AO1: Liberals believe that there are too many checks and balances contained in the Constitution which hinder effective government AO2: The consequence of this is that government can become gridlocked AO3: This then makes important change impossible to enact, and change that does occur does so very slowly AO1: Conservatives believe that the system of checks and balances has been inadequate to prevent the expansion of the federal government AO2: The expansion of federal government has been at the expense of the states, and of the power of the Supreme Court AO3: This means the founding principles of the Constitution have been compromised and too much power concentrated in the hands of the federal government AO1: When the same party is in control of both the presidency and Congress, the checks and balances may cease to be effective AO2: This can mean that presidents are more likely to be able to pass their policy agenda with limited checks by Congress, especially in an era of increasing partisanship AO3: This makes it more difficult for the opposition party to delay or check legislation as the presidential party will dominate the legislative process, e.g. through the committee system AO1: Checks and balances can also hamper effective government when there are divisions over controversial issues AO2: Conflicts between Supreme Court rulings and legislation Congress has passed on issues such as abortion have made the AO3: Supreme Court a quasi-judicial body

AO1: The survival of the system of checks and balances shows that it has served its purpose of preventing one branch of government achieving disproportionate power AO2: This is particularly true as there is still the ultimate check of judicial review by the Supreme Court after legislation has been passed by the executive and legislature AO3: This prevents effective dictatorship, particularly when one party dominates the presidency and both chambers of Congress AO1: Checks and balances do not prevent effective government, but can help to ensure change is dependent on broad- based enduring support AO2: Both chambers of Congress must agree bills in the same format, and go through an elaborate system of checks through the committee system before the final bill is signed by the president AO3: This means that compromise and an ability to work with opposition party members and politicians in different roles in essential to pass legislation effectively AO1: The Constitution itself prevents populist legislation being passed simply to win electoral support on some issues that are seen as protected, e.g. gun rights AO2: This has been demonstrated with presidents who have made a single issue a central plank of their presidency and then had to work with Congress to try to pass legislation, e.g. both Obama and Trump’s healthcare reforms AO3: This helps to ensure policy is well- designed and heavily scrutinised and so more likely to have input from a variety of sources rather than drafted by a single branch AO1: Other barriers are more significant in preventing effective government, e.g. the committee system in Congress AO2: Over 90% of bills ‘die’ in the committee stage due to the numerous powers committee chairman have over whether or not bills progress to the next stage AO3: This can significantly delay or even entirely prevent the passage of legislation that does not fit the agenda of committee chairmen, rather than following the will of the majority of Congress