The Legislative and Executive Branch - Essay Example

?PSA353 Political Behavior, Participation and Democracy Fall Semester, Final Exam According to Connelly, why was Woodrow Wilson’s project to change how the legislative and executive branch governed, doomed to failure? (minimum 300 words). Woodrow Wilson wanted to enhance the power of legislative parties and diminish the dominance of standing committee over legislative process as he preferred “party government” over “committee government” (Connelly, 2010, 109). He was biased towards legislative process that is open and did not favor much the constitutional forms. Both Newt Gingrich and Wilson stressed that political parties, Congress and ideas must be given prominence in American Politics (Connelly, 2010). His influence was great and thoughts about Congressional Government were relevant and used by many reformers (Connelly, 2010), however Connelly (2010) argued that Woodrow Wilson’s project to change how the legislative and executive branch governed was doomed to failure. Connelly (2010) gave many reasons to support his argument. He states that In his book ‘Congressional Government’ Wilson’s suggestion on American politics were incomplete and were not fully evolved to a certain extent. Even though he stated that “radical defect” (Connelly, 2010, 119) of the constitutional system is separation of powers he did not tackle or changed the fundamental flaw of separation of legislative and executive powers of American Constitution. Wilson suggested that “the cure for the friction of the separation of powers can be found in the fusion of party government” (Connelly, 2010, 119), however Connelly (2010) was of the opinion that he disregarded the separation of powers’ potentiality for fission. According to Collins Wilson did not fully understood the concept of separation of powers that it not only limits but also empowers the government and can promote progressive change, he failed to see that separation of powers not only subtracts the energy but also can add energy to the political process. Wilson saw separation of powers as a defect rather Nicol C, comparative legislative scholar termed it as both “a virtue and source of strength” (Connelly, 2010, 122). Apart from that Wilson himself was not fully convinced of the virtues of ‘congressional government’ and had second and third thoughts about it which he expressed in his later books. According to Connelly even though Wilson was a good politician and political scientist to point out the defects of the constitutional systems he lacked the perception to understand its strengths (Connelly, 2010). Even though Wilson stood out as a worthy opponent to James Madison federalist view, questioned and raised the defects of pluralist system, yet his idea of pure party government was not feasible under the system of separation of powers however it might have been possible within House of Representatives with majority according to Connelly (2010). Therefore Connelly opined that Woodrow Wilson’s project was doomed to failure. 2. How might Tocqueville explain the objectives of Piven & Cloward’s project to especially target the poor in voter registration drives? (minimum 300 words). Tocqueville (1838, 1) in his book ‘Democracy in America’ stated that “in United States even religion of most of the citizens is republican, since it submits the truths of the other world to private judgment, as in politics the care of their temporal interests in abandoned to the good sense of the people”. He further states that republican ideas are so ingratiated into Americans that they become habits, opinions and ultimately recognized formally as laws. To change republican’s notions hijacking the ideals of American and its democracy, Tocqueville (1838) suggests revolutionizing the whole society. He thinks that it can happen only with consistent efforts and series of events over a period of time with opposite opinions that can substitute this process. He also opines that in America, to destroy the republican ideology a difficult social process is required which might be interrupted but process should be continued as Republicans notions might revive again, therefore to make it extinct totally existing people participating must be replaced with new people (Tocqueville, 1838). Thus Piven and Cloward’s project to especially target the poor in voter registration drives might achieve this objective and bring on a revolution. Piven and Cloward (2000) state that in American electorate young, minorities and less well-off people are underrepresented. Due to concerted efforts like poll taxes, cumbersome registration process and literacy tests blacks and immigrants were restricted from voting thus limiting their participation in democracy (Piven and Cloward, 2000). Their entrance might replace the existing peoples’ power and oppose the ideology of the republicans as their requirements and opinion might differ and be in opposition to republican’s notions. He compares Republican Government of America with that of the Louis XIV monarchial government of France which was without opponents and advocates. He argues that similarly republicans govern without opposition or disagreement or debate by an unspoken agreement of consensus (Tocqueville, 1838). Thus with participation of poor people in voting, republicans form of society might be viewed as inconvenient and change may be initiated. However he also opines that if republicans institutions are not there Americans might experience dictatorial government, however its chances are less because America is not governed by few privileged class of people but by the peoples’ majority (Tocqueville, 1840). 3. Refer to our readings in this course and explain whether politicians lead the people, or whether the people lead the politicians in American democracy.