Tài liệu Văn Hóa Mỹ Hoàn chỉnh - Ngôn Ngữ Anh | Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ, Đại học Đà Nẵng
Tài liệu Văn Hóa Mỹ Hoàn chỉnh - Ngôn Ngữ Anh | Trường Đại học Ngoại ngữ, Đại học Đà Nẵng được sưu tầm và soạn thảo dưới dạng file PDF để gửi tới các bạn sinh viên cùng tham khảo, ôn tập đầy đủ kiến thức, chuẩn bị cho các buổi học thật tốt. Mời bạn đọc đón xem!
Tài liệu liên quan:
Preview text:
HE UNIVERSITY OF DANANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES AMERICAN CULTURE Class: VHM-06 Group: 06 Group members:04
1. Dang Thi Lan Anh 20CNA01 (Leader) 2. Pham Thi Hong Giang 20CNA08 3. Nguyen Quynh Trang 20CNA12 4. Huynh Thi Thu Thanh 20CNA07 OUTLINE I. Introduction II. Body II.1 Definitions
II.2 The Federal Government
II. 2.1. The Three Branches of Government:
II.2.1.1 The legislative branch ( Congress) II.2.1.2 The executive branch II.2.1.3 The judicial branch
II.2.2 The roles and powers of the president II.2.2.1 Life of presidents II.2.2.1.1. First president II.2.2.1.2 Current presidents
II.2.2.2 The roles of the president
II.2.2.3 The powers of the president
II.2.2.4 U.S - Vietnam relation
II.2.3 Constitutions of the United States
II.2.3.1 The problem of liberty
II.2.3.2 The Constitutional Convention II.2.3.3 The challenge
II.2.3.4 The Constitution and democracy
II.2.3.5 The Constitution and slavery
II.2.3.6 The motives of the Framers
II.2.3.7 Constitutional reform--modern views
II.2.4 Political Parties in the USA II.2.4.1 Demoncratic Party II.2.4.2 Republican Party II.2.4.3 Minor Parties II.1 DEFINITIONS:
1. VETO: a constitutional right to reject a decision or proposal made by a law- making body.
2. DIXIECRATS: A member of a faction of southern Democrats stressing
states’ rights and opposed to the civil rights programs of the Democratic Party.
3. DEMOCRATS: based on a form of government in which the people choose leaders by voting
4. TURNOUT: the number of people attending or talking part in an event,
especially the number of people voting in an election.
5. CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL: one of the twelve federal United States
courts of appeals that cover a group of states known as a “circuit”
6. REPUBLICAN: someone who believes in government by elected
representatives only, with no king or queen
7. THE G.O.P: short for Grand Old Party, is a name for the Republican Party of the United States of America.
8. MONARCH: a nation’s ruler usually by hereditary right
9. CONSTITUTION : the act of forming or establishing something
10. LEGISLATIVE BRANCH : the branch of the United States goverment that makes laws
11. EXUCUTIVE BRANCH : part of U.S. government réponsible for carrying out laws
12.JUDICIAL BRANCH: branch of the United States government administering justice
13.AMENDMENT: a statement that is added to a proposal or document
14.RATIFICATION: making something valid by formally confirming it
15.FEDERALISM: government divided between central and regional powers
16.COMMUNISM: a theory favoring collectivism in a classless society
17.ANARCHY: a state of lawlessness and disorder
18. OLIGARCHY: a political system governed by a few people
19. TOTALITARIANISM : a form of government in which the ruler is unconstrained
20.TYRANNY: government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator II BODY:
II.1 Federal Government of the United State:
II.1.1 Legislative Branch:
1. The organization of Congress: 1.1 The Senate:
The Senate is the upper chamber of the United State Congress. A member of the
Senate is a Senator who serves terms of six years. Each US state is represented by
two senators regardless of its population.
➞ Ensuring equal representation for each state in the Senate. Originally, senators
were selected by the state legislatures, not by popular elections. By the early years
of the 20th century, the legislatures of as many as 29 states had provided for
popular election of senators by referendums. Functions of the Senate: * Legislation: -
Bills can be introduced either in the Upper House or the House of
Representatives. However, the US Constitution states that "All bills aimed at
increasing income taxes must begin in the House of Representatives." As a
result, the Senate does not have the right to take initiative on tax-fixing laws. -
Approval by both the House of Representatives and the Senate is mandatory
on any bill, including the bill on taxes, so that they become law. Both houses
must pass the same version as the bill; if there are differences, they can be
resolved by a conference committee that includes members of the two houses. * Check and balances: -
The constitution gives the Senate a unique function that is able to "check and
balance" the power of other sectors of the federal government. This
possibility includes the requirement that the Senate has the right to advise
and that the Senate consent to certain presidential officials of the US
President; just as the Senate must ratify all treaties with foreign
governments; adjudicate all impeachment cases, and elect the US Vice
President in case no one receives a majority of the electoral votes.
1.2 The House of Representatives:
The House of Representatives is the upper chamber of the United State Congress.
The House of Representatives is
composed of state representatives, the
number of state representatives is
decided based on the percentage of the
state's population, and each serves a term of two years.
Functions of House of Representative: * Legislation:
- Like the Senate, the House of Representatives has the power to propose new bills
or amend laws. Members of the two houses are appointed to committees in
different areas such as budget and justice.
- A law that wants to be passed requires the consent of two houses. The Senator
proposed a bill, called the SB (senate bill), which would pass first in the Senate,
then move to the House of Representatives. Congressman proposed that the bill,
called house bill, will be passed in the House of Representatives first, then transferred to the Senate. * Check and balances:
- The Constitution gives the US House of Representatives the right to hear all
impeachment cases, and to elect the Vice President of the United States in case no
one receives a majority of the electoral votes.
A brief comparison between the Senate and the House of Representatives
The House of Representatives and the Senate have almost equal power, but the
method of election has a few differences. The Founding Fathers wanted that
members of the House of Representatives be close to the people, reflecting the
wishes and aspirations of the people. The House of Representatives has special
power: the right to make revenue laws, to depose government officials, and to elect
the president if the electoral college election doesn't decide who wins.
2. Responsibilities of Congress: *Legislative role:
- Legislative (law making) has always been the most crucial role of the US
Congress as well as of a legislature in any country in the world.
- However, Congress only considers and passes all bills, not the agency that
initiates all bills. In fact, a large number of bills that Congress reviews and passes
are from the executive branch. Bills can also be proposed by political parties,
pressure groups, social organizations ... or even individual citizens. *Supervision:
- Oversight of the manner in which laws are implemented is increasingly becoming
an important and effective role of the US Congress.
- Moreover, supervision involves meeting voters' needs in the precinct, especially
when Congress investigates arbitrary, unfounded, or wrongdoing by government agencies.
- On the other hand, supervision is also considered as an effective means to protect
the balance and balance of power between the National Assembly and the
executive and judicial branches. *Serve voters:
- Service to constituents means that parliamentarians will be elected by voters to protect their legal rights.
- Listening to individual opinions on government activities, government officials is
an activity that brings a lot of understanding to parliamentarians, enabling them to
effectively protect their interests of voters.
* Roles represent different interests:
- Representation of unique interests is an increasingly expanded, developed and
perfected US Congress. The role of representative means that each member of
parliament represents a group of voters who want to protect their voters' rights.
- The representative here also means that many of the social rights of interests are
divided in the National Assembly to negotiate and negotiate to balance the interests
of different interest groups through the representative.
*The role of public education:
- Educating the public about national issues and setting the terms for national
debate is an important role in raising the people's legal awareness.
- By seizing public opinion, Congress often seeks to satisfy or clarify issues of
public interest, in order to help them understand the importance of the National
Assembly's work and enhance the credibility of the National Assembly. they to
those they have elected to protect their rights.
3. Powers of Congress:
- The most important rights include the right to levy and collect taxes, to borrow, to
regulate interstate and foreign trade, to cast and print money, to set up the courts of
the Supreme Court, to develop and maintain military power, and declare war.
- In terms of U.S. law, there are limits to congressional authority such as not
delaying citizens' right to appeal during their arrest (except in the case of
insurgency or the country is in invaded), not allowed to pass laws allowing arrest
without trial, not through retroactive laws, nor the right to confer noble titles. Other
restrictions are governed by amendments, especially the Bill of Rights.
II.1.2 Executive Branch:
1. The key roles of Executive Branch: 1.1 The President:
➣ The President of the United States leads
the country. He or she is the head of state,
leader of the Federal Government, and
Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces.
➣ The president serves a four-year term and
can be elected no more than two times. The
purpose of this rule is to prevent a person from staying President for his whole life, like a king. Powers of President : ➤
• Legislative role: The President cannot make laws. This is a "check" on the
President's power, so he cannot make laws to give himself more power. However,
when the Legislative branch passes a law, the President can decide whether or not
to veto the law. In this way, the President can "check" the power of the Legislature.
The President may also make "executive orders" to make sure that people follow the law.
• Executive power including:
- War and foreign affairs powers: One of the most important of all executive
powers is the president's role as Commander-in-Chief of the United States Armed Forces .
- Administrative power: The president is the head of the executive branch of the
federal government and is constitutionally obligated to "take care that the laws be
faithfully executed". The executive branch has over four million employees,
including members of the military.
- Judicial powers : The president also has the power to nominate federal judges,
including members of the United States courts of appeals and the Supreme Court
of the United States. However, these nominations require Senate confirmation.
- Legislative facilitator: The president cannot directly introduce legislative
proposals for consideration in Congress. However, the president can take an
indirect role in shaping legislation, especially if the president's political party has a
majority in one or both houses of Congress.
• Ceremonial roles : As head of state, the president can fulfill traditions established by previous presidents
➢Three qualifications to serve as president :
• Be a natural-born U.S. citizen of the United States
• Be at least thirty-five years old
• Be a resident in the United States for at least fourteen years
➢ Since the office was established in 1789, 44 individuals have served 45
presidencies spanning 57 full four-year terms. The first, George Washington, won a
unanimous vote of the Electoral College. Grover Cleveland served two non-
consecutive terms in office and is therefore counted as the 22nd and 24th President
of the United States. The 45th and current President is Donald Trump (since January 20, 2017).
1.2 The Vice President:
➢The Vice President of the United States is the second-highest officer in the
executive branch of the US federal government, after the President of the United
States, and ranks first in the presidential line of succession.
➣The vice president is also an officer in the legislative branch, as President of the
Senate. The Vice President supports the President. If the President is unable to
serve, the Vice President becomes President. The Vice President can be elected and
serve an unlimited number of four-year terms as Vice President, even under a different president.
➣The Vice President is indirectly elected together with the President to a four-
year term of office by the people of the US through the Electoral College. Roles of ➤ Vice President:
● Preside over the United States Senate: Vice President is the President of the
Senate and preside over Senate meetings. In this capacity, the Vice President
is charged with maintaining order and decorum, recognizing members to
speak, and interpreting the Senate’s rule, practices, and precedent.
● Preside over impeachment trials: As President of Senate he may also preside
over most of the impeachment trials of federal officers, except whenever the
President of the United States is on trial.
● Supervise electoral vote count: The Vice President, in his capacity as
President of the Senate, also presides over counting and presentation of the
votes of the Electoral College.
● Succession to the presidency: The Vice President can takes over the
―powers and dutiesǁ of the presidency in the
event of a president’s removal, death, resignation, or inability. ● Presidential disabilities ● Informal roles T
➢ o be constitutionally eligible to serve as the
nation’s vice president, an individual must: - Be natural-born US citizen - Be at least 35 years old
- Be a resident in the US for at least 14 years The current ➢
Vice President of the USA is the 48th Vice President – Mike Pence. 1.3 The Cabinet:
The Cabinet of the United States is part of the executive branch of the
federal government of the United States. The Cabinet’s role is to serve as an
advisory body to the President.
Cabinet’s members include the vice president, heads of executive
departments, and other high-ranking government officials. Cabinet members
are nominated by the president and must be approved by a simple majority
of the Senate - 51votes if all 100 Senators vote.
2. Comparing between Vietnamese Executive Branch and The US Executive Branch:
In general, the function of the executive branch of the US and Vietnam is
almost the same. However, because of the different structure, the operation
and controlling agencies are different.
