You are here: UK Essays » Essays » Politics » Citizen Congress Government

Cookie Information

Privacy Information

Free Essays - Essays

Citizen Congress Government

Laws are passed faster in Great Britain than in US Congress because there is less interaction from an average citizen at the national level. Every citizen is represented in Congress in two ways by three people. Each citizen has two U.S senators who represent them as residents of state.

Each citizen also has one U.S representative who speaks for them as a resident of a congressional district. Senators and representatives thus face different challenges, yet they must somehow reach agreements from these different perspectives. The system as a whole is designed for stability rather than quick change, a fact that sometimes frustrates people. (Samuel C, pg 363-381).

It seems that there is greater involvement and representation of the public and their wishes in the American government than there is in the British government. When the citizens are accorded greater involvement in the government, it the follows that the law takes a longer time to be passed. This could be difficult because the wishes of the citizens are varied and it becomes difficult to know which ones to give priority and which ones not to. The legislators are therefore faced with a daunting task. The citizens take the legislators to parliament expecting them to support and pass the laws and policies they support. They also expect them to oppose laws that they do not support. The legislators try their best to do this as they know that they depend on the constituents to get into parliament.

Legislators are usually influenced by organized interest groups in disproportionate ways. Not all mistakes found in the political process and identified by interest groups do stand in the way of particular political outcomes. However the law making process cannot be excluded from interest groups because it is assumed that interest groups represent ordinary citizens. Their involvement in policy making improves the processes of decision making.

Citizens, as expected support policies that meet their demands. On the other hand they block policies they feel only reflect the interests of those in power. Interest groups sometimes make it almost impossible for policy makers to implement policies that are best in terms of efficiency especially if such policies usually impose costs on sections of the public in the long run. Economic growth may occur at a slow pace because of rivalry between interest groups over the distribution of economic gains. (Oslon, 1963, pg 243).

The ever present threat of policy influence by interest group was something that was detected early by the makers of the constitution of US. To counter this threat, a constitutional system of republican government that takes into account interest groups was formed. This system allows interest groups to employ various ways of weighing in on policy making. James Madison made the case for constitutions criticism. He pointed out that the problem of interest groups in his theory of republican democracy. He warns of the mischief of factions in “Federalist no. 10, 4”pg 85. He asserts that interest groups that could threaten personal liberty or the liberty of other groups. (Goldstein, pg144).

There are a number of ways through which interest groups try to influence the law making process. These include;

• Hiring of representatives to act on their behalf and put their agenda across. Activities related to lobbying include liaising with the executive branch and the Congress. The objective of this is to discuss what they feel are the positive and negative effects of proposed legislations that are proposed.

• They also participate in election activities: they try very hard to influence elections in order to ensure election or re-election of people who support their grievances. Having people subscribe to their ideas ensures that they have effects on the law making process.

• Other than the above they mobilize members of the public. Many groups rely on the efforts of people who are motivated to act on their behalf in order to influence policy making. They write them letters, make phone calls to them, and also invite them to demonstrations. (Scott, 1982, pg90).

An interest group considers itself influential if the congress kills or produces a policy that it agrees with. Influence from interest groups can come from a variety of paths when the congressional stand point is taken. Information, action or threatened action from interest groups can cause congress members to alter the content or path of legislation pieces. This might come in the form o f a change of wording, a passage from a sub-committee, not passing from a standing committee, or persuasive remarks from a number that has an effect on the status of the bill. (Smith, pg91).

The reality of power is the other factor that presents an obstacle to reforms in parliament. The matter of the effects of reform on power relations, especially between Government and Parliament is quite apart from the question of its desirability in the abstract. The limitation imposed by the independent and powerful standing committees of Congress is something American presidents are familiar with. A prime minister, unlike the president who is less constrained, needs to retain legislature’s support when taking action. (Samuel, pg 380).

Political parties play a crucial role in the life of politics through setting agendas of policies, directing and organizing material and human resources, nominating candidates for offices that are public and monitoring the work of representatives that are elected. The political party that wins the most areas in a given election in two or multiparty democracies wins legislative control. On the other hand, in parliamentary systems, the governments’ executive branch is controlled by the party that wins majority.

In Europe, political parties are the primary institutions are mainly the representatives of democracy. The structure of electoral competition is defined by the parties. Candidates are not selected by individuals but by party and party representatives. A large proportion of British do not vote for individual candidates but directly for party lists. Once they are in government, parties exercise control over the process of policymaking. Party leaders and political parties articulate and identify many of the issues and concerns raised by the public. Parties also perform an education function by informing the public. (Salisbury, pg 71).

A political party may win more seats than each of the other party in a multiparty political system. It is not possible to win more than all other parties combined. Coalitions may be formed by parties in this case to achieve a majority. In control of the legislature, the majority party or coalition has more votes compared to other parties. At least in theory, it can easily pass legislation. Multiparty systems are accused of being instable politically. Political parties cannot work together and form stable coalitions because of too many competing interests. They also cannot prevent deadlock between the executive and the legislature. (Greenwood, pg 383).