(minimum 300 words) The Ideal concept in American Democracy is that the people lead the politicians. In a true democratic nation a leader must adhere to public aspirations and desire and he is accountable to the public who have granted him the political power (Aldrich, 1995). According to Lau and Redlawsk (2006) theoretically democracy succeeds only when people are able to freely elect and make informed decision in choosing their leaders and these leaders represent the views of the people and their performance in accounted for. If they perceive that politicians are not forwarding their interests they may not vote for him again and he might find himself out of the politics. However it is not often the case as in reality many times politicians lead people. As Schlesinger (1966) in his political ambition theory stated that any politicians’ main ambition is to seek an office and further his career and this ambition is often the drive in politics. Thus politicians who seek office find themselves constrained to promise the public their desires and fulfill the same. Politicians are not adhering to their own ideologies or public aspirations or the policies of any political parties rather they join political parties that will give them success, attractive platform and has more winning probability. Thus they are not led by people but are swaying people towards them from a popular party platform conveying its message and policies. Another scenario is that with the use of money politicians can organize a successful campaign and attract voters without backing of any political party or experience in politics. For example Ross Perot campaign for Presidency is termed as the most successful campaign, he lacked support of any political party but he had more than sufficient financial resources than Brown and Buchanan. He said that if people wanted him to be a presidential candidate they can show by voting for him in all fifty states. He mobilized activists both paid and voluntary and they were able to build a large organization for campaigning in all the states. With so much money pouring in and successful campaign they won 15% vote of the electorate even though he lost the presidency. The main factor behind his winning significant electorate is incumbency of the existing president and also finance. This example shows that people can be led and can be swayed with successful political campaigns and finance which is becoming the rage at present (Aldrich, 1995). 4. Refer to our readings in this course about political behavior in American democracy, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of popular government.(minimum 300 words). According to the founders of the constitution, “a Popular Government is a government by the consent of the governed”, (Connelly, 2010, 178) and Tocqueville (1838), states that a popular government is government by the whole people rather than the rule of majority. The strengths of a popular government are That it is for the public good that protects the liberty of the individual, provides security in terms of national security and tranquility at domestic level, prosperity, stability required by the citizens to exercise their rights (Connelly, 2010). Tocqueville (1838), states that a popular government tempers the majority tyranny unlike democratic governments where majority rules in peoples’ name. People in a democratic governments often find themselves in perpetual political campaigns and might perceive governments’ instability, inconsistent policies, and ever-changing laws. The strength is that popular government will not get stuck in political gridlock as happens in democratic government when it lacks majority to rule (Tocqueville, 1838). Weaknesses of popular government However there are some drawbacks associated with popular government. As there is no opposition, the government is left unopposed and unchallenged if the policies are not in favor of the public. Popular government also lacks the political fever as seen in American Democracy where due to constant political activity people feel energized and are aware of and get involved in the current public affairs (Tocqueville 1838). Popular governments often give arise to revolutionary passions as people’s energy is not mobilized elsewhere and they are looking for a change in how they are governed or their laws are made. In American democracy people can modify, change their laws, and governments, that’s how their passions are utilized and their rebellion passions are subdued (Connelly, 2010). Even though in American democracy, majority rules they respect their rights, understand their limits and not overdo them and minority‘s voice is also heard in form of opposition. However in popular government minorities are not recognized. In popular government form people’s participation in politics is minimal whereas people participate actively in American Democracy. Therefore even though on face American Democracy might look turbulent and ever-changing due to political behavior it does not overrides the constitution, but upholds freedom, liberty and rights of the people even of the minority and is active whereas popular democracy is more passive (Tocqueville, 1838). References Aldrich, John. 1995. Why Parties? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Connelly, William F., Jr.2010. James Madison Rules America: the Constitutional Origins of Congressional Partisanship. Lanham, MD:Rowman and Littlefield. Lau, Richard R. and Redlawsk, David P. 2006. How Voters Decide. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Piven, Frances Fox and Richard A Cloward, 2000. Why Americans Still Don’t Vote: and Why Politicians Want It That Way. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Schlesinger Joseph A. 1966. Ambition and Politics: Political Careers in the United States – American Politics Research Series. Rand McNally In Aldrich, John. 1995. Why Parties? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Tocqueville Alexis De., 1838. Democracy in America. Translated by Henry Reeve (Esq.). Vol. 1, Part 2, Chapter 10. Saunders and Otley (London). Tocqueville Alexis De., 1840. Democracy in America. Translated by Henry Reeve (Esq.). Vol. 2. Part 4. Chapter 2. Saunders and Otley (London). Tocqueville Alexis De., 1838 -1840. Democracy in America. Translated by Henry Reeve (Esq.). Vol. 1. And Vol. 2 In Connelly, William F., Jr.2010. James Madison Rules America: the Constitutional Origins of Congressional Partisanship. Lanham, MD:Rowman and Littlefield. Read More