The executive power of the United States in the federal government is
vested in the President. However, the political apparatus is different, in
Vietnamese political organization, the Government is the executive authority
and the Prime Minister of Vietnam is the head of Government.
II.1.3 Judicial Branch:
While the Executive and Legislative branches are elected by the people,
members of the Judicial branch are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
Article III of the Constitution, which establishes the Judicial branch,
leaves Congress significant discretion to determine the shape and structure
of the federal judiciary. Even the number of Supreme Court Justices is left to
Congress – at times there have been as few as six, while the current number
has only been in place since 1869. The Constitution also grants Congress the
power to establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court, and to that end
Congress has established the United States district courts, which try most
federal cases, and 13 United States courts of appeals, which review appealed district court cases. 1. The Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the land and
the only part of the federal judiciary specifically required by the Constitution.
The Constitution does not stipulate the number of Supreme Court Justices,
the number is set instead by Congress.
Since 1869, there have been nine Justices, including one Chief Justice. All
Justices are nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and hold
their offices under life tenure. Justices may remain in office until they
resign, pass away, or are impeached and convicted by Congress.
The Court’s task is to interpret the meaning of a law, to decide whether a law
is relevant to a particular set of facts, or to rule on how a law should be
applied. Lower courts are obligated to follow the precedent set by the
Supreme Court when rendering decisions.
➢The Supreme Court plays a very important role in our constitutional
system of government. First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of
last resort for those looking for justice. Second, due to its power of judicial
review, it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government
recognizes the limits of its own power. Third, it protects civil rights and
liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets
appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular
majorities cannot pass laws that harm and take undue advantage of
unpopular minorities. In essence, it serves to ensure that the changing views
of a majority do not undermine the fundamental values common to all Americans.
➢ The decisions of the Supreme Court have an important impact on society
at large, not just on lawyers and judges. The decisions of the Court have a
profound impact on high school students. In fact, several landmark cases
decided by the Court have involved students, e.g…. 2. The Inferior Courts: *District courts:
One step below the Court of Appeals is the District Court. Each of the 94
districts has at least two judges, the biggest districts have 24 or more. Each
district also has a U.S bankruptcy court. District Courts are the trial courts of
the federal system. Their criminal cases concern federal offenses, and their
civil cases deal with matters of federal law or disputes between citizens of
different states. They’re also the only federal courts where grand juries indict the accused and juries decide the cases. Congress determines the court districts based on size, population and caseload. Some states have their own district while New York, California and Texas each
have four. Judges have to live in the district they serve, the District of
Columbia is the lone exception, but a judge may temporarily sit in another
district to help with a heavy caseload. *The courts of appeal:
There are 11 regional Circuit Court of Appeals and one US Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Created in 1892, the number of judges on
each court varies from 6 to 28, but most have 10 to 15. Each court has the
power to review decisions of district courts in its region. Appeals Courts,
sometimes called appellate courts, can also review orders of independent
regulatory agencies if a dispute remains after the agency's internal review process has been exhausted. ➤ Court Structure
The Federal Court System The State Court System
Article III of the Constitution
The Constitution and laws of each
invests the judicial power of the
state establish the state courts. A
United States in the federal court
court of last resort, often known as a
system. Article III, Section 1 Supreme Court, is usually the specifically creates the U.S.
highest court. Some states also have
Supreme Court and gives Congress
an intermediate Court of Appeals.
the authority to create the lower
Below these appeals courts are the federal courts.
state trial courts. Some are referred
to as Circuit or District Courts.
Congress has used this power to
States also usually have courts that
establish the 13 U.S. Courts of
handle specific legal matters, e.g.,
Appeals, the 94 U.S. District Courts, probate court (wills and estates);
the U.S. Court of Claims, and the
juvenile court; family court; etc.
U.S. Court of International Trade. U.S. Bankruptcy Courts handle
bankruptcy cases. Magistrate Judges
handle some District Court matters.
Parties dissatisfied with a decision
Parties dissatisfied with the decision
of a U.S. District Court, the U.S.
of the trial court may take their case
Court of Claims, and/or the U.S. to the intermediate Court of
Court of International Trade may Appeals.
appeal to a U.S. Court of Appeals
A party may ask the U.S. Supreme
Parties have the option to ask the
Court to review a decision of the
highest state court to hear the case.
U.S. Court of Appeals, but the
Supreme Court usually is under no obligation to do so. The U.S.
Supreme Court is the final arbiter of
federal constitutional questions.
Only certain cases are eligible for
review by the U.S. Supreme Court. ➤ Selection of Judges
The Federal Court System The State Court System
The Constitution states that federal
State court judges are selected in a
judges are to be nominated by the variety of ways, including -
President and confirmed by the election
Senate. They hold office during good - appointment for a given number of
behavior, typically, for life. Through years,appointment for life Congressional impeachment
- combination of these methods, e.g.,
proceedings, federal judges may be
appointment followed by election. removed from office for
misbehavior. appointment for a
given number of years,appointment
for life, and combination of these
methods, e.g., appointment followed by election.
➤ Types of Cases Heard
The Federal Court System The State Court System ● Cases that deal with the
● Most criminal cases, probate constitutionality of a law; (involving wills and estates)
● Cases involving the laws and ● Most contract cases, tort treaties of the U.S.; cases (personal injuries),
● Cases involving ambassadors family law (marriages, and public ministers; divorces, adoptions), etc. ● Disputes between two or State courts are the final more states; arbiters of state laws and ● Admiralty law; constitutions. Their ● Bankruptcy interpretation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution may be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Supreme Court may choose to hear or not to hear such cases.
II.2.2 THE ROLES AND POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT
II.2.2.1 LIFE OF PRESIDENTS
Up to this year's election, the United States has had 45 presidents. Here is a brief overview of the presidents.
II.2.2.1.1 THE FIRST PRESIDENT
I will briefly talk about the first US president.
The first President of the United States George
Washington was one of the greatest presidents
of the United States. He is the man who laid
the foundation for America and made great
foundational contributions to building the
prosperity of America as it is today.
George Washington was born on February 22,
1732 into a well-to-do family with a farming
tradition. With great contributions
demonstrating leadership talent, strategic
vision and ability to change the destiny of the
whole United States. In 1789 George
Washington was officially elected as the first
president of the United States of America at
that time (United States of America). He served as president from 1789 to 1797
(two terms) and contributed to the process of building a prosperous foundation for the United States.
II.2.2.1.2 THE CURRENT PRESIDENT
Up to the present time, the incumbent
president of the United States is Joe Biden. Joe Biden has just been
considered by the US media as the
46th President of the United States
after one of the few elections that is
considered "the most dramatic" in modern US electoral history.
Mr. Joe Biden is also one of the few
US politicians who have risen above
"family tragedies" to become the
oldest president at the time of taking office. Mr. Joe Biden, full name is Joseph
Robinette Biden Jr, was born on November 20, 1942 in the town of Scranton,
Pennsylvania, into a Catholic family of Irish descent. In the 1950s, his father,
Joseph Robinette Biden Sr., was a former car salesman who lost his job and moved
the family to Delaware. Born of a working-class background and stuttering as a
child, Joe Biden overcame it all. Joe Biden attended the University of Delaware
and Syracuse College of Law, and also started his political career in Delaware.
President-elect Joe Biden will go down in American history as the most
experienced politician, but his political career is also associated with family tragedies.
II.2.2.2 THE ROLES OF THE PRESIDENTS
The Constitution is the document that contains the foundational laws
for the United States. Article II of the Constitution details the executive branch
and president. It lists only three requirements to become president: the person
must be at least thirty-five years old, a natural-born citizen, and have lived in the
United States for at least fourteen years. Once elected and sworn into office, the
President of the United States moves into the White House for the next four
years. Current presidents can serve a maximum of two four-year terms. The 22nd
Amendment created this limit after Franklin Roosevelt served as president for
twelve years. He was elected to four terms but died shortly after his fourth
inauguration in 1945. While living and working in the White House, the president
performs many roles. These include the following eight: Chief of State, Chief
Executive, Chief Administrator, Chief Diplomat, Commander-in-Chief, Chief
Legislator, Chief of Party, and Chief Citizen.
II.2.2.2.1 COMMANDER IN CHIEF
The Constitution specifically gives the president
direct power over all branches of the military as
Commander-in-Chief. The authority to declare
war lies with the legislative branch, but the
president can request and then sign declarations of war drafted by Congress.
During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln met with
generals and visited troops in camp. Other
presidents exercised their authority as
Commander-in-Chief even when the nation was
not engaged in a conflict. In 1957, President
Dwight D. Eisenhower sent soldiers to Little Rock,
Arkansas, providing protection for the first African
American children who attended the newly
desegregated Central High School.
II.2.2.2.2 CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR
Along with managing the armed forces, the president heads the entire executive
branch of the federal government as Chief Administrator. The executive branch is
more than just the White House. This branch is made up of many different
departments and agencies, such as the Department of Energy and the Department of Agriculture.
II.2.2.2.3 CHIEF EXECUTIVE
Also a part of leading the executive branch, the president is Chief Executive,
enforcing the laws of the nation. To help with this enormous task, the president
has the power to appoint a Cabinet, the group of people who advise the president
and run the various government agencies. George Washington had only four official cabinet members. Today there are twenty- four Cabinet-level positions, and they meet in the White House’s Cabinet Room in the West Wing. The first woman appointed to a Cabinet-level position was Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933. She
was instrumental in helping Roosevelt carry out the New Deal, which put
millions of people back to work during the Great Depression
II.2.2.2.4 CHIEF LEGISLATOR
In the role of Chief Legislator, the president
does not write the laws of the nation; that is
the job of Congress. However, the president
has the authority to either sign a bill or veto
a bill, which will prevent it from becoming
a law. Presidents also advise Congress on
their legislative goals, usually in a speech
called the State of the Union. Some of the many examples of bill signings
include William Howard Taft’s signing New Mexico into statehood in 1912
and Ronald Reagan’s proclaiming the birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr., a national holiday in 1983.
II.2.2.2.5 CHIEF DIPLOMAT
As Chief Diplomat, the president determines how the United States and its
diplomats interact with other countries. The president hosts State Visits, where
foreign leaders visit the president at the White House. In 1860, James Buchanan
welcomed the first delegation of officials
from Japan and ratified a Treaty of Amity
and Commerce. People were so eager to
see these visitors in the East Room that
some even stood on pieces of furniture.
II.2.2.2.6 CHIEF OF PARTY
In this unofficial position, the president acts as the leader of their political party
and supports other governmental candidates who support the same policies.
II.2.2.2.7 CHIEF OF STATE
In this position, the president serves as the
public face and figure head of the country.
An example of this is when the president
hosts the ceremonial events such as the
Presidential Medal of Freedom reception.
This award is the highest civilian honor,
presented to individuals who have made
especially significant contributions to the nation and world
II.2.2.2.8 CHIEF CITIZEN
The president represents all citizens and sets an example for civic behavior in times of peace and crisis. During World War I, President Woodrow Wilson kept sheep on the White House lawn,
benefiting the Red Cross through the
donation of their wool and serving
as a highly visible symbol of home front support. He hoped to
encourage all Americans to give to the war effort in whatever way they could.
II.2.2.3 THE POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT
The president of the United States leads one of the most powerful countries in the
world, so it’s no wonder that the job comes with huge responsibilities. Most of the
president’s basic tasks are outlined by Article II of the U.S. Constitution.
II.2.2.3.1 CHIEF OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH
The president’s main job is to oversee the
federal government, which is made up of
more than 2 million employees. To keep it
running smoothly, each president chooses a
group of senior advisers called a Cabinet.
The president is also the head of the
executive branch of government, which is
the branch responsible for enforcing laws. Although laws are passed by Congress,
the president decides which ones are most important to enforce—and how to do so.
The president also appoints federal judges and nominates people for open seats on
the U.S. Supreme Court. The president’s choices for both judges and Cabinet
members must be approved by the U.S. Senate.
II.2.2.3.2 HEAD OF FOREIGN POLICY
Another crucial presidential task is maintaining America’s role as a world leader.
