Bicameral Senate Power
Bicameral Legislature – does the House or the Senate have more power? Our Founding Father’s created a bicameral legislature for three reasons: First, it was what they knew, their ideologies came from Britain. The British Parliament has two houses; the House of Commons and the House of Lords (Shmoop Editorial Team).
Second, was the emphasis on checks and balances. An unicameral legislature might consolidate too much power, and they also knew from Britain, that could cause corruption. Dividing the chambers provides a check against tyranny (Shmoop Editorial Team).
The third was “a matter of practical politics” (Shmoop Editorial Team). Small states wanted all the states to have equal representation in Congress, but the larger (and more populous) states wanted congressional representation to be based on population. A bicameral legislature provided …show more content…
Not that they have the same powers, but equal in that neither the Senate nor the House can make a law without the other. Under the U.S. Constitution, the two chambers are equal, however; the Constitution gives certain exclusive powers to each chamber. For an example the Senate has powers to confirm Presidential nominees that they do not share with the House, and the House has powers to originate all tax/spending bills that are not shared with the Senate (Nickels n.d.).
Dye and Zeigler’s Elite Theory claims that representative democracy is not really based on the will of the people, but a small elite class that governs the masses. “Only one branch of the new government, the House of Representatives, was to be elected by popular vote. The other three controlling bodies-the president, the Senate, and the Supreme Court–were removed from direct voter participation” (2009). According to Dye and Zeigler none of the delegates showed any enthusiasm for mass participation in democracy. The two chamber split appears to support Dye and Zeigler’s argument on Elite Theory
Second, was the emphasis on checks and balances. An unicameral legislature might consolidate too much power, and they also knew from Britain, that could cause corruption. Dividing the chambers provides a check against tyranny (Shmoop Editorial Team).
The third was “a matter of practical politics” (Shmoop Editorial Team). Small states wanted all the states to have equal representation in Congress, but the larger (and more populous) states wanted congressional representation to be based on population. A bicameral legislature provided …show more content…
Not that they have the same powers, but equal in that neither the Senate nor the House can make a law without the other. Under the U.S. Constitution, the two chambers are equal, however; the Constitution gives certain exclusive powers to each chamber. For an example the Senate has powers to confirm Presidential nominees that they do not share with the House, and the House has powers to originate all tax/spending bills that are not shared with the Senate (Nickels n.d.).
Dye and Zeigler’s Elite Theory claims that representative democracy is not really based on the will of the people, but a small elite class that governs the masses. “Only one branch of the new government, the House of Representatives, was to be elected by popular vote. The other three controlling bodies-the president, the Senate, and the Supreme Court–were removed from direct voter participation” (2009). According to Dye and Zeigler none of the delegates showed any enthusiasm for mass participation in democracy. The two chamber split appears to support Dye and Zeigler’s argument on Elite Theory