What are some faults with the American federal government and how does it affect the roles of our political parties in policy making?

I'm assuming that you're asking this because the question was presented to you in a course; It sounds vaguely familiar.


Take a micro look on American politics and government. What would you change? Give a problem and provide a solution. Try to lessen the broadness of the question by focusing on a few specific faults and solutions.

'Some faults' and 'it' don't go together, so if this is how the teacher wrote the question, I am a bit dismayed. 'It' would be 'they' if more than one fault is wanted.

I am also unclear on what policy making our political parties do, if this is in the US.

You can safely say that all gov'ts have faults, even democratic ones; the struggle is ongoing as society changes.

One big problem with federal as opposed to state gov't is slow, money-wasting red tape, with too many administrators. One big problem with state power is conflicts and discrepancies across state lines. Poor states have poor education, some states allow marijuana, details about abortion go by state, and so on - is that good or bad? It can be argued either way.

But since the question is about political party policy, I have no idea what to say. Good luck.
Republicans tend to be against taxation that goes to social programs and they tend to favor the rich in the favor that the money trickles down to the poor, while democrats tend to be for the poor, the working person, taxes to be spent on social programs. That's simplified. But that's not 'policy' so I don't even like the question.

I think we can get away with treating the collective noun as being compatible with 'it' in this instance. We can also assume that the 'faults' in policy impact on the political parties and not the government who formulate the policy.

On this basis I would say that the question is a bit clumsy. I would go with something like this:

What are some of the faults with how American federal government policy affects the roles of our political parties?

I am not totally happy with this, but I think it is a bit better than the original formulation.

Now that the wording is settled, what is the answer to the question?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JudyKayTee

Now that the wording is settled, what is the answer to the question?

---

Upon second thoughts I wouldn't change the way the question has been framed. The only reason I say this is because some people take offense when we correct their grammar. I would leave the question as it stands.

These types of question are generally easy to answer because they are rather general. Starting with an introduction to the essay, I would define the terms you are going to use. In other words, you get to say what certain words mean according to your interpretation.

Having done this it is important to explain why you have chosen to define the terms in a particular way. It is equally important to provide evidence for your position. In other words, actual political examples that demonstrate the definitions of choice.

You would need to finish the essay with a conclusion. A conclusion sums up the arguments you have put forward.

Thank you for asking our help with your homework assignment. However, there are some rules we have for doing so.
Do not simply retype or paste a question from your book or study material

We won't do your homework questions for you. You were given the assignment for you to learn.

If you come up with your own answer or process and post it for us to critique that is acceptable. If you have some SPECIFIC questions that you couldn't find or didn't understand, we may help with that.
But this is your assignment, so show us you have at least attempted to complete it on your own.

Thank you.

I hold teachers to a high standard. More than half the questions here that are copied (other than math) drive me nuts. In fact someone was just here asking a math question that was worded in a way that made the correct answer sound wrong, and the OP said he had already figured it out correctly but not according to the conflicting wording of the question.

Let me address your question, even if it is a homework assignment

The fault lies in the structure, where a President can be of a different political persuasion to that of the majority of the House. This gives rise to the obstructionist situation that has existed for four years where it is impossible for a government to get its program progressed and has given rise to ad hoc measures like the sequester. This situation might be remedied by aligning the terms of the President and the House so as to end the constant electioneering that is associated with two year terms. The idea that legislation can be blocked in the Senate even though a majority might be in favour is anathema to western democracy