Presidents have to decide what the nation’s relationships with other governments
will be like. A president’s goals and actions—including meeting with foreign
leaders, often in tough negotiations—make up his or her foreign policy. Presidents
also appoint ambassadors, who represent the U.S. to foreign nations.
The president has the sole power to negotiate treaties. Treaties serve important
functions, such as ending wars or promoting trade. Before such agreements can
take effect, however, they have to be ratified, or approved, by the Senate.
II.2.2.3.3 POLITICAL PARTY LEADER
The president serves as the leader of his or her political party and plays a key role
in shaping its positions on important issues. Presidents help raise money for the
party and campaign for members who are running for office. Experts say that
Barack Obama (2009-2017) reshaped the Democratic Party during his presidency.
Under Obama’s direction, the party became much bolder in its support of rights for minorities and undocumented immigrants.
II.2.2.3.4 HEAD OF STATE
As the head of state, the president acts as
the highest living symbol of our country.
When presidents welcome Super Bowl
champions or host official dinners at the
White House, they are representing the
nation. Americans look to their president
for inspiration, especially when he or she
engages with foreign leaders. The
president’s actions are expected to
represent the nation’s highest ideals and commitment to democracy. II.2.2.3.5 GUARDIAN OF THE ECONOMY
The president shares responsibility for the economy with Congress. But as the
nation’s chief executive, he or she is expected to help it run smoothly—and as
fairly for all Americans as possible. Overseeing the economy includes many
factors, such as trying to keep the unemployment rate down and aiding businesses.
Every year, the president proposes a budget for the country. This determines how
much money each part of the government, such as the military, will get to operate.
Congress adds its own priorities—and sometimes changes the president’s
suggested budget completely. The final budget must be passed by Congress and signed by the president.
II.2.2.3.6 COMMANDER IN CHIEF
The Constitution divides the power to make war between the president and
Congress. Only Congress can actually declare war on another country. But the
Constitution names the president as commander in chief of the nation’s armed
forces. That means the president makes major decisions on where and when troops
will be deployed (or sent into combat), who will lead them, and how the U.S. will
use its weapons. The president also has what experts call
the “awesome responsibility” of deciding
whether to bomb a foreign country. Harry S. Truman (1945-1953) had to make that
choice when he ordered atomic bombs to be dropped on two Japanese cities, the
action that ended World War II (1939-1945).
II.2.2.3.7 LEGISLATIVE MANAGER
The president can influence legislation in several ways. As a proposed law (called
a bill) works its way through Congress, the president will call members of the
Senate and the House of Representatives to urge them to vote for or against it. He
or she may also invite members of Congress to the White House to discuss a proposed bill.
Presidents have another tool when it comes to new laws passed by Congress: They
can veto, or reject, legislation they don’t like. But Congress can override the
president’s veto by a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate.
II.2.2.4 U.S - Vietnam relation
Twenty-five years after the establishment of bilateral relations in 1995, the
United States and Vietnam are trusted partners with a friendship grounded in
mutual respect. U.S.-Vietnam relations have become increasingly cooperative and
comprehensive, evolving into a flourishing partnership that spans political,
economic, security, and people-to-people ties. The United States supports a strong,
prosperous, and independent Vietnam that contributes to international security;
engages in mutually beneficial trade relations; and respects human rights and the
rule of law. Relations are guided by the 2013 U.S.-Vietnam Comprehensive
Partnership, an overarching framework for advancing the bilateral relationship, and
Joint Statements issued by our two countries’ leaders in 2015, 2016, and in May
and November 2017. In 2020, Vietnam and the United States commemorated 25
years of diplomatic relations between the two countries, renewing their
commitment to strengthened cooperation. The Comprehensive Partnership
underscores the enduring U.S. commitment to the Indo-Pacific and provides a
mechanism to facilitate cooperation in areas including political and diplomatic
relations, trade and economic ties, defense and security, science and technology,
education and training, environment and health, humanitarian assistance/disaster
relief, war legacy issues, protection and promotion of human rights, people-to-
people ties, and culture, sports, and tourism. The United States supports capacity
building for Vietnam’s law enforcement, regional cross-border cooperation, and
implementation of international conventions and standards. Vietnam is a partner in
nonproliferation regimes, including the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear
Terrorism, and takes advantage of expertise, equipment, and training available
under the Export Control and Related Border Security program. In 2016, the
United States and Vietnam signed a letter of agreement to increase cooperation on
law enforcement and the justice sector and the two countries are working jointly to
implement the agreement. The United States and Vietnam hold regular dialogues
on labor, security, energy, science & technology, and human rights. Achieving the
fullest possible accounting of Americans missing and unaccounted for in Indochina
is one of the United States’ highest priorities in Vietnam. The Joint POW/MIA
Accounting Command conducts four major investigation and recovery periods a
year in Vietnam, during which specially trained U.S. military and civilian
personnel investigate and excavate hundreds of cases in pursuit of the fullest
possible accounting. Vietnamese-led recovery teams have become regular
participants in these recovery missions since August 2011. Vietnam remains
heavily contaminated by explosive remnants of war, primarily in the form of
unexploded ordnance (UXO) including extensive contamination by cluster
munitions dating from the war with the United States. The United States is the
largest single donor to UXO/mine action in Vietnam, contributing more than $140
million since 1994, and the two countries signed a memorandum of understanding
on continued unexploded ordnance cooperation in December 2013. U.S. efforts to
address legacy issues such as UXO/demining, MIA accounting, and remediation of
Agent Orange provided the foundations for the U.S.-Vietnam defense relationship.
The United States and Vietnam are committed to strengthening defense
cooperation between the two countries as outlined in the Memorandum of
Understanding on Advancing Bilateral Defense Cooperation in 2011 and the U.S.-
Vietnam Joint Vision Statement on Defense Relations signed in 2015, giving
priority to humanitarian cooperation, war legacy issues, maritime security,
peacekeeping, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. In May 2016, the
United States fully lifted its ban on the sale of lethal weapons to Vietnam and
continued to provide Vietnam with maritime security assistance – including
through the Maritime Security Initiative, the Cooperative Threat Reduction
program, and Foreign Military Financing. The United States transferred Hamilton-
class Coast Guard cutters to Vietnam in 2017 and 2020 to help improve Vietnam’s
maritime law enforcement capabilities. The United States reaffirmed its support
for Vietnam’s peacekeeping efforts through assistance to Vietnam’s first
deployment of UN peacekeeping forces in 2018, to South Sudan. U.S.-Vietnam
people-to-people ties have flourished. Tens of thousands of Vietnamese study in
the United States, contributing nearly $1 billion to the U.S. economy. The
Fulbright University Vietnam, which matriculated its first undergraduate cohort in
Fall 2019, brings world-class, independent U.S.-style education to Vietnam. More
than 25,000 young Vietnamese are members of the Young Southeast Asia Leaders
Initiative network in Vietnam. The United States and Vietnam signed a Peace
Corps implementing agreement in 2020.
II.2.3 Constitutions of the United States II.2.3.1 The problem of liberty
Compare the causes of revolution in the US vs. France. The American and French
revolution were both extremely important in the changing path of world history.
Even with different outcomes and variances in successes, the impact of both cannot
be denied. The Causes of the French revolution and the American revolution are
similar because they both were partially prompted by an over-reaching monarch,
another similarity was that both revolutions were started by the commoners who
wanted revolution to improve their lives, however a key difference is that the
American revolution was sparked by outrage of political reasons whereas the
french were fighting for complete social revolution. Overall the causes for the
American and French Revolutions
Haiti was French colony and Latin America was spanish but independence was
paramount in both and changed these areas forever. The outcomes of independence
movements in Haiti and the Spanish Americas were similar because they both
ended successfully and with independence from the colonizing nation, a difference
however was that in Haiti the revolution ended with a complete social overhaul
and the re-arrangement of social classes whereas in the Latin American revolutions
it ended as mostly the same as before. Another difference is that Latin America
ended up with a dictator under Simon Bolivar, whereas Haiti constructed a new
government with the predominantly black population in office. Overall the
outcomes of independence movement in Haiti and the Spanish Americas were more different than
But the American revolution changed not the social dynamics of North America
but how the people saw themselves and their government. In North America
between the years 1650-1850 the beliefs about government changed as the people
thought that self-governance could be achieved and should be achieved by this
newly founded american Government. Another change was that people believed
that the United States Government was real, and that the many colonies could be
united under one government. However a continuity is that the people believed the
government should not intertwine in the daily lives of the people, just like the
british had done when they were in power. Overall in the years 1650-1850 there
was more change in the way people believed about government than continuity.
These new ideas of how self-governance is paramount were not new ways of
thinking, as they were pioneered within the enlightenment in france, and was one
of the multiple reasons for the French
2. The liberties the colonists fought to protect were on a higher law embodying
natural rights that were ordained by God, discoverable in nature and history, and
essential to human progress. They said that these certain rights belong to us and
cannot be taken from us. These essential rights included life, liberty, and property
II.2.3.2 The Constitutional Convention
The Declaration of Independence is arguably one of the most influential documents
in American History. Other countries and organizations have adopted its tone and
manner in their own documents and declarations. For example, France wrote its
'Declaration of the Rights of Man' and the Women's Rights movement wrote its
'Declaration of Sentiments'. However, the Declaration of Independence was
actually not technically necessary in proclaiming independence from Great Britain.
History of the Declaration of Independence
A resolution of independence passed the Philadelphia Convention on July 2. This
was all that was needed to break away from Britain. The colonists had been
fighting Great Britain for 14 months while proclaiming their allegiance to the
crown. Now they were breaking away. Obviously, they wanted to make clear
exactly why they decided to take this action. Hence, they presented the world with
the 'Declaration of Independence' drafted by thirty-three-year-old Thomas Jefferson.
The text of the Declaration has been compared to a 'Lawyer's Brief'. It presents a
long list of grievances against King George III including such items as taxation
without representation, maintaining a standing army in peacetime, dissolving
houses of representatives, and hiring "large armies of foreign mercenaries." The
analogy is that Jefferson is an attorney presenting his case before the world court.
Not everything that Jefferson wrote was exactly correct. However, it is important
to remember that he was writing a persuasive essay, not a historical text. The
formal break from Great Britain was complete with the adoption of this document on July 4, 1776.
What Is the Declaration of Independence? Mercantilism
Mercantilism was the idea that colonies existed for the benefit of the Mother
Country. The American colonists could be compared to tenants who were expected
to 'pay rent', i.e., provide materials for export to Britain. Britain's goal was to have
a greater number of exports than imports allowing them to store up wealth in the
form of bullion. According to mercantilism, the wealth of the world was fixed. To
increase wealth a country had two options: explore or make war. By colonizing
America, Britain greatly increased its base of wealth. This idea of a fixed amount
of wealth was the target of Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations(1776). Smith's work
had a profound effect on the American founding fathers and the nation's economic system.
Events Leading to the Declaration of Independence
The French and Indian War was a fight between Britain and France that lasted from
1754-1763. Because the British ended in debt, they began to demand more from the
colonies. Further, parliament passed the Royal Proclamation of 1763 which
prohibited settlement beyond the Appalachian Mountains.
Beginning in 1764, Great Britain began passing acts to exert greater control over
the American colonies which had been left more or less to themselves until the
French and Indian War. In 1764, the Sugar Act increased duties on foreign sugar
imported from the West Indies. A Currency Act was also passed that year banning
the colonies from issuing paper bills or bills of credit because of the belief that the
colonial currency had devalued the British money. Further, in order to continue to
support the British soldiers left in America after the war, Great Britain passed the
Quartering Act in 1765. This ordered colonists to house and feed British soldiers if
there was not enough room for them in the barracks.
An important piece of legislation that really upset the colonists was the Stamp Act
passed in 1765. This required stamps to be purchased or included on many different
items and documents such as playing cards, legal papers, newspapers, and more.
This was the first direct tax that Britain had imposed on the colonists. The money
from it was to be used for defense. In response to this, the Stamp Act Congress met
in New York City. 27 delegates from nine colonies met and wrote a statement of
rights and grievances against Great Britain. In order to fight back, the Sons of
Liberty and Daughters of Liberty secret organizations were created. They imposed
non-importation agreements. Sometimes, enforcing these agreements meant tarring
and feathering those who still wished to purchase British goods.
