COMPARATIVE POLITICS
Structuring the Question
No requirement to reach a verdict or judgement, questions do not need introductions or conclusions
Most effective approaches to these questions were to identify clear differences/similarities etc with explicit points made
between US and Uk with exemplification
Refer to wording of question in each paragraph
Comparative Theories
Theoretical approaches
1. Rational, focus on the individual -> President, PM, Lords, MPs. Senators, Congress people
2. Structural, focuses on the structures -> Regional power, Election processes, constitution, sovereign bodies,
legislative processes, other political processes and institutions
3. Cultural, focuses on the groups -> pressure groups, political parties, factions, voter groups
Rational approach, individuals
- Suggests that individuals’ actions are guided by consideration of their own interests rather than influence from
groups or structures
- By acting rationally, individuals judge how best to realise their own goals, e.g., maintaining power within a
political system, attempting to achieve ideological or policy goals, to make sure their views are put into practice
Comparing the power of President and PM
- Both act in a rational manner, using their own powers to achieve policy goals, both have considerable authority as
leaders, set a political agenda for country based on own personal views
- Also have power (within executive in particular) appoint people to key decision-making positions
Power of congressperson and MP
- Both might vote in congress/parliament, acting rationally to maintain their own positions of power, might resist
structural and cultural factors
- Might ignore executive patronage-power or the dominant view of their party because they are trying to maintain
their own political power by pleasing constituents
Cultural approach, groups and ideas
- Group has a culture, shared ideas, beliefs and values, to which members can conform and which influence
individuals’ members actions
- While individuals often chose to join a group, this group can still influence/restrict their behavior
- Culture is a habitual and perceived as natural, giving it power over individuals that they may not be aware of
Comparing PM and president
, - Both may alter their policy goals because of the culture of the party
- This can happen when their own views are out of step with the views of their party and the PM or President feels
the need to adjust their aims
Parties
- May be a dominant value system that leads to tribal politics, influencing the behavior of politicians
- Politicians are acting on the basis of party culture, without considering their own rational self-interest or
structural influences
Structural approach, institutions
- ‘Big picture’ perspective, often involves understanding the main constitutional roles, powers and limits of a
political process or institution
- Actions of individuals and groups are limited and largely determined by structures, structural approach can be
applied readily to all topics because major political structures e.g., constitutions, influence or determine political
processes in every area
PM and president
- Constitution provides a structure that restricts the office-holder political actions, both subject to constitutional
rules and may find their powers or policy goals restricted
- Both have seen some of their key policy goals restricted by court decisions
Congress and parliament
- Different levels of power from each other, UK MPs are more limited because of the power of the executive,
whereas US congress members have greater ability to act as they wish because there is less pressure from the
executive
Comparing congress and parliament (Legislative)
CONGRESS PARLIAMENT
Reflection of the USA’s federal system of government MPs represent constituencies based around historic counties,
cities and topics -> MPs representing Beaconsfield, Amersham
Representation based on 50 states, senate equal representation, HoL reflects culture of nation that used to have lords, barons,
house proportional representation bishops etc
Composition
Congress and parliament therefore are still reflective of two very different characters of the two countries
Similarities between parliament and congress
- Can initiate and amend legislation, and the power to vote on legislation to determine whether or not it is enacted
- Place similar checks on their executives, parliament and congress can restrict the executive by voting against their
proposals, and executive scrutiny takes place, especially via committees
- High degree of control over foreign policy, including military action, typically voting on executive proposals in
these areas
- Role in determining constitutional rules
- Accountable to the public, might force politicians to respond to public opinion and reject executive proposals
Structuring the Question
No requirement to reach a verdict or judgement, questions do not need introductions or conclusions
Most effective approaches to these questions were to identify clear differences/similarities etc with explicit points made
between US and Uk with exemplification
Refer to wording of question in each paragraph
Comparative Theories
Theoretical approaches
1. Rational, focus on the individual -> President, PM, Lords, MPs. Senators, Congress people
2. Structural, focuses on the structures -> Regional power, Election processes, constitution, sovereign bodies,
legislative processes, other political processes and institutions
3. Cultural, focuses on the groups -> pressure groups, political parties, factions, voter groups
Rational approach, individuals
- Suggests that individuals’ actions are guided by consideration of their own interests rather than influence from
groups or structures
- By acting rationally, individuals judge how best to realise their own goals, e.g., maintaining power within a
political system, attempting to achieve ideological or policy goals, to make sure their views are put into practice
Comparing the power of President and PM
- Both act in a rational manner, using their own powers to achieve policy goals, both have considerable authority as
leaders, set a political agenda for country based on own personal views
- Also have power (within executive in particular) appoint people to key decision-making positions
Power of congressperson and MP
- Both might vote in congress/parliament, acting rationally to maintain their own positions of power, might resist
structural and cultural factors
- Might ignore executive patronage-power or the dominant view of their party because they are trying to maintain
their own political power by pleasing constituents
Cultural approach, groups and ideas
- Group has a culture, shared ideas, beliefs and values, to which members can conform and which influence
individuals’ members actions
- While individuals often chose to join a group, this group can still influence/restrict their behavior
- Culture is a habitual and perceived as natural, giving it power over individuals that they may not be aware of
Comparing PM and president
, - Both may alter their policy goals because of the culture of the party
- This can happen when their own views are out of step with the views of their party and the PM or President feels
the need to adjust their aims
Parties
- May be a dominant value system that leads to tribal politics, influencing the behavior of politicians
- Politicians are acting on the basis of party culture, without considering their own rational self-interest or
structural influences
Structural approach, institutions
- ‘Big picture’ perspective, often involves understanding the main constitutional roles, powers and limits of a
political process or institution
- Actions of individuals and groups are limited and largely determined by structures, structural approach can be
applied readily to all topics because major political structures e.g., constitutions, influence or determine political
processes in every area
PM and president
- Constitution provides a structure that restricts the office-holder political actions, both subject to constitutional
rules and may find their powers or policy goals restricted
- Both have seen some of their key policy goals restricted by court decisions
Congress and parliament
- Different levels of power from each other, UK MPs are more limited because of the power of the executive,
whereas US congress members have greater ability to act as they wish because there is less pressure from the
executive
Comparing congress and parliament (Legislative)
CONGRESS PARLIAMENT
Reflection of the USA’s federal system of government MPs represent constituencies based around historic counties,
cities and topics -> MPs representing Beaconsfield, Amersham
Representation based on 50 states, senate equal representation, HoL reflects culture of nation that used to have lords, barons,
house proportional representation bishops etc
Composition
Congress and parliament therefore are still reflective of two very different characters of the two countries
Similarities between parliament and congress
- Can initiate and amend legislation, and the power to vote on legislation to determine whether or not it is enacted
- Place similar checks on their executives, parliament and congress can restrict the executive by voting against their
proposals, and executive scrutiny takes place, especially via committees
- High degree of control over foreign policy, including military action, typically voting on executive proposals in
these areas
- Role in determining constitutional rules
- Accountable to the public, might force politicians to respond to public opinion and reject executive proposals
