Question 1 Response: Creating a new Constitution was vital to the unity of the United States of America since the Articles of Confederation weren’t sufficient for good government. If there was any evidence of this, it was that the United States was clearly bankrupt and now needed to be organized in such a manner that both the States and the Federal government had to share power in such a manner that everyone’s interests were kept in mind. A centralized approach was key to putting the country back on track. Hence, a meeting was held in the Pennsylvania State House in Philadelphia in order to prepare the Constitution that would not only ensure that power was equally shared but would led to social justice and prosperity of the United States (“The Constitutional Convention”). Among the compromises made, the one that caught my eye was known as the Three-Fifths compromise, and which had an impact on how members of the House are elected, the North believed that the South would have an unfair advantage as they had a steady influx of slaves working for rich landowners in the Southern States. A debate as to whether slaves should be counted resulted and due to which, it was agreed that five slaves would be counted as three votes. Speaking of which, the sale of slaves as well as their importation was hotly disputed by the North but also had to be set aside if a consensus had to be reached. Even if members at the Convention agreed that government should not interfere a few years later, the Civil War would raise this issue once again and polarise the country into two sides that would not yield ground. Of course, in today’s world, and thanks to the Civil Rights movement, both these compromises made to set up government in the United States would be impossible as every individual counts for a single vote. This includes a number of minorities in the United States be it Black, Asian and Hispanic among others. The reason why these two compromises were important is because it significantly determined who was elected in the House (Wandrei).
Question 2 Response: Debates in American politics for almost two centuries now continues to focus on the powers that should be shared between the State and the Federal government. If one understands the context during the time the Constitutional Convention took place, the United States was bankrupt and with the federal government not being able to create foreign policy, it was time to consider modifications to the Articles of Confederation. As a result of the three-month meeting between representatives from all states, Congress was given a substantial amount of power but with checks and balances so as to ensure that none of the branches would usurp power to serve its own interests. During these three months, there were a number of changes and compromises made to the Constitution keeping in mind the North and the South, the smaller as well as the larger states and the Federalist as well as the Anti-Federalists. No doubt, deliberation was necessary since the ratifying the Constitution had far-reaching consequences. Still, at the end of it all, the sovereignty of the States were maintained but their power were kept limited while the powers of the federal government was definitely broadened. Some of the powers that the federal government obtained and which was up for debate were the powers of the President, the Supremacy Clause which gave the federal government power over state laws particularly in regard to commerce. Of course, the six year term of Senators was a point of contention between these two opposing parties. Of course, these are merely a few powers that were granted to the federal government but in time, a Bill of Rights was put out so as to clearly delineate the rights of both individuals and states so as to maintain the balance of power. Speaking of which, and after the Constitutional Convention, it was clear that the Anti-Federalists wanted clear documentation from the federal government that protected both individuals and the States’ rights. This resulted in the first Ten Amendments of the Constitution. Of which, the tenth amendment clearly stated that the powers that weren't delegated to the federal government were reserved for the state. One thing was for sure: this was a document that limited the powers of government and which appeased the Anti-Federalists who were more concerned about protecting state interests rather than the United States being recognised as a world power (“The States’ Rights” ; “Bill of Rights”).
Question 3 Response: Public office is an integral part to any society or state as policies that are formed determine the direction of the country - whether it succeeds or fails in the short or long-term. It's serious business. Of course, the route to being elected into public office involves joining a party that you agree with, in terms of ideology. Winning an election means being granted the power of running the government and this can only be done if one joins a political party in the first place. In stark contrast, and while interest groups bring together people with similar interests that are economic or noneconomic in nature, their role in government is limited to influencing policy through lobbying efforts but not running it. Recruitment in interest groups are merely done by bringing together people of a common cause - usually professionals in a certain field that want to be protected by law - and following which, they begin to make demands to those in public office as to how they would like their interests protected or advanced (Thomas). One interesting and very powerful lobbying group is the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that is well-known for its lobbying prowess in the United States. Since the fate of Israel depends on its relationship with the United States, electing Jews to the House or Senate will indicate a level of bias that is unwarranted for. Instead a lobbying group much like the AIPAC works best as a special interests group that influences only foreign policy related to Israel and the Middle East. Even if Obama has stunted diplomatic efforts with Israel, this group is considered too powerful and well-connected so as to be ignored going forward as relationships will bounce back to normal once Trump takes over. Those of American nationality should be left to govern the country while a Jewish lobby group works best in protecting the interests of the Jews and Israel. After all, in reading history, if Israel doesn't take care of itself, no one else will.
Question 4 Response: There are a number of roles that the United States President has to play and which can be broadly summarized as seven. Not only is he or she the Chief of State, Chief Executive, Chief Diplomat, Commander-in-Chief, Chief of Party, Legislative Leader but also the guardian of the economy. One can easily tell by these diverse roles that the President has a crucial role to play in leading his country at a number of levels and the decisions that he makes, along with the other branches of government, can be crucial to progress or stagnation in the United States (“Seven Rules”). Now, given that the Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that checks were placed at all levels of government, the President, being the head of the executive branch, can veto bills passed by Congress. Yet in turn, Congress, by means of a two-thirds majority, can override this veto too. Another important function of the President involves nominating members to the Cabinet as well as Supreme Court justices. Yet again, two-thirds of Congress can overturn these nominations given how important these are to society even if less than 10 percent of these have been overturned in the United States political history (Henderson). Having said that, there's very little that citizens should be worried about given that these checks and balances have been effective for the most part of two hundred years. While the President's take on policy is crucial, other branches of government can limit his influence to a large extent as they see fit. Even if Trump seems a bit controversial, the various branches of government will definitely keep his ambitions under check, if found wanting. This is why the Constitution was prepared in the first place.
Works Cited
"The Constitutional Convention of 1787." University of Missouri Website. n.d. Web. 18 January 2017. <http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/convention1787.html/>
Wandrei, Kevin. "List & Describe the Three Famous Compromises of the Constitutional Convention." Synonym Website. n.d. Web. 18 January 2017. <http://classroom.synonym.com/list-describe-three-famous-compromises-constitutional-convention-17742.html/>
"The Question of States' Rights: The Constitution and American Federalism (An Introduction)." University of Missouri Website. n.d. Web. 18 January 2017. <http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/PROJECTS/FTRIALS/CONLAW/statesrights.html/>
"Bill of Rights of the United States of America (1791)." Bill of Rights Institute Website. 2017. Web. 18 January 2017. <https://www.billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/>
Thomas, Clive S. "Interest Group." Encyclopædia Britannica. 19 January 2007. Web. 18 January 2017. <https://www.britannica.com/topic/interest-group/Types-of-interests-and-interest-groups/>
"Seven Roles for One President." Scholastic Website. 2015. Web. 18 January 2017. <https://www.scholastic.com/teachers/articles/teaching-content/seven-roles-one-president/>
Henderson, Sara. "What Are Two Ways Congress Can Check the Power of the Executive Branch?" Synonym Website. 2017. Web. 18 January 2017. <http://classroom.synonym.com/two-ways-congress-can-check-power-executive-branch-13320.html/>