Events began to escalate with the passage of the Townshend Acts in 1767. These
taxes were created to help colonial officials become independent of the colonists by
providing them with a source of income. Smuggling of the affected goods meant
that the British moved more troops to important ports such as Boston. The increase
in troops led to many clashes including the famous Boston Massacre.
The colonists continued to organize themselves. Samuel Adams organized the
Committees of Correspondence, informal groups that helped spread information from colony to colony.
In 1773, parliament passed the Tea Act, giving the British East India Company a
monopoly to trade tea in America. This led to the Boston Tea Party where a group
of colonists dressed as Indigenous people dumped tea from three ships into Boston
Harbor. In response, the Intolerable Acts were passed. These placed numerous
restrictions on the colonists including the closing of Boston Harbor.
Colonists Respond and War Begins
In response to the Intolerable Acts, 12 of the 13 colonies met in Philadelphia from
September-October, 1774. This was called the First Continental Congress. The
Association was created calling for a boycott of British goods. The continuing
escalation of hostility resulted in violence when in April 1775, British troops
traveled to Lexington and Concord to take control of stored colonial gunpowder
and to capture Samuel Adams and John Hancock. Eight Americans were killed at
Lexington. At Concord, the British troops retreated losing 70 men in the process.
May 1775 brought the meeting of the Second Continental Congress. All 13
colonies were represented. George Washington was named the head of the
Continental Army with John Adams backing. The majority of delegates were not
calling for complete independence at this point so much as changes in British
policy. However, with the colonial victory at Bunker Hill on June 17, 1775, King
George III proclaimed that the colonies were in a state of rebellion. He hired
thousands of Hessian mercenaries to fight against the colonists.
In January 1776, Thomas Paine published his famous pamphlet entitled "Common
Sense." Up until the appearance of this extremely influential pamphlet, many
colonists had been fighting with the hope of reconciling. However, he argued that
America should no longer be a colony to Great Britain but instead should be an independent country.
Committee to Draft the Declaration of Independence
On June 11, 1776, the Continental Congress appointed a committee of five men to
draft the Declaration: John Adams Benjamin Franklin , , Thomas Jefferson, Robert
Livingston, and Roger Sherman. Jefferson was given the task of writing the first
draft. Once complete, he presented this to the committee. Together they revised the
document and on June 28 submitted it to the Continental Congress. The Congress
voted for independence on July 2. They then made some changes to the Declaration
of Independence and finally approved it on July 4.
II.2.3.3 The challenge
The Virginia Plan was a proposal to establish a bicameral (two-branch)
legislature in the newly founded United States. Drafted by James Madison in
1787, the plan recommended that states be represented based upon their
population numbers, and it also called for the creation of three branches of
government. While the Virginia Plan was not adopted in full, parts of the
proposal were incorporated into the Great Compromise of 1787, which laid
the foundation for the creation of the U.S. Constitution.
William Paterson’s New Jersey Plan proposed a unicameral (one-house)
legislature with equal votes of states and an executive elected by a
national legislature. This plan maintained the form of government under
the Articles of Confederation while adding powers to raise revenue and
regulate commerce and foreign affairs. James Madison commented on
Paterson’s proposed plan in his journal that he maintained during the
course of the proceedings. Madison’s notes, which he refined nightly,
have become the most important contemporary record of the debates in the Convention.
During the summer of 1787, the delegates to the Constitutional Convention
in Philadelphia established equal representation in the Senate and
proportional representation in the House of Representatives. Called the
“Great Compromise” or the “Connecticut Compromise,” this unique plan for
congressional representation resolved the most controversial aspect of the drafting of the Constitution.
The Virginia Plan, drafted by James Madison and introduced to the
Convention by Edmund Randolph on May 29, 1787, proposed the creation
of a bicameral national legislature, or a legislature consisting of two houses,
in which the “rights of suffrage” in both houses would be proportional to the
size of the state. When delegates from small states objected to this idea,
delegates from the larger states argued that their states contributed more of
the nation’s financial and defensive resources than small states and therefore
ought to have a greater say in the central government. This proposal also
reflected a vision of national government that differed from the government
under the Articles of Confederation in which each state had an equal voice.
Madison argued that “whatever reason might have existed for the equality . .
. when the Union was a federal one among sovereign States, it must cease
when a national Government should be put into place.”
Delegates from the smaller states insisted on preserving the equal vote they
had enjoyed under the Articles of Confederation. “A confederacy,” New
Jersey’s William Paterson stated, “supposes sovereignty in the members
composing it & sovereignty supposes equality.”
On June 11 the delegates voted to adopt proportional representation in the
House of Representatives based on the “whole number of white & other free
Citizens,” and “three fifths of all other persons,” meaning enslaved African
Americans. Connecticut’s Roger Sherman, with support from Oliver
Ellsworth, also from Connecticut, immediately moved that states have equal
suffrage in the Senate. Sherman stated that “Everything depended on this.
The smaller States would never agree to the plan on any other principle than
an equality of suffrage” in the Senate. The motion was defeated by one vote.
In response, William Paterson proposed what became known as the New
Jersey Plan, presenting it to the Convention on June 15. The centerpiece of
Paterson’s plan was a unicameral (one-house) legislature in which each state
had a single vote. The Convention voted down Paterson’s proposal on June
19 and affirmed its commitment to a bicameral legislature on June 21.
The small-state delegates continued to protest proportional representation in
the Senate with increasingly heated language, threatening to unravel the
proceedings. When another vote on equal representation in the Senate
resulted in a tie on July 2, however, the small shift opened the possibility for compromise.
The Convention appointed a “Grand Committee” to reach a final resolution
on the question. The committee reported the original Sherman compromise
proposal with the added provision, suggested by Benjamin Franklin of
Pennsylvania, that revenue and spending bills would only originate in the
House. Madison and others continued to press their case for proportional
representation in the Senate and to oppose a House monopoly on revenue
bills, while some small-state delegates were reluctant even to support
proportional representation in the House. On July 16, delegates narrowly
adopted the mixed representation plan giving states equal votes in the Senate.
II.2.3.4 The Constitution and democracy
At the beginning of the 21st century, Western democracies are the most
prosperous nations in the world, but this does not necessarily imply that democracy
causes prosperity. Indeed, the literature examining the issue suggests that the
protection of private property rights, the existence of market institutions, low taxes
and government regulation, and a free and stable monetary system are the key
elements that pro duce prosperity (Gwartney and Lawson 1997; Keefer and Knack
1997; Landes 1998). When these factors are taken into account, Barro (1996) and
Gwartney, Lawson, and Holcombe (1999) fifind that democratic poli tical
institutions have, if anything, a negative effect on the performance of an
economy.1 Democratic institutions allow citizens to participate in the political
process and engage in rent-seeking, as Tullock (1967) and Kreuger (1974) have
noted, which, following Mancur Olson’s (1982) thesis, weakens a nation and
precipitates its decline. Government action is, at its foundation, based on coercion.
As Yeager (1985) persuasively argues, no matter how much people like or approve
of their government, government offers people no choice but to obey its laws, pay
its taxes, and follow its regulations. Dictators can use the power of government to
divert resources away from a nation’s citizens for the private benefifit of the
dictator2, but so can citizen coa litions in a democracy. Thus, as Buchanan (1975)
and Usher (1992) argue, to protect the rights of its citizens, government must have
enough power to protect its citizens from the predatory actions of other citizens,
but not so much that government itself becomes a predator.
The classical liberal answer to this problem, Hayek (1973, 1976, 1979) explains, is
to design a government based on rule of law. Under rule of law, government acts
according to well-defifined rules that apply equally to everyone. As Holcombe
(1994) argues, under such a system, those in government have the incentive to
protect the rights of their citizens, because those citizens are the source of
government revenue. Through taxation, government forces citizens to fifinance its
activities, which means that its citizens are the source of its revenue and its pros
perity. Thus, policy makers have an incentive to protect the rights of the citizens,
because by doing so, they are protecting their own source of revenue. When
government is seen in this way, the fundamental activity of all government is an
exchange of protection for tribute. Government revenue comes from the
productivity of its taxpayers, so any government that does not protect the
productive capacity of its source of revenue must be very short-sighted. Citizens
want protection, and have an incentive to pay tribute to the government because
this is how the production of protective services is fifinanced. Both citizens and
government have an incentive to participate in, and perpetuate, this exchange of
protection for tribute. This is why governments can be stable institutions.
II.2.3.5 The Constitution and slavery
On the 200th anniversary of the ratification of the US Constitution, Thurgood
Marshall, the first African American to sit on the Supreme Court, said that the
Constitution was "defective from the start." He pointed out that the framers had left
out a majority of Americans when they wrote the phrase, "We the People." While
some members of the Constitutional Convention voiced "eloquent objections" to
slavery, Marshall said they "consented to a document which laid a foundation for
the tragic events which were to follow."
The word "slave" does not appear in the Constitution. The framers consciously
avoided the word, recognizing that it would sully the document. Nevertheless,
slavery received important protections in the Constitution. The notorious three-
fifths clause—which counted three-fifths of a state’s slave population in
apportioning representation—gave the South extra representation in the House of
Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. Thomas Jefferson would
have lost the election of 1800 if not for the Three-fifths Compromise. The
Constitution also prohibited Congress from outlawing the Atlantic slave trade for
twenty years. A fugitive slave clause required the return of runaway slaves to their
owners. The Constitution gave the federal government the power to put down
domestic rebellions, including slave insurrections.
The framers of the Constitution believed that concessions on slavery were the price
for the support of southern delegates for a strong central government. They were
convinced that if the Constitution restricted the slave trade, South Carolina and
Georgia would refuse to join the Union. But by sidestepping the slavery issue, the
framers left the seeds for future conflict. After the convention approved the great
compromise, Madison wrote: "It seems now to be pretty well understood that the
real difference of interests lies not between the large and small but between the
northern and southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences form the line of discrimination."
Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention, about 25 owned slaves.
Many of the framers harbored moral qualms about slavery. Some, including
Benjamin Franklin (a former slaveholder) and Alexander Hamilton (who was born
in a slave colony in the British West Indies) became members of anti-slavery societies.
On August 21, 1787, a bitter debate broke out over a South Carolina proposal to
prohibit the federal government from regulating the Atlantic slave trade. Luther
Martin of Maryland, a slaveholder, said that the slave trade should be subject to
federal regulation since the entire nation would be responsible for suppressing
slave revolts. He also considered the slave trade contrary to America’s republican
ideals. "It is inconsistent with the principles of the Revolution," he said, "and
dishonorable to the American character to have such a feature in the constitution."
John Rutledge of South Carolina responded forcefully. "Religion and humanity
have nothing to do with this question," he insisted. Unless regulation of the slave
trade was left to the states, the southern-most states "shall not be parties to the
union." A Virginia delegate, George Mason, who owned hundreds of slaves, spoke
out against slavery in ringing terms. "Slavery," he said, "discourages arts and
manufactures. The poor despise labor when performed by slaves." Slavery also
corrupted slaveholders and threatened the country with divine punishment, he
believed: "Every master of slaves is born a petty tyrant. They bring the judgment of heaven on a country."
Oliver Ellsworth of Connecticut accused slaveholders from Maryland and Virginia
of hypocrisy. They could afford to oppose the slave trade, he claimed, because
"slaves multiply so fast in Virginia and Maryland that it is cheaper to raise than
import them, whilst in the sickly rice swamps [of South Carolina and Georgia]
foreign supplies are necessary." Ellsworth suggested that ending the slave trade
would benefit slaveholders in the Chesapeake region, since the demand for slaves
in other parts of the South would increase the price of slaves once the external supply was cut off.
The controversy over the Atlantic slave trade was ultimately settled by
compromise. In exchange for a 20-year ban on any restrictions on the Atlantic
slave trade, southern delegates agreed to remove a clause restricting the national
government’s power to enact laws requiring goods to be shipped on American
vessels (benefiting northeastern shipbuilders and sailors). The same day this
agreement was reached, the convention also adopted the fugitive slave clause,
requiring the return of runaway slaves to their owners.
