• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

An 18th Century Strait-jacket - Is this a fair description of the Constitution?

Extracts from this document...


An 18th Century Strait-jacket. Is this a fair description of the Constitution? According to Ashford and Ashbee (1999), the system of: "checks and balances have created gridlock. Decisions cannot be made because there is insufficient agreement between institutions. In contrast with the countries of western Europe, the US has, [critics] argue, been unable to impose effective gun control or establish comprehensive health-care provision because decision making requires such a widely shared consensus." This gridlock is one of the reasons that some have come to call the US Constitution an "18th Century Strait-Jacket". Of course there are various sides to this argument that must be explored before a conclusion is reached. First, we must put this into its historical context. As a colony of the British Empire, the Americans had several grievances particularly with taxation with representation in the British Parliament, the quartering of soldiers in people's homes without permission and imprisonment without trial. ...read more.


While a literalist may believe that these people must support the Constitution on every occasion, others may suggest that while they should uphold the principles and rules of the Constitution, if they disagree with anything in the Constitution they have the right, from the 1st Amendment's "freedom of speech" guarantee, to make this public. Therefore, it can be argued that it is, in fact, the interpreters as opposed to the interpreted that makes the Constitution an "18th Century Strait-Jacket". Critics argue that the nature of the Constitution creates a situation whereby the Constitution acts as a 'Strait-Jacket', restricting Representatives getting on with their work but rather concentrating on upcoming elections. This is can be substantially evidenced as truth but perhaps overall it is an advantage. If the Representatives are constantly looking towards approaching elections they may become more 'in tune' with their mandate and give the people what they want rather than what he/she or their party thinks the people should want. ...read more.


By the 1960s - when the Vietnam War was fought - the president had undoubted primacy or hegemony in the handling of defence policy and national security matters." Hence, Arthur Schlesinger Jr described the 1960s as the era of the 'imperial presidency'. Ashbee and Ashford continued to demonstrate that "Congress - although sometimes vocal in its comments - played a subordinate role". Therefore, it can be said the Constitution is not as restricting as critics would lead us to believe because power has gradually evolved towards the President. It is important also to compare the US Constitution to other Constitution. The British Constitution most notably, is not codified or entrenched. It is much easier to change this Constitution - through an Act of Parliament, a court ruling or an EU law in comparison to the US, an amendment of which requires a 2/3 majority in both houses and the approval of 3/4 of the states. Nevertheless, while Britain may seem to have more 'power' over her country than the US's "18th Century Stait Jacket" ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United States section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United States essays

  1. To what extent is it fair to say America is a land of 100 ...

    The above points out that both parties contain Groups with differing beliefs. Alan Grant argues that up to the 1980's, these parties were seen as "loose confederative associations of state and local structures which only came together once every four years to select and attempt to elect a Presidential candidate".

  2. How well does the US Constitution Work

    be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems. Conservatives support limited government, limited taxation, and a balanced budget. Some admit the necessity of taxes, but insist that taxes should be low.

  1. The British Constitution

    Steadily day-to-day power came to be exercised by ministers in cabinet. 'Queen in Parliament' is the formal title of the British Legislature, Which consists of The Sovereign, the House of Lords and the House of Commons. It is a Bicameral legislature, consisting of the two chambers the House of Lords and the House of Commons.

  2. To what extent is the American Constitution an elitist document?Why then did the framers ...

    their best interests to provide for public participation in the political process because of the possibility that the masses could rise up against them, as they themselves had rebelled against the British. But if we look at the question in detail we can see that the real reason that the

  1. Discuss the arguments for and against a codified constitution

    As a result, for example, a number of asylum seeks have been detained without trial. Under a codified constitution they would be unable to introduce this legislation to restrict people's rights and the only way to do this is to amend the constitution which would be difficult and a lengthy process.

  2. '9 politicians sitting on a bench.' Critically evaluate this description of the US Supreme ...

    dispute and allowing the task of government to continue.[9]?This was clearly a very political decision, despite the fact it was a more restrained court, which proves that even the judicially restrained courts still act as politicians, as the Supreme Courts role was similar to the House of Representatives role in

  1. The Separation of Church and State in America.

    DOMA counteracts the full faith and credit clause by allowing states to not recognize same-sex marriage licenses if they choose not to. (Barooah, <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/01/doma-unconstitutional-ruling_n_1560780.html>.) DOMA is unconstitutional because it restricts the rights of same-sex couples to certain areas of the country, violating the full faith and credit clause as well as diminishing the right to the couples pursuit of happiness.

  2. American Government Term Paper #1. Discuss the theory of Checks and Balances as outlined ...

    and superior to all laws adopted by any state or any subdivision? (We the People). Also, this clause bound the representatives of all state and local governments as well as the federal government to take an vow (oath) of office to support the national Constitution, meaning each action that was

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work