of how people shape their opinions and view the government. However, these parties were inevitable and would have happened had they been a part of the government process or not. Political parties had to form in the 19th century in order for people to successfully win elections at all, as it was hard for candidates to get their views out to the people, and because people need a group that they can sympathise with and support.
Senator Mitch McConnell states that the electoral voting system is, “Designed to promote good government and legislation that forwards the common good of a large and diverse nation.” He believes that just because the electoral voting system does not please many people and sometimes may not elect the president that everyone thinks should be the president does not make the system have enough flaws to just cast it out. It exists for many reasons, but mainly for choose the right person for the job. It is the system that keeps the government and its people together like a “linchpin,” as he states. If it were to be removed, the nation could collapse.
Americans strive to fight for what is right. Americans who vote will vote for the candidate who shares the same political views as the voter. It is fascinating how unconsciously Americans, as voters, oftentimes forget to take the time to contemplate why the candidate that shares the same views as us is right. Political parties have led us as a nation through dark times, such as the Great Depression, they serve as a vital lifeline for our government. Without any political parties there would be not representation, voting would become exceedingly complicated than it should be, our government would change entirely.
Historian John C. Miller mentions how the content of the essays “went over the heads of the common people”; even other federalist thought they were not the best way to convince the citizens, and complained that Publius was “too recondite for the masses” and a writer with a more “common touch” would have been better. This lack of understanding made it easier for the anti-federalist to advocate for their cause, something which was illustrated with the fact that The Federalist was “vastly outsold” by pamphlets that contained anti-federalist
Thus causing even more conflict, especially amongst those not in the South. Another controversial issue was federalism because Marshall gave the national government a vast amount of power over state 's rights, and Taney believed more in giving power to the state rather than the national government. In addition, this is when outside groups started forming and lobbying their influence over government decisions, whether it is pertaining to slavery, rights, or economic interests. James Madison regarded “factions” or interest groups with concern when authoring segments of the Federalist Papers. The problem he envisioned was that eliminating them from the political scene was a threat to democratic principles, a cure worse than the disease.
Our national government has not always dad this much influence over matters concerning this country. Under the Articles of Confederation, power for the national government was vastly limited compared to the current central government today. The people who wrote the Articles where worried about a strong central government that would oppress them like the King did. In turn they came up with the Articles of Confederation which gave greater power to the states instead of the national government. Under the Us Constitution the central government know has more power than it did under the Articles of Confederation to stabilize the United States.
This is one of the many reasons why the Electoral College is unfair, past elections have shown that bigger populations have more electoral votes, concluding that smaller states’ votes become insignificant. This leaves people in question, is the Electoral College now based on where you live? Even though the purpose of the electoral college is to ultimately decide who will occupy the position of the president, there was an Electoral Commision of elite representatives, established to determine the 19th President, because of the situation the electoral college caused. The commission included five representatives from the House, another five associates from the Senate and five justices from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Justices in the Electoral Commission were David Dias
This doesn’t mean everyone will. As the Port Huron Statement points out “each individual sees apathy in his fellows” and this “perpetuates the common reluctance to organize for change.” People having the ability to affect the government and its proceedings means it’s a true democracy; government “for the people by the people.” People don’t always take advantage of this, however those that do contribute to the democracy as a whole. Lobbying allows people to influence politicians, but it’s not the only way.