Was the Constitution a proslavery document, as abolitionist William Lloyd
Garrison claimed when he burned the document in 1854 and called it "a covenant
with death and an agreement with Hell"? This question still provokes controversy.
If the Constitution temporarily strengthened slavery, it also created a central
government powerful enough to eventually abolish the institution
II.2.3.6 The motives of the Framers
Woody Holton is not out to trash the Constitution. Its success, he says, is almost
impossible to exaggerate. But his lively, provocative book -- a finalist for a
National Book Award -- disputes the idea that the Founding Fathers wrote the
Constitution to protect civil liberties. They wanted, he says, to make the United
States more attractive to investors, and for that reason consciously made American government democratic than it had been. less
Readers of the published papers of George Washington might come to a different
conclusion about what the Founders wanted. Washington and his correspondents --
all major players in the development and ratification of the Constitution -- spoke
repeatedly about making the United States "a respectable nation," which it
notoriously was not in 1787. The problem was in part fiscal: The United States had
failed to make a scheduled interest payment on its wartime loans from France and
had no way to pay a chunk of the principal due late that year. Structural flaws also
kept the fledgling nation from acting with what Washington called the requisite
"energy." The Confederation Congress -- the entire government of the United
States at the time -- needed the consent of nine states to exercise its most important
powers under the Articles of Confederation. Throughout most of the wild winter of
1786-87, when insurgent farmers attacked the federal arsenal at Springfield, Mass.,
in Shays' Rebellion, there weren't nine state delegations present. The situation screamed for change.
Yet, Holton argues, "expressions of concern about the weakness of Congress,
numerous as they were, were vastly outnumbered by complaints against the state
governments." He is not the first historian to make this point; Gordon S. Wood's
classic Creation of the American Republic (1969) did, too. Both base their
argument on the writings of James Madison. But Holton, a professor at the
University of Richmond, goes further. He contends that the Founders were
primarily concerned with the very democratic, revolutionary state legislatures'
"excessive indulgence to debtors and taxpayers," above all by printing paper
money, which made the United States an investor's nightmare. Well-heeled
"Federalists" -- which included most of the Founders -- dismissed paper money as
a way to allow lazy, luxury-loving people with the 18th-century equivalent of
serious credit card debt to cheat their creditors.
To get the other side of the story, Holton prowled through rural newspapers and
paid attention to such "ordinary Americans" as Adonijah Matthews of Virginia and
William Manning of Massachusetts, both tavern keepers, and Herman Husband, a
North Carolina farmer. Using their testimony, he mounts a persuasive attack on the
Federalists' hard money ideology.
After 1783, Holton explains, the states faced colossal war debts on which the
interest alone required more revenue than the colonies collected before
independence. Most states resorted to regressive "direct taxes" on real estate and
polls (only adult men). The main beneficiaries were speculators who had
purchased government-issued IOUs from soldiers and war suppliers for a fraction
of their official worth, then collected 6 percent interest on the full face value,
yielding as much as a 30 percent annual return. That was a great deal if you could
swing it, as Abigail Adams, Holton's surprise speculator, understood. John, the
future president, wanted to invest in land; not Abigail. Collecting interest was a lot
less trouble than working land, and -- though she didn't say it -- interest and capital
gains weren't taxed, while land was.
To add to the problem, a severe trade deficit in the mid-1780s drained the country's
gold and silver. The resulting deflation made it harder to pay private debts, which
became, in real terms, larger than the original loans. Delinquents could see their
farms auctioned off, then spend time in debtors' prison. The rural population did
not submit quietly. Throughout the country, farmers resisted tax collectors, forced
courts to close (or burned them down) to prevent foreclosures and demanded paper money and tax relief.
Circumstances called for (in modern terms) a loosening of the money supply, and
Holton argues that paper money was a reasonable response. Seven states printed
currency (though only three made it legal tender for all debts), and every state
provided some tax or debtor relief. The goal was to let people pay their taxes and
encourage economic development, but the paper currency lost value in a few
states, particularly Rhode Island, which tried to force creditors to accept it. To
defenders of fiscal responsibility, Rhode Island showed what too much democracy
produced: a situation in which only a fool would lend money to anyone.
Madison, however, understood debtor relief as a majoritarian violation of property
rights. That has implications for Holton's claim that the Founders were for
investment, not civil liberties. In fact, they were necessarily for both, since a good
investment climate demands, as Madison put it, both "security of private rights,
and the steady dispensation of Justice."
The desire to protect creditors and property rights was, no doubt, a powerful force
for constitutional change. Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution prohibits states
from issuing anything but gold and silver legal tender or "impairing the Obligation
of Contracts," and Holton shows that several Founders considered it their favorite
part of the document. More important, he argues that the Founders buried a host of
undemocratic devices in the Constitution to ensure that the new government would
not repeat what they described as the states' "excessive" or "licentious" democracy.
No federal official would have to face the voters every year, as almost all state
legislators did at the time, for example. Only members of the House of
Representatives would be elected directly by the people, and large electoral
districts all but guaranteed the election of prominent, often wealthy, candidates.
Why did "we the people" agree to these constraints and ratify the Constitution?
Holton says the Federalists manipulated state conventions, persuaded doubters that
the new government would lower taxes and misled people with outright lies. More
attention to the state ratification debates would, I think, suggest another answer:
Many delegates saw full well the undemocratic provisions in the Constitution. But
even the Constitution's critics wanted to be part of a "respectable nation" that could
pay its bills and defend its peoples' interests more effectively than the
Confederation had. Many voted for ratification in the hope that amendments would
soon modify the Constitution's more objectionable provisions.
Were their demands responsible for the Bill of Rights, as Holton asserts? Yes,
though he doesn't tell the story in detail. Of the five state ratifying conventions that
recommended amendments to the Constitution, only Virginia explicitly asked for a
bill of rights. However, all five asked that state legislatures have an opportunity to
levy direct taxes before the federal government collected them. That was a rights
issue, the central rights issue of the Revolution: no taxation without (adequate)
representation. Rather than risk leaving taxing power with the state legislatures,
Madison proposed amendments to protect the "great rights of mankind" on which
everyone agreed. So the Bill of Rights was not exactly what the Constitution's
critics had asked for, though it turned out to be their lasting gift to America.
II.2.3.7 Constitutional reform--modern views
The worst legacy of the Obama administration may be disdain for the
Constitution’s separation of powers. President Obama’s actions have created
dangerous stress fractures in our constitutional architecture, making it imperative
that the Trump administration and Republican Congress commence immediate repairs.
The Constitution separates power in two ways: among the three branches of the
federal government and between the federal government and states. As James
Madison wrote in the Federalist Papers, separation creates “a double security” for
liberty because “different governments will control each other, at the same time
that each will be controlled by itself.”
The Obama administration has spurned this core constitutional principle,
aggrandizing executive power at the expense of Congress and states. It has
rewritten laws, disregarding its constitutional duty to faithfully execute them.
ObamaCare’s implementation provides multiple examples: delaying statutory
deadlines, extending tax credits to groups Congress never included, exempting
unions from fees, expanding hardship waivers beyond recognition and granting
“transition relief” for preferred employers.
Mr. Obama even usurped Congress’s power of the purse, spending billions for
“cost-sharing subsidies” that pay ObamaCare insurers for subsidizing deductibles
and copays. Congress never appropriated money for these subsidies, so the
administration shifted money appropriated for other purposes. The House sued to
defend its constitutional prerogative, and in May a federal court against the ruled
administration, which has appealed.
Mr. Obama also exempted five million illegal immigrants from deportation, though
Congress had unambiguously declared them deportable. He waived the mandatory
work requirement of the 1996 welfare reform. He redefined sexual discrimination
under Title IX, forcing schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms of
their non-biological gender, and threatening to withdraw funds if colleges refuse to
reduce due process protections for individuals accused of sexual assault.
The president has exhibited particular antipathy toward the Senate’s advice-and-
consent duty. In Noel Canning v. NLRB (2014), the Supreme Court unanimously
ruled that the administration violated separation of powers by making unilateral
appointments to the National Labor Relations Board while the Senate was in
session. And the president unilaterally committed the nation to an unpopular
nuclear deal with Iran, bypassing the Senate’s treaty ratification power.
Mr. Obama’s actions have also shattered federalism. The administration rewrote
the 1970 Clean Air Act, commanding states to revamp their electricity generation
and distribution infrastructure. It rewrote the 1972 Clean Water Act, claiming vast
new power to regulate ditches and streams under the risible notion that they are
“navigable waters.” It has refused to enforce existing federal drug laws,
emboldening states to legalize marijuana.
The media and academy enabled the administration’s unconstitutional behavior
because they support its policy agenda. But the Framers expected members of
Congress to jealously defend congressional power against executive encroachment
—even from a president of the same political party. As Madison observed,
“Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be
connected with the constitutional rights of the place.”
This principle disappeared during the past eight years. In his 2014 State of the
Union address, the president vowed to implement his agenda “wherever and
whenever I can” without congressional involvement—to thunderous applause by
Democrats. In November 2014, Democratic Senators urged the president to vastly
expand his unilateral amnesty for illegal immigrants.
The Trump administration and GOP Congress should resist the temptation to
follow this Constitution-be-damned playbook. The greatest gift Republicans could
give Americans is a restored separation of powers. But this cannot be
accomplished by merely rescinding the Obama administration’s unconstitutional
executive orders. While this is a necessary step, Congress should enact additional reforms.
First, Congress can amend the 1996 Congressional Review Act to require
affirmative approval of major executive-branch regulations. The law now allows
regulations to go into effect automatically if Congress does not disapprove them.
The act has been used only once to overturn a regulation because it requires
passage of a joint resolution of disapproval—which must be signed by the
president. This requirement should be inverted: If Congress does not affirmatively
approve a regulation, it never goes into effect.
Second, Congress could prohibit “ Chevron deference,” in which federal courts
defer to executive branch interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Chevron deference
is a judge-made doctrine that has aggrandized executive power, ostensibly to
implement Congress’s intent. If Congress denounces such deference, it can
simultaneously reduce executive power and encourage itself to legislate with greater specificity.
Third, Congress can augment its institutional authority by expanding its contempt
power. The criminal contempt statute should require the U.S. attorney to convene a
grand jury upon referral by the House or Senate without exercising prosecutorial
discretion. Congress should also extend the civil contempt statute to the House, not
merely the Senate, and enact a new law specifying a process for using Congress’s
longstanding (but rarely invoked) inherent contempt authority.
Fourth, Congress can require that all major international commitments be ratified
by treaty. A statute defining the proper dividing line between treaties and executive
agreements would reassert the Senate’s constitutional role, provide clarification to
the judiciary, and encourage communication and negotiation between Congress and the president.
Fifth, Congress can enact a law further restricting its ability to coerce states into
adopting federal policies or commanding state officials to carry them out. While
the courts have ultimate say on the contours of these federalism doctrines, a law
could force greater consensus and debate, provide guidelines on Congress’s use of
its powers, and signal to the judiciary a reinvigorated commitment to federalism.
Restoring separation of powers is necessary and possible. It should be the highest
priority of the Trump administration and Congress.
Mr. Rivkin and Ms. Foley practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington,
D.C. Ms. Foley is also a professor of constitutional law at Florida International University College of Law.
II.2.4 Political Parties in the USA
II.2.4.1 Demoncratic Party II.2.4.1.1 Introduction
Democratic Party, in the United States, one of the two major political
parties, the other being the Republican Party.
The Democratic Party has changed significantly during its more than two
centuries of existence. During the 19th century the party supported or tolerated
slavery, and it opposed civil rights reforms after the American Civil War in order to
retain the support of Southern voters. By the mid-20th century it had undergone a
dramatic ideological realignment and reinvented itself as a party supporting
organized labour, the civil rights of minorities, and progressive reform. Since Pres.
Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal of the 1930s, the party has also tended to favour
greater government intervention in the economy and to oppose government
intervention in the private noneconomic affairs of citizens. The logo of the
Democratic Party, the donkey, was popularized by cartoonist Thomas Nast in the
1870s; though widely used, it has never been officially adopted by the party. II.2.2.1.2 History
The Democratic Party is the oldest political party in the United States and among
the oldest political parties in the world. It traces its roots to 1792, when followers
of Thomas Jefferson adopted the name Republican to emphasize their anti-
monarchical views. The Republican Party, also known as the Jeffersonian
Republicans, advocated a decentralized government with limited powers. Another
faction to emerge in the early years of the republic, the Federalist Party, led by
Alexander Hamilton, favoured a strong central government. Jefferson’s faction
developed from the group of Anti-Federalists who had agitated in favour of the
addition of a Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the United States. The Federalists
called Jefferson’s faction the Democratic-Republican Party in an attempt to
identify it with the disorder spawned by the “radical democrats” of the French
Revolution of 1789. After the Federalist John Adams was elected president in
1796, the Republican Party served as the country’s first opposition party, and in
1798 the Republicans adopted the derisive Democratic-Republican label as their official name. In 1800 Adams was defeated by
Jefferson, whose victory ushered in a
period of prolonged Democratic-
Republican dominance. Jefferson won reelection easily in 1804, and Democratic-Republicans James
Madison (1808 and 1812) and James
Monroe (1816 and 1820) were also
subsequently elected. By 1820 the
Federalist Party had faded from national politics, leaving the Democratic-
Republicans as the country’s sole major party and allowing Monroe to run
unopposed in that year’s presidential election.
During the 1820s new states entered the union, voting laws were relaxed, and
several states passed legislation that provided for the direct election of presidential
electors by voters (electors had previously been appointed by state legislatures).
These changes split the Democratic-Republicans into factions, each of which
nominated its own candidate in the presidential election of 1824. The party’s
congressional caucus nominated William H. Crawford of Georgia, but Andrew
Jackson and John Quincy Adams, the leaders of the party’s two largest factions,
also sought the presidency; Henry Clay, the speaker of the House of
Representatives, was nominated by the Kentucky and Tennessee legislatures.
Jackson won the most popular and electoral votes, but no candidate received the
necessary majority in the electoral college. When the election went to the House of
Representatives (as stipulated in the Constitution), Clay—who had finished fourth
and was thus eliminated from consideration—threw his support to Adams, who
won the House vote and subsequently appointed Clay secretary of state.
Despite Adams’s victory, differences between the Adams and the Jackson factions
persisted. Adams’s supporters, representing Eastern interests, called themselves the
National Republicans. Jackson, whose strength lay in the South and West, referred
to his followers simply as Democrats (or as Jacksonian Democrats). Jackson
defeated Adams in the 1828 presidential election. In 1832 in Baltimore, Maryland,
at one of the country’s first national political conventions (the first convention had
been held the previous year by the Anti-Masonic Movement), the Democrats
nominated Jackson for president, drafted a party platform, and established a rule
that required party presidential and vice presidential nominees to receive the votes
of at least two-thirds of the national convention delegates. This rule, which was not
repealed until 1936, effectively ceded veto power in the selection process to
minority factions, and it often required conventions to hold dozens of ballots to
determine a presidential nominee. (The party’s presidential candidate in 1924, John
W. Davis, needed more than 100 ballots to secure the nomination.) Jackson easily
won reelection in 1832, but his various opponents—who derisively referred to him
as “King Andrew”—joined with former National Republicans to form the Whig
Party, named for the English political faction that had opposed absolute monarchy
in the 17th century (see Whig and Tory).
Slavery and the emergence of the bipartisan system
From 1828 to 1856 the Democrats won all but two presidential elections (1840 and
1848). During the 1840s and ’50s, however, the Democratic Party, as it officially
named itself in 1844, suffered serious internal strains over the issue of extending
slavery to the Western territories. Southern Democrats, led by Jefferson Davis,
wanted to allow slavery in all the territories, while
Northern Democrats, led by Stephen A. Douglas,
proposed that each territory should decide the
question for itself through referendum. The issue
split the Democrats at their 1860 presidential
convention, where Southern Democrats nominated
John C. Breckinridge and Northern Democrats
nominated Douglas. The 1860 election also included John Bell, the nominee of the
Constitutional Union Party, and Abraham Lincoln, the candidate of the newly
established (1854) antislavery Republican Party (which was unrelated to
Jefferson’s Republican Party of decades earlier). With the Democrats hopelessly
split, Lincoln was elected president with only about 40 percent of the national vote;
in contrast, Douglas and Breckinridge won 29 percent and 18 percent of the vote, respectively.
The election of 1860 is regarded by most political observers as the first of the
country’s three “critical” elections—contests that produced sharp yet enduring
changes in party loyalties across the country. (Some scholars also identify the 1824
election as a critical election.) It established the Democratic and Republican parties
as the major parties in what was ostensibly a two-party system. In federal elections
from the 1870s to the 1890s, the parties were in rough balance—except in the
South, where the Democrats dominated because most whites blamed the
Republican Party for both the American Civil War (1861–65) and the
Reconstruction (1865–77) that followed; the two parties controlled Congress for
almost equal periods through the rest of the 19th century, though the Democratic
Party held the presidency only during the two terms of Grover Cleveland (1885–89
and 1893–97). Repressive legislation and physical intimidation designed to prevent
newly enfranchised African Americans from voting—despite passage of the
Fifteenth Amendment—ensured that the South would remain staunchly
Democratic for nearly a century (see black code). During Cleveland’s second term,
however, the United States sank into an economic depression. The party at this
time was basically conservative and agrarian-oriented, opposing the interests of big
business (especially protective tariffs) and favouring cheap-money policies, which
were aimed at maintaining low interest rates.
A difficult transition to progressivism
In the country’s second critical election, in 1896, the Democrats split disastrously
over the free-silver and Populist program of their presidential candidate, William
Jennings Bryan. Bryan lost by a wide margin to Republican William McKinley, a
conservative who supported high tariffs and money based only on gold. From 1896
to 1932 the Democrats held the presidency only during the two terms of Woodrow
Wilson (1913–21), and even Wilson’s presidency was considered somewhat of a
fluke. Wilson won in 1912 because the Republican vote was divided between
President William Howard Taft (the official party nominee) and former Republican
president Theodore Roosevelt, the candidate of the new Bull Moose Party. Wilson
championed various progressive economic reforms, including the breaking up of
business monopolies and broader federal regulation of banking and industry.
Although he led the United States into World War I to make the world “safe for
democracy,” Wilson’s brand of idealism and internationalism proved less attractive
to voters during the spectacular prosperity of the 1920s than the Republicans’ frank
embrace of big business. The Democrats lost decisively the presidential elections of 1920, 1924, and 1928. The New Deal coalition
The country’s third critical election, in 1932, took place in the wake of the stock
market crash of 1929 and in the midst of the Great Depression. Led by Franklin D.
Roosevelt, the Democrats not only regained the presidency but also replaced the
Republicans as the majority party throughout the country—in the North as well as
the South. Through his political skills and his sweeping New Deal social programs,
such as social security and the statutory minimum wage, Roosevelt forged a broad
coalition—including small farmers, Northern city dwellers, organized labour,
European immigrants, liberals, intellectuals, and reformers
—that enabled the Democratic Party to retain the
presidency until 1952 and to control both houses of
Congress for most of the period from the 1930s to the mid-
1990s. Roosevelt was reelected in 1936, 1940, and 1944; he
was the only president to be elected to more than two terms.
Upon his death in 1945 he was succeeded by his vice
president, Harry S. Truman, who was narrowly elected in 1948. The civil rights era
Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, the supreme Allied commander during World
War II, won overwhelming victories against Democrat Adlai E. Stevenson in the
presidential elections of 1952 and 1956. The Democrats regained the White House
in the election of 1960, when John F. Kennedy narrowly defeated Eisenhower’s
vice president, Richard M. Nixon. The Democrats’ championing of civil rights and
racial desegregation under Truman, Kennedy, and especially Lyndon B. Johnson—
who secured passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of
1965—cost the party the traditional allegiance of many of its Southern supporters.
Moreover, the pursuit of civil rights legislation dramatically split the party’s
legislators along regional lines in the 1950s and ’60s, with Southern senators
famously conducting a protracted filibuster
in an ultimately futile attempt to block
passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Although Johnson defeated Republican
Barry M. Goldwater by a landslide in
1964, his national support waned because
of bitter opposition to the Vietnam War,
and he chose not to run for reelection.
Following the assassination of Robert F.
Kennedy in 1968, the party nominated
Johnson’s vice president, Hubert H.
Humphrey, at a fractious convention in Chicago that was marred by violence
outside the hall between police and protesters. Meanwhile, many Southern
Democrats supported the candidacy of Alabama Governor George C. Wallace, an
opponent of federally mandated racial integration. In the 1968 election Humphrey
was soundly defeated by Nixon in the electoral college (among Southern states
Humphrey carried only Texas), though he lost the popular vote by only a narrow margin.
From Watergate to a new millennium
From 1972 to 1988 the Democrats lost four of five presidential elections. In 1972
the party nominated antiwar candidate George S. McGovern, who lost to Nixon in
one of the biggest landslides in U.S. electoral history. Two years later the
Watergate scandal forced Nixon’s resignation, enabling Jimmy Carter, then the
Democratic governor of Georgia, to defeat Gerald R. Ford, Nixon’s successor, in
1976. Although Carter orchestrated the Camp David Accords between Egypt and
Israel, his presidency was plagued by a sluggish economy and by the crisis over
the kidnapping and prolonged captivity of U.S. diplomats in Iran following the
Islamic revolution there in 1979. Carter was defeated in 1980 by conservative
Republican Ronald W. Reagan, who was easily reelected in 1984 against Carter’s
vice president, Walter F. Mondale. Mondale’s running mate, Geraldine A. Ferraro,
was the first female candidate on a
major-party ticket. Reagan’s vice
president, George Bush, defeated
Massachusetts Governor Michael S.
Dukakis in 1988. Despite its losses in
the presidential elections of the 1970s
and ’80s, the Democratic Party
continued to control both houses of
Congress for most of the period
(although the Republicans controlled the Senate from 1981 to 1987).
In 1992 Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton recaptured the White House for the
Democrats by defeating Bush and third-party candidate Ross Perot. Clinton’s
support of international trade agreements (e.g., the North American Free Trade
Agreement) and his willingness to cut spending on social programs to reduce
budget deficits alienated the left wing of his party and many traditional supporters
in organized labour. In 1994 the Democrats lost control of both houses of
Congress, in part because of public
disenchantment with Clinton’s
health care plan. During Clinton’s second term the country
experienced a period of prosperity
not seen since the 1920s, but a scandal involving Clinton’s
relationship with a White House
intern led to his impeachment by
the House of Representatives in
1998; he was acquitted by the Senate in 1999. Al Gore, Clinton’s vice president,
easily won the Democratic presidential nomination in 2000. In the general election,
Gore won 500,000 more popular votes than Republican George W. Bush but
narrowly lost in the electoral college after the Supreme Court of the United States
ordered a halt to the manual recounting of disputed ballots in Florida. The party’s
nominee in 2004, John Kerry, was narrowly defeated by Bush in the popular and electoral vote.
Aided by the growing opposition to the Iraq War (2003–11), the Democrats
regained control of the Senate and the House following the 2006 midterm
elections. This marked the first time in some 12 years that the Democrats held a
majority in both houses of Congress. In
the general election of 2008 the party’s
presidential nominee, Barack Obama,
defeated Republican John McCain,
thereby becoming the first African
American to be elected president of the
United States. The Democrats also
increased their majority in the Senate
and the House. The party scored another
victory in mid-2009, when an eight-month legal battle over one of Minnesota’s
Senate seats concluded with the election of Al Franken, a member of the state’s
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party. With Franken in office, Democrats in the Senate
(supported by the chamber’s two independents) would be able to exercise a
filibuster-proof 60–40 majority. In January 2010 the Democrats lost this filibuster-
proof majority when the Democratic candidate lost the special election to fill the
unexpired term of Ted Kennedy following his death.
The Democrats’ dominance of Congress proved short-lived, as a swing of some 60
seats (the largest since 1948) returned control of the House to the Republicans in
the 2010 midterm election. The Democrats held on to their majority in the Senate,
though that majority also was dramatically reduced. Many of the Democrats who
had come into office in the 2006 and 2010 elections were defeated, but so too were
a number of longtime officeholders; incumbents felt the sting of an electorate that
was anxious about the struggling economy and high unemployment. The election
also was widely seen as a referendum on the policies of the Obama administration,
which were vehemently opposed by a populist upsurge in and around the
Republican Party known as the Tea Party movement.
The Democratic Party fared better in the
2012 general election, with Obama defeating
his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney. The
2012 election did not significantly change
the distribution of power between the two
main parties in Congress. While the
Democrats retained their majority in the
Senate, they were unable to retake the House of Representatives. The Republicans
retook the Senate during the 2014 midterm elections.
In the 2016 presidential race, Democrats
selected Hillary Clinton as their
nominee, the first time a major party in
the United States had a woman at the
top of its presidential ticket. Despite
winning the popular vote by almost
three million ballots, Clinton failed to
take enough states in the electoral
college, and the presidency was won by
Republican Donald J. Trump in one of the largest upsets in U.S. electoral history.
Moreover, the Republican Party maintained control of both chambers of Congress
in the 2016 election. In the midterms two years later, however, Democrats retook
the House in what some described as a “blue wave.”
Despite being conducted during the coronavirus global pandemic, the 2020 federal
election generated the largest voter turnout in American history, with more 150
million ballots cast. Democrats—who voted early and by mail more often than
Republicans did—handed Obama’s former vice president, Joe Biden, a victory
over the incumbent, Trump, in the presidential election. Biden won the popular
vote by some five million votes and triumphed in the electoral college vote by
holding on to the states captured by Clinton in the previous presidential contest and
winning back the “blue wall” states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin that
had been lost to Trump in 2016. The Democrats’ attempt to retake control of the
Senate hinged on two runoff elections to be held in Georgia in January 2021. The
party held on to control of the House of Representatives, but its majority shrank significantly.
II.2.4.1.2 Policy and structure
Despite tracing its roots to Thomas Jefferson—who advocated a less-powerful,
more-decentralized federal government—the modern Democratic Party generally
supports a strong federal government with powers to regulate business and
industry in the public interest; federally financed social services and benefits for
the poor, the unemployed, the aged, and other groups; and the protection of civil
rights. Most Democrats also endorse a strong separation of church and state, and
they generally oppose government regulation of the private, noneconomic lives of
citizens. Regarding foreign policy, Democrats tend to prefer internationalism and
multilateralism—i.e., the execution of foreign policy through international
institutions such as the United Nations—over isolationism and unilateralism.
However, because the party is highly decentralized (as is the Republican Party), it
encompasses a wide variety of opinion on certain issues. Although most Democrats
favour affirmative action and gun control, for example, some moderate and
conservative Democrats oppose those policies or give them only qualified support.
Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party formulate their platforms
quadrennially at national conventions, which are held to nominate the parties’
presidential candidates. The conventions take place in the summer of each
presidential election year; by tradition, the incumbent party holds its convention
second. The Democratic National Convention is typically attended by some 4,000
delegates, most of whom are selected during the preceding winter and spring. So-
called “superdelegates,” which include members of the Democratic National
Committee (the party’s formal governing body) as well as Democratic governors
and members of Congress, also participate. However, following criticism of the
superdelegates’ influence in the 2016 nomination process, their power was limited
by rule changes in 2018. Notably, if the first ballot for the party’s nominee is
contested, superdelegates are unable to vote until the second round.
II.2.4.2 The Republican Party II.2.4.2.1 Introduction
Republican Party, byname Grand Old Party (GOP), in the United States, one
of the two major political parties, the other being the Democratic Party. During the
19th century the Republican Party stood against the extension of slavery to the
country’s new territories and, ultimately, for slavery’s complete abolition. During
the 20th and 21st centuries the party came to be associated with laissez-faire
capitalism, low taxes, and conservative social policies. The party acquired the
acronym GOP, widely understood as “Grand Old Party,” in the 1870s. The party’s
official logo, the elephant, is derived from a cartoon by Thomas Nast and also dates from the 1870s. II.2.4.2.2 History
The term Republican was adopted in 1792 by supporters of Thomas Jefferson, who
favoured a decentralized government with limited powers. Although Jefferson’s
political philosophy is consistent with the outlook of the modern Republican Party,
his faction, which soon became known as the Democratic-Republican Party,
ironically evolved by the 1830s into the Democratic Party, the modern Republican Party’s chief rival.
The Republican Party traces its roots to the 1850s, when antislavery leaders
(including former members of the Democratic, Whig, and Free-Soil parties) joined
forces to oppose the extension of slavery into the Kansas and Nebraska territories
by the proposed Kansas-Nebraska Act. At meetings in Ripon, Wisconsin (May
1854), and Jackson, Michigan (July 1854), they recommended forming a new
party, which was duly established at the political convention in Jackson.
At their first presidential nominating convention in 1856, the Republicans
nominated John C. Frémont on a platform that called on Congress to abolish
slavery in the territories, reflecting a widely held view in the North. Although
ultimately unsuccessful in his presidential bid, Frémont carried 11 Northern states
and received nearly two-fifths of the electoral vote. During the first four years of
its existence, the party rapidly displaced the Whigs as the main opposition to the
dominant Democratic Party. In 1860 the Democrats split over the slavery issue, as
the Northern and Southern wings of the party nominated different candidates
(Stephen A. Douglas and John C. Breckinridge, respectively); the election that year
also included John Bell, the nominee of the Constitutional Union Party. Thus, the
Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln, was able to capture the presidency,
winning 18 Northern states and receiving 60 percent of the electoral vote but only
40 percent of the popular vote. By the time of Lincoln’s inauguration as president,
however, seven Southern states had seceded from the Union, and the country soon
descended into the American Civil War (1861–65).
In 1863 Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared slaves in
rebelling states to be “forever free” and welcomed them to join the Union’s armed
forces. The abolition of slavery would, in 1865, be formally entrenched in the
Constitution of the United States with the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment.
Because the historical role played by Lincoln and the Republican Party in the
abolition of slavery came to be regarded as their greatest legacy, the Republican
Party is sometimes referred to as the party of Lincoln.
The prolonged agony of the Civil War weakened Lincoln’s prospects for reelection
in 1864. To broaden his support, he chose as his vice presidential candidate
Andrew Johnson, a pro-Union Democratic senator from Tennessee, and the
Lincoln-Johnson ticket subsequently won a landslide victory over Democrat
George B. McClellan and his running mate George Pendleton. Following Lincoln’s
assassination at the end of the war, Johnson favoured Lincoln’s moderate program
for the Reconstruction of the South over the more punitive plan backed by the Radical Republican members of
Congress. Stymied for a time by
Johnson’s vetoes, the Radical Republicans won overwhelming
control of Congress in the 1866
elections and engineered Johnson’s impeachment in the House of Representatives. Although the Senate fell one vote short of
convicting and removing Johnson,
the Radical Republicans managed to implement their Reconstruction program,
which made the party anathema across the former Confederacy. In the North the
party’s close identification with the Union victory secured it the allegiance of most
farmers, and its support of protective tariffs and of the interests of big business
eventually gained it the backing of powerful industrial and financial circles.
The 1860 election is today regarded by most political observers as the first of three
“critical” elections in the United States—contests that produced sharp and
enduring changes in party loyalties across the country (although some analysts
consider the election of 1824 to be the first critical election). After 1860 the
Democratic and Republican parties became the major parties in a largely two-party
system. In federal elections from the 1870s to the 1890s, the parties were in rough
balance—except in the South, which became solidly Democratic. The two parties
controlled Congress for almost equal periods, though the
Democrats held the presidency only during the two terms of
Grover Cleveland (1885–89 and 1893–97).
In the country’s second critical election, in 1896, the
Republicans won the presidency and control of both houses of
Congress, and the Republican Party became the majority party in
most states outside the South. The Republican presidential
nominee that year was William McKinley, a conservative who favoured high tariffs
on foreign goods and “sound” money tied to the value of gold. The Democrats,
already burdened by the economic depression that began under President
Cleveland, nominated William Jennings Bryan, who advocated cheap money
(money available at low interest rates) based on both gold and silver.
The assassination of President McKinley in 1901 elevated to the presidency
Theodore Roosevelt, leader of the party’s progressive wing. Roosevelt opposed
monopolistic and exploitative business practices,
adopted a more conciliatory attitude toward
labour, and urged the conservation of natural
resources. He was reelected in 1904 but declined
to run in 1908, deferring to his secretary of war
and friend, William Howard Taft, who won
handily. Subsequently disenchanted with Taft’s
conservative policies, Roosevelt unsuccessfully
challenged him for the Republican nomination in
1912. Roosevelt then bolted the Republican Party
to form the Progressive Party (Bull Moose Party)
and ran for president against Taft and the Democratic candidate, Woodrow Wilson.
With the Republican vote divided, Wilson won the presidency, and he was
reelected in 1916. During the spectacular prosperity of the 1920s, the Republicans’
conservative and probusiness policies proved more attractive to voters than
Wilson’s brand of idealism and internationalism. The Republicans easily won the
presidential elections of 1920, 1924, and 1928.
The stock market crash of 1929 and the Great Depression that followed had severe
consequences for the Republicans, largely because of their unwillingness to
combat the effects of the depression through direct government intervention in the
economy. In the election of 1932, considered the country’s third critical election,
Republican incumbent Pres. Herbert Hoover was overwhelmingly defeated by
Democrat Franklin D. Roosevelt, and the Republicans were relegated to the status
of a minority party. Roosevelt’s three reelections (he was the only president to
serve more than two terms), the succession of Harry S. Truman to the presidency
on Roosevelt’s death in 1945, and Truman’s narrow election over New York Gov.
Thomas E. Dewey in 1948 kept the Republicans out of the White House for two
decades. Although most Republicans in the 1930s vehemently opposed Roosevelt’s
New Deal social programs, by the 1950s the party
had largely accepted the federal government’s
expanded role and regulatory powers.
In 1952 the Republican Party nominated as its
presidential candidate World War II Supreme Allied
Commander Dwight D. Eisenhower,
who easily defeated Democrat Adlai E.
Stevenson in the general election.
Despite Eisenhower’s centrist views, the
Republican platform was essentially
conservative, calling for a strong
anticommunist stance in foreign affairs,
reductions in government regulation of
the economy, lower taxes for the
wealthy, and resistance to federal civil
rights legislation. Nevertheless,
Eisenhower did dispatch federal troops to Arkansas in 1957 to enforce the court-
ordered racial integration of a high school in Little Rock; he also signed the Civil
Rights Acts of 1957 and 1960. Moreover, his “moderate Republicanism” led him
to oversee an expansion of social security, an increase in the minimum wage, and
the creation of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
In the early 1950s Sen. Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin became the party’s most
ardent anticommunist, taking the limelight while attempting to expose communists
who he claimed were in the American government. In the interest of party unity,
Eisenhower chose not to criticize McCarthy’s demagogic red-baiting and
occasionally appeared to support him; privately, however, the president did not
hide his enmity for McCarthy, worked to discredit him, and pushed Republican senators to censure him.
The party retained the traditional support of both big and small business and
gained new support from growing numbers of middle-class suburbanites and—
perhaps most significantly—white Southerners, who were upset by the
prointegration policies of leading Democrats, including President Truman, who
had ordered the integration of the military. Eisenhower was reelected in 1956, but
in 1960 Richard M. Nixon, Eisenhower’s vice president, lost narrowly to Democrat John F. Kennedy.
The Republicans were in severe turmoil at their 1964 convention, where moderates
and conservatives battled for control of the party. Ultimately, the conservatives
secured the nomination of Sen. Barry M. Goldwater, who lost by a landslide to
Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson, Kennedy’s vice president and successor. By 1968 the
party’s moderate faction regained control and again nominated Nixon, who
narrowly won the popular vote over Hubert
H. Humphrey, Johnson’s vice president.
Many Southern Democrats abandoned the
Democratic Party to vote for the anti-
integration candidate George C. Wallace.
Importantly, the 1964 and 1968 elections
signaled the death of the Democratic “Solid
South,” as both Goldwater and Nixon made
significant inroads there. In 1964, 5 of the 6
states won by Goldwater were in the South; in 1968, 11 Southern states voted for
Nixon and only 1 voted for Humphrey.
Although Nixon was reelected by a landslide in 1972, Republicans made few gains
in congressional, state, and local elections and failed to win control of Congress. In
the wake of the Watergate scandal, Nixon resigned the presidency in August 1974
and was succeeded in office by Gerald R. Ford, the first appointed vice president to
become president. Ford lost narrowly to Southern Democrat Jimmy Carter in 1976.
In 1980 Ronald W. Reagan, the charismatic leader of the Republican Party’s
conservative wing, defeated Carter and helped the Republicans to regain control of
the Senate, which they held until 1987.
Reagan introduced deep tax cuts and launched a massive buildup of U.S. military
forces. His personal popularity and an economic recovery contributed to his 49-
state victory over Democrat Walter F. Mondale in 1984. His vice president, George
H.W. Bush, continued the Republicans’ presidential success by handily defeating
Democrat Michael S. Dukakis in 1988. During Bush’s term, the Cold War came to
an end after communism collapsed in the Soviet Union and eastern Europe. In
1991 Bush led an international coalition that drove Iraqi armies out of Kuwait in
the Persian Gulf War. Congress continued to be controlled by the Democrats,
however, and Bush lost his bid for reelection in 1992 to another Southern
Democrat, Bill Clinton. Partly because of Clinton’s declining popularity in 1993–
94, the Republicans won victories in the 1994 midterm elections that gave them
control of both houses of Congress for the first time since 1954. They promptly
undertook efforts to overhaul the
country’s welfare system and to reduce the budget deficit, but their
uncompromising and confrontational
style led many voters to blame them for a
budget impasse in 1995–96 that resulted
in two partial government shutdowns.
Clinton was reelected in 1996, though the
Republicans retained control of Congress.
In 2000 Texas Gov. George W. Bush, son
of the former president, recaptured the
presidency for the Republicans, receiving 500,000 fewer popular votes than
Democrat Al Gore but narrowly winning a majority of the electoral vote (271–266)
after the Supreme Court of the United States ordered a halt to the manual
recounting of disputed ballots in Florida. Bush was only the second son of a
president to assume the nation’s highest office. The Republicans also won a
majority in both chambers of Congress (though the Democrats gained effective
control of the Senate in 2001 following the decision of Republican Sen. Jim
Jeffords of Vermont to became an independent). A surge in Bush’s popularity
following the September 11 attacks of 2001 enabled the Republicans to recapture
the Senate and to make gains in the House of Representatives in 2002. In 2004
Bush was narrowly reelected, winning
both the popular and electoral vote, and
the Republicans kept control of both
houses of Congress. In the 2006 midterm
elections, however, the Republicans fared
poorly, hindered largely by the growing
opposition to the Iraq War, and the
Democrats regained control of both the
House and the Senate. In the general
election of 2008 the Republican
presidential nominee, John McCain, was defeated by Democrat Barack Obama,
and the Democrats increased their majority in both houses of Congress. The
following year the Republican National Committee elected Michael Steele as its
first African American chairman.
With a gain of some 60 seats, a swing not registered since 1948, Republicans
recaptured control of the House and dramatically reduced the Democrats’ majority
in the Senate in the 2010 midterm election. The election, which was widely seen as
a referendum on the Obama administration’s policy agenda, was marked by
anxiety over the struggling economy (especially the high unemployment rate) and
by the upsurge of the Tea Party—a
populist movement whose adherents
generally opposed excessive taxation
and “big” government. Tea Party candidates, some of whom had
displaced candidates favoured by the
Republican establishment during the
primaries, had mixed success in the general election.
In the 2012 general election, the Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney
was unable to unseat Obama. The situation in Congress remained relatively
unchanged, with Republicans retaining their hold on the House of Representatives
and Democrats successfully defending their majority in the Senate. The
Republicans regained control of the Senate during the 2014 midterm elections.
The 2016 presidential election was a watershed moment for the Republican Party.
The party’s nomination was captured by businessman and television personality
Donald Trump, who easily defeated more-mainstream Republican candidates such
as Jeb Bush and Ted Cruz in the primaries. Trump’s far-right social positions and
outspoken hostility toward immigrants made a number of mainstream Republicans
concerned that he was setting the party up for a Goldwater-esque landslide
electoral defeat. But, to the surprise of most political pundits, he won the electoral
college despite amassing almost three million fewer popular votes than Democrat
Hillary Clinton, giving Republicans the presidency for the first time in eight years
to go alongside the party’s retention of power in both chambers of Congress.
Trump continued to defy political norms after taking office, and his presidency was
plagued by controversy, especially allegations that his campaign had colluded with
Russia to secure his election. Although he enjoyed solid support among
Republicans, some believed that he was causing irreparable harm to the party. His
overall approval ratings were typically low, and in the 2018 midterms Democrats retook control of the House.
II.2.4.2.3 Policy and structure
Although its founders refused to
recognize the right of states and
territories to practice slavery, the
modern Republican Party supports
states’ rights against the power of the
federal government in most cases, and
it opposes the federal regulation of
traditionally state and local matters, such as policing and education. Because the
party is highly decentralized (as is the Democratic Party), it encompasses a wide
variety of opinion on certain issues, though it is ideologically more unified at the
national level than the Democratic Party is. The Republicans advocate reduced
taxes as a means of stimulating the economy and advancing individual economic
freedom. They tend to oppose extensive government regulation of the economy,
government-funded social programs, affirmative action, and policies aimed at
strengthening the rights of workers. Many Republicans, though not all, favour
increased government regulation of the private, noneconomic lives of citizens in
some areas, such as abortion, though most Republicans also strongly oppose gun-
control legislation. Republicans are more likely than Democrats to support
organized prayer in public schools and to oppose the legal recognition of equal
rights for gays and lesbians (see gay rights movement). Regarding foreign policy,
the Republican Party traditionally has supported a strong national defense and the
aggressive pursuit of U.S. national security interests, even when it entails acting
unilaterally or in opposition to the views of the international community.
Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party formulate their platforms
quadrennially at national political conventions, which are held to nominate the
parties’ presidential candidates. The conventions take place in the summer of each
presidential election year; by tradition, the incumbent party holds its convention
second. The Republican National Convention typically gathers some 2,000
delegates who are selected during the winter and spring.
Until the 1970s, few nationwide rules governed the selection of delegates to the
Republican National Convention. After the Democratic Party adopted a system
based on state primaries and caucuses, the Republicans followed suit. More than
40 states now select delegates to the Republican convention through primary
elections, while several other states choose delegates through caucuses. Virtually
all Republican primaries allocate delegates on a “winner-take-all” basis, so that the
candidate who wins the most votes in a state is awarded all the delegates of that
state. In contrast, almost all Democratic primaries allocate delegates based on the
proportion of the vote each candidate receives. As a result, the Republicans tend to
choose their presidential nominees more quickly than the Democrats do, often long
before the summer nominating convention, leaving the convention simply to ratify the winner of the primaries.
In addition to confirming the party’s presidential nominee and adopting the party
platform, the national convention formally chooses a national committee to
organize the next convention and to govern the party until the next convention is
held. The Republican National Committee (RNC) consists of about 150 party
leaders representing all U.S. states and territories. Its chairman is typically named
by the party’s presidential nominee and then formally elected by the committee.
Republican members of the House and the Senate organize themselves into party
conferences that elect the party leaders of each chamber. In keeping with the
decentralized nature of the party, each chamber also creates separate committees to
raise and disburse funds for House and Senate election campaigns. Although
Republican congressional party organizations maintain close informal relationships
with the RNC, they are formally separate from it and not subject to its control.
Similarly, state party organizations are not subject to direct control by the national committee. II.2.4.3 Minor Parties
A minor party, or third party, is an organization that is not affiliated with the two
major American parties—the Democrats or Republicans. Minor parties run
candidates in a limited number of elections and they do not receive large pluralities
of votes. They arise when the two major parties fail to represent citizens’ demands
or provide the opportunity to express opposition to existing policies. Citizens often
form a minor party by uniting behind a leader who represents their interests.
Functions of Minor Parties
Minor parties raise issues that the Democrats and Republicans ignore because of
their tendency to take middle-of-the road positions. As a result, minor parties can
be catalysts for change (Mazmanian, 1974). The Progressive Party backed the
women’s suffrage movement in the early twentieth century, which led to the
passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. Child labor laws, the direct election of US
senators, federal farm aid, and unemployment insurance are policies enacted as a
result of third-party initiatives (Sifry, 2003).
More recently, the Tea Party has raised issues related to the national debate,
government bailouts to failing industries, and the health care system overhaul. The
Tea Party is a conservative-leaning grassroots political movement that emerged in
2009 when the Young Americans for Liberty in the state of New York organized a
protest against state government “tax and spend” policies. The Tea Party–themed
protest recalled events in 1773, when colonists dumped tea into Boston Harbor to
demonstrate their opposition to paying a mandatory tax on tea to the British
government. Subsequent Tea Party protests took place in states across the country.
Tea Party supporters participated in national protests in Washington, DC, which drew thousands of supporters. Types of Minor Parties
Minor parties can be classified as enduring, single-issue, candidate-centered, and fusion parties. Enduring Minor Parties
Some minor parties have existed for a long time and resemble major parties in that
they run candidates for local, state, and national offices. They differ from major
parties because they are less successful in getting their candidates elected
(Rosenstone, Behr, & Lazarus, 2000).
The Libertarian Party, founded in 1971, is an enduring minor party, which is a type
of minor party that has existed for a long time and regularly fields candidates for
president and state legislatures. The Libertarians are unable to compete with the
two major parties because they lack a strong organizational foundation and the
financial resources to run effective campaigns. The party also holds an extreme
ideological position, which can alienate voters. Libertarians take personal
freedoms to the extreme and oppose government intervention in the lives of
individuals, support the right to own and bear arms without restriction, and endorse
a free and competitive economic market (Savage, 1997).
Single-Issue Minor Parties
Sometimes called ideological parties, single-issue minor parties exist to promote a
particular policy agenda. The Green Party is a product of the environmental
movement of the 1980s. It advocates environmental issues, such as mandatory
recycling and strong regulations on toxic waste (Jan, 1997).
Candidate-Centered Minor Parties
Candidate-centered minor parties form around candidates who are able to rally
support based on their own charisma or message. Former World Wrestling
Federation star Jesse “The Body” Ventura was elected governor of Minnesota in
1998 under the Independence Party label, an offshoot of the Reform Party. The
plainspoken, media savvy Ventura made the need for an alternative to two-party
domination a core theme of his campaign: “It’s high time for a third party. Let’s
look at Washington. I’m embarrassed. We’ve got a lot of problems that the
government should be dealing with, but instead, for the next nine months, the focus
of this nation will be on despicable behavior by career politicians. If this isn’t the
right time for a third party, then when?” (Sifry, 2003) Fusion Minor Parties
Fusion minor parties, also known as alliance parties, are enduring or single-issue
minor parties that engage in the practice of cross endorsement, backing candidates
who appear on a ballot under more than one party label. Fusion parties routinely
endorse candidates who have been nominated by the two major parties and support
their causes. Cross endorsement allows minor parties to contribute to the election
of a major-party candidate and thus gain access to officeholders. In addition to
giving a major-party candidate an additional ballot position, fusion parties provide funding and volunteers.
Only eight states permit the practice of cross endorsement. The most active fusion
parties are in New York. The Liberal Party and the Democratic Party cross
endorsed Mario Cuomo in the 1990 New York governor’s race, leading him to
defeat his Republican Party and Conservative Party opponents handily. The
Conservative Party and the Republican Party cross endorsed George Pataki in the
2000 governor’s race, leading him to victory (Gillespie, 1993). During the 2010
midterm elections, the Tea Party cross endorsed several successful candidates
running in the primary under the Republican Party label, upsetting mainstream
Republican candidates. Some of the Tea Party–endorsed candidates, such as US
Senate candidate Rand Paul in Kentucky, went on to win the general election.