Most MPs in the House of Commons belong to a particular political party for example the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party, or the New Democratic Party. The character and organization of the House of Representatives have evolved under the influence of political parties. This provides a means of mobilizing the necessary majorities and controlling proceedings. (Eugene B., Robert A pg 290).

Parliament is at the centre of the political system in the United Kingdom. It is the supreme legislative body meaning that the parliament is sovereign. The government is answerable to it as it is drawn from it. Parliament is bicameral, consisting of the House of Lords and the House of Commons. The Congress members in United States can alter the course or content of draft legislations based on action threats and information action from interest groups. The interest groups could do this through making persuasive remarks to members who have profound effect on a questionable bill, a passage coming from a sub committee and wording. (Greenwood, pg 398).

The political parties in have a structure that is mainly decentralized and also has minimal internal discipline. The federal and presidential form of government could be the reason behind this state of affairs. These parties when in power do not have the likelihood to broad and coherent legislative packages than parties which are centralized in parliamentary systems. In systems which are competitive such as Britain parties are usually highly organized, disciplined, and have large membership. This is mainly because the government is parliamentary and has a unitary structure.

This makes it possible for the party in power to translate what visions it puts forward during election campaigns into policies of the public. Every issue presented requires a vote from members of Parliament. In the U.S., representatives and senators who wish to seek re-election from local constituencies that vary widely do not experience such pressure. In Britain, scoundrel partisans can have their quest for renomination denied.

The opposition has a crucial role in the floor debates that are a characteristic of such debates. The opposition is expected to illuminate and make clear its positions clearly. It should also be prepared to present a front that is united when the public falls out of favor with the majority. Political parties play a role that is quite different in the U.S. Congress. As much as it is true that almost all Congress members are usually supportive of major parties and that affiliation with parties does not affect the members’ decision concerning legislative voting, parties found in the United States cannot show the level of unity shown the level of unity shown by the parliamentary parties in Britain. The legislative parties in U.S are decentralized, mostly nonhierarchical, have coalitions that are broad, and are very flexible when it comes to a range of issues. As a result there may be no consistency in party positions on different areas of policies. (Greenwood, pg 387).

The United States legislative system is designed to produce legislation showing concession among varied interests and one that satisfies all interests. Bipartisan support of legislation becomes necessary for the passing of a bill when one party dominates the legislature and the executive. Since 1987, this has been the case. A president in the United States of America has the power to veto legislation. He can be only be overtaken by two thirds majority in each sitting of Congress.) (Ernst, pg 351).

The power of members of parliament in America is greater than of those in Britain. However, the opposition party members in the United States usually get frustrated because of their failure to control the process of legislation. They can combine with members who are many to ensure their interests are served by the legislations passed through voting. They can also use the advantage of their numbers to exhibit leverage to a certain degree in bargaining for legislation. They can defend the interests of their constituents with their individual vote if all fails as a defense which is possible.

Legislatures use the deliberation process to make laws and adopt policies. The decisions are usually generated from set of principles that are broad in the constitutions that are unwritten and written. It is not mandatory for these decisions to come from the laws’ rule or legal precedents that are specific. This is what differentiates legislatures and the courts.

What matters in the long run is not the strength of the legislature of any government; it is whether the kind of legislature chosen serves the needs of the citizens of a country. This as has been seen in many states and countries can be a daunting task.

Work Cited

B.Eugene Robert A. 2002. Going by the Book. The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness. Transaction Publishers. Pp 267-330.

E. Freund 2006. Standards of American Legislation. University of Chicago Press. Pp 340-363. Scott Furlong “Interest Group Influence on Regulatory Policy” Paper presented at the presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science.1992. 89-115. Retrieved from http://www.uwgb.edu/pea/faculty/curriculum_vitae/cv_furlong.doc.

M.Goldstein. Interest groups, lobbying and Participation in America. Cambridge University Press. 1999 pg140-151.

Greenwood John 2001: Conflict of Laws in Great Britain. Cambridge University Press. Pp 380-420.

R. John B., Diane P.B. Role of Political Parties in the Organization of Congress. Journal of Law Economics and Organization .2002. Oxford University Press.

Mancur Oslon The Logic of Collective Action: Harvard University Press. 1965. 230-248

Salisbury, Robert H. Interest Representation. “The Dominance of Institutions.” American

Political Science Review. 78: (1984)64-76

C. Samuel P. Review Article: The British House of Commons as a Focus for Political Research. British Journal of Political Science, Vol.3, No.3 (July 1973). Pp 363-381.

A Smith ‘Interest Group-Influence in the U.S Congress.” Legislative Studies Quarterly 20: (1995)89-139.

Sign up and be the first to receive our latest offers: