Political Science

The United States Congress consists of members both from Senate and House of Representatives who are chosen by direct election. Direct election is a system of choosing political office holders where the voters directly cast ballots for the person or persons or political party that they desire to see elected.

During policy or policies making, they can derail the process buy refusing to support unanimously any policy during the voting for the policies in the seating and this would delay the policy making process. Their vote would be divided and the proposes get outnumbered and this would see a policy being shot down and face a vote passing challenge if Congress itself get divided on the policy.
The Congressional Committees work is to discuss the bills that come to the house where by bills and their resolutions are usually referred to the appropriate committee, which then may report a bill back in its original form favorable or unfavorable or recommend amendments, report original measures, or allow the proposed legislation to die in committee stage any action if the bill was seen unfavorable or unsuitable.

Congress is important to the need of the citizens in the sense that the bills which are brought in the house which touches on the lives and economies of the country for them to be passed Congress has to unanimously pass them. Without which such bills wont be passed and hence wont be applied even if how much they would be of value to the citizens.

Congress needs to be decentralized in the sense to kill monopoly and be able to collect views and interests from various platforms and corridors so that the bills presented to the house are unilateral and are those that are a benefit to the majority and not vise versa.

The oversight body of the committee is made up of members from the administration, advisory commissions, regulatory reform committees of the cabinet, parliamentary committees and intergovernmental committees. The members are wide spread and their role is to regulate, coordinate and supervise the reforms to ensure quality standards.

The president can come up with policies and bills which he would want to see them pass and in such case he would first consult his party committee members and have them tabled and discussed by various committees for passing. His role is tamed in that, he can not just pass any policy, it has to be vetted and all he has to do is to align his members towards supporting the bills when they come to the house.

Miller Center on Carrot and Stick was referring the power struggle of persuasion that prevails towards proposals, negotiating compromises that involves congress to have their vote on matters relating to some sensitive bills in statehouse.

Max Weber was a political economist and a sociologist who came with the concept of social theory influence and the giving of sociology itself. In Webers theory the modern capitalism and rational bureaucracy as a point of departure in research i.e. natural laws are possible of establishment in cultural science and that such laws are conditioned psychologically.

The patronage system in the US government was a system where the winning party in election dispensing all appointive office positions to loyal members of the party in power. After the assassin of President Garfield, the Congress swung into action prompting their public authority to facilitate a reelection and thereby enacting numerous reforms that shed more light on the represented and their representatives.

Accountability n policy making is important in the sense that views from all regions and groups and relevant vetting is made to forester greater transparency through direct public scrutiny.
The Administrative Act of 1946 is an act which was to govern the process that federal administrative agencies follow in carrying out their responsibilities. The law governed the conduct of the state agencies.

The Clean Air Act was an act which was put to control air pollution in the United States. Though the law was initially passed in 1963, major amendments were made and added in 1970 with a comprehensive program of reducing air pollution.

The Supreme Courts role in the United States Government is to declare whether an act is constitutional or unconstitutional when it comes to policy making. Its major and only role is to adjudicate and the judges are appointed by the sitting president.

Judges should make decisions based on principle not political they should more focus on decisions not opinions. That way the decision would be a stand of right and wrong and opinion would favor a political position.

Supreme Court of the United States decided the case of (Joseph W. Cumming, James S. Harper, and John C. Ladeveze v. The County Board of Education of Richmond County, State of Georgia)  where in all-white Richmond County School Board closed Ware High School, a segregated, tax-supported, all-black high school in the City of Augusta.

The plaintiffs did not seek integration of the Augusta Public Schools nor did they lodge a complaint regarding the separation by race of children in the primary grades, they did not attempt to compel the board to provide a high school for blacks their demand was for injunctive relief that would force the closing of the white high school through the withholding of tax support until the black high school was reopened. This approach succeeded in the trial court but failed in the Georgia Supreme Court. In an opinion written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, the Justice who had just three years before asserted that the constitution was color-blind, the Supreme Court of the United States sustained the ruling of the Georgia Supreme Court denying the request for injunctive relief. Ware High School was not reopened.

The Supreme Court justice Sonia Sotomayor will make a significant role in the face of race and origin if appointed to the bench. She comes from a race opposed by majority of Americans in terms of race her being Hispanic amid her experience and expertise in legal issues.

Katrina incidence occurred in August 2005 and it remains the most pronounced natural disaster in United States history. Hurricane Katrina hit on New Orleans. This natural disaster was amongst the biggest in United States. Most parts in United States were covered by water for a couple of weeks. Federal levy system failed leading to flooding in many parts of the cities in United States.

FEMA stands for Federal Emergency Management Agency. This is an agency which is under Homeland Security Department. A Nation Prepared is the motto followed by this agency. The goal of this agency is to respond to any disaster whether manmade or natural. This agency does this through preparation and prevention of the occurrence of such disasters. The response of this agency to Katrina was disaster because they had not prepared well for the disaster (Gerber, 2009).

Other government agencies, military and citizenry groups took part in the Katrina incidence by giving aid to the affected citizens as well as recovering properties. The role of the president in this incidence could have been demanding the cooperation of various government agencies in offering aid to the affected people. The president has the role declaring it a national disaster and calling for donations from other countries.

The lesson learned from FEMA is the issue of preparedness to respond to disasters whether triggered by man or naturally occurring. There are various I could have put across if I were the director of FEMA. Ensuring that you have all the facilities required for response to a disaster is the mandate of a response agency (Gerber, 2009). I could have provided all the facilities required by my team to ensure we recover from the disaster as quickly as possible. Katrina incidence left many parts covered with water. This was because of poor drainage system. If I were the director, I have ensured an efficient drainage system.

Lee Thornton, who has served as the Dean of the Philip Merrill College of Journalism and who also during the Ford and Carter administrations covered the White House for CBS News, writes in a recent academic journal that President Obama was able to effectively alter the tradition operation of the American political system by using technology to educate and mobilize American voters.  More specifically, Thornton argues that What the American political system witnessed this time around was a perfect collision of technology with a generation ready to rise up and embrace a cause. Candidate Obama understood those things in a way that his opposition obviously did not  HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5033652158(Thornton, 2008, p. 2).  The article strongly suggests that the integration of technology and political campaigns has transformed the American political system by granting Americans new types of access to candidates and by creating a sort of voter enthusiasm that deviates from traditional media contacts with political candidates.
 
Thornton notes that politicians have frequently made use of the media and cites Lyndon B. Johnson as an American president who devised deliberate strategies to influence public opinion through the news media.  In terms of examining the American political system, within the context of political campaigns, there have been few changes in how the media has been defined and used since President Johnson.  President Obama, much younger and much more technologically-aware than his predecessors, demonstrated through his internet efforts that the internet is a powerful new type of media and that success in the American political system may become increasingly dependent on savvy internet campaigns.  Surprisingly, given the deeply-entrenched role of the broadcast news media in national elections, Thornton notes that this may encourage future candidates in the American political system to  try to sidestep the traditional media HYPERLINK httpwww.questiaschool.comPM.qstaod5033652158(Thornton, 2008, p. 2). 

This relates to class discussions because it illustrates how special interests such as the mainstream news media can be perceived as being unduly influential and sometimes biases President Obama, seek to free himself of some of these powerful interests and effectively addressed himself more directly to the American people.  This is, in my opinion, a positive development because it bridges the gap between political candidates and voters by squeezing out to a certain extant information brokers such as media organizations owned and controlled by powerful financial interests.  The Internet is more transparent and diverse, though care has to be taken to determine whether information is factually correct, and it is probably a good thing to sidestep the broadcast news media in the name of transparency. 

Negative campaigning or mudslinging has long been considered as part of American political culture. As a means to securing an electoral seat, it is considered the norm in politics and is as they say as American as Mississippi mud (Goodman, 1996, p. 13). As a result of excesses in candidate-centered campaign contributions, political advertising is often mean-spirited and foul, focusing not on candidates platform but on character. Because candidates are essentially engaged in a political contest, it might seem completely normal for them to discredit opponents through deceit, manipulation, and character assassination. I do not believe this should be the norm in a supposedly robust and mature two-party democracy like the United States. However unbelievable it might be, the US constitution could be regarded as the promoter of such negative political campaigning.

The Communication Act of 1934 and the 1976 Federal Election Campaign Act (as amended) resulted to the protection of corporate-sponsored political commercials insofar as restricting them would be, as the decision in Buckely v. Valeo indicates infringes on the right to free speech (1976). To counter the effects of negative political advertisements, public opinion is crucial. Interest groups are helpful in exposing and educating the American public on political messages, rather than personalities, of a particular party. In this manner, they help in providing alternative opinion especially to low-income and marginalized homes which are found to be most vulnerable and most inclined to believe in negative campaign (Chang, Park,  Shim, 1998).

Soft money also reduces candidate-centered politics because it funds for advocacy of the party as a whole. I think that party-centered politics reflects a democracy in its mature form, but the personality-centered campaign is without a doubt, the more sellable strategy to win a political contest. While candidate-centeredness of political campaigns may be inevitable, resorting to dirty tactics and deceitful propaganda does more harm than good in the long run. It weakens confidence in government and respect for elected leaders.

When one thinks of the foreign service, embassy and diplomats come into mind.  In the world of the foreign service of the diplomatic corps, negotiation is the most important function or tool in diplomacy (Berridge200520).  The reason why the diplomatic service exists is to help facilitate cordial relations among nations and this also includes resolving problems and issues in a peaceful way rather than resorting to war or precipitate any turmoil in the world.

Diplomats have been in the forefront of any matter that requires foreign intervention in lieu of a military one which entails using force.  Diplomats are always the first to go and work out a peaceful agreement with a foreign host, whether they are state or non-state actors such as the case of the earthquake in Haiti that struck in January 10, 2010.  The non-governmental organization (NGO), Bread for Haiti went to the stricken island nation to help alleviate the people who are suffering from hunger following the calamity.

During the course of their mercy mission, the convoy was stopped by a local militia group, called Blanc et Rouge, demanding that the the workers relinquish their supplies.  It was apparent that they would not allow the relief workers through unless concessions were made.  The leaders of the Bread for Haiti convoy have refused to yield, and this resulted in a standoff that had run for several hours now. 

The services of Dr. Toma, a local physician and well-respected local leader from a town called Belladere, came after being told of the standoff.  Dr. Toma s clinic was one of the destinations where the supplies were earmarked because the clinic is considered neutral ground.  For many years, Dr. Toma has established a reputation of being fair and trustworthy, and has been successful in coming up with compromises between competing political factions in the local area, thereby keeping the peace.  A three-party conversation has begun to find a solution to the impasse.  This also involves the representatives from Bread from Haiti and the militia representatives.

In this case, it would be easy to make threats in order to assert ones will.  But in a situation like this, it would be counterproductive.  The militias can still seize the goods and block further aid using force.  Since the NGO is not associated with any government agency, they could not enlist the services of the peacekeeping forces in the area and time was of the essence and the aid needs to be delivered.  In the light of this development, a compromise is struck.  Dr. Tomas clinic would be the collection point.  The Blanc et Rouge would not dare interfere for it may attract the attention of rival militias who might challenge them.

In this scenario, diplomatic solutions are preferable to armed confrontations.  The problem is they are not easy to attain if the circumstances are complex and this requires very careful handling by skilled negotiators who know how to play the strengths and weaknesses of the parties involved.

Democratic elections are supposed to propel into political and civil office leaders who have a clear vision of the future. Only such a visionary leadership can guarantee the strengthening of social and political institutions for the prosperity of future generations. Because of this fact, young adults between the ages of 18 and twenty four would be expected to be the most enthusiastic voters but this has not been the case. Less than 50 percent of those below 25 responded in the affirmative if asked if they would vote.

The main reason behind this is that parents and the society have overlooked their responsibility of teaching their children the political system and the essence of voting. Secondly, politicians have shown little interest in addressing the matters affecting this population group. The main policy suggestions during campaigns are revolve around the interests of the working class without paying due attention to youth matters in a manner that would suggest they are actually the future of this country.

In assessing the candidates running for office, I look at the suggestions they make in the media about how they would make life for all Americans in their targeted group better. If a candidate has sound policy, he or she will have the support of the majority. The media also plays a big part in the decision as they decrypt most of the rhetoric and jargon used by campaign camps while asking for votes.

However, to increase the levels of voter turnout especially among the youth, the media should take more responsibility not just in reporting campaign stories and developments but deeply interpreting the contentious issues for everyone and also in educating the public on the importance of participating in the electioneering process.

The term democracy refers a system of governance where the people are actively involved in the election of leaders who serve in the government.  The political government within a democracy is facilitated by representative democracy or direct democracy. A constitution facilitates the protection of the freedom of citizens, civil rights, liberty and legitimized rights. The term constitution refers to a body of fundamental rules and principles in a nation that determines the power and duties of the government .In addition, the constitution guarantees certain rights to the people (Denvir, pg.1).  In the US, many citizens venerate the constitution and believe that it is a good model for democracy.  However, the question of how democratic the US constitution is has triggered critical analysis and debates of the constitution.  According to Robert Dahl in his book How Democratic is the American Constitution, there are several undemocratic elements in the constitution (Dahl, pg.3) .Although majority of Americans believe that the American constitution and its principles uphold democratic values, citizens should take a critical analysis of the constitution to determine whether there is need make amendments in the document.

Discussion
The legitimacy of the US constitution emanates from its utility as a tool of democratic governance (Jordan, pg.31).  However, the incorporation of antidemocratic elements in the constitution can be attributed to the context within which it was established One major factor that has been considered to contribute to this drawback in the document is the fact that numerous aspects of the US political system were integrated in the constitution as a result of the Framers last minute compromise or short-sightedness. Furthermore, the Framers of the constitution may have lacked a democratic political system upon which to model a government.  The most unusual and potentially undemocratic elements in the American constitution include the bicameral legislature, Electoral College system, the federal system, judicial review and the presidential system. Because the Framers incorporated features in the political system that go against significant democratic reforms, the American citizens have been challenged to have a critical analysis of Americans political system in order to identify opportunities that can create a democratic society.

One of the reasons why the American constitutional system is viewed as undemocratic and inefficient is the strong bicameral legislature which has a highly unequal representation in the upper chamber, an executive branch and independent in the upper chamber, an extensive judicial review of the federal legislative enactments and an electoral system where coalition governments and third parties are ruled out (Levinson, pg 27). The American presidential system which is supported by the constitution is related to the Electoral College and the Senate which have undemocratic elements .The Senate and the Electoral College tie the electoral vote to geography instead of the population. This makes the two to have the political power lean towards the establishment of coalitions of smaller states whose interests may not necessarily go hand in hand with the interests of a nation.  The American constitutional system was modeled during a transitional stage when democratic evolution period experienced in England during the eighteenth century. Although the presidential system in the US has not led to political instability, the formula of separation of powers in many third world countries has given rise to leadership problems. The collapse of presidential rgimes in these countries is an indication of the problems that may also arise within the US presidential system. The US presidentialism allows division of powers into the executive, legislature and judicial branches. Although this is expected to provide a system of checks and balances, it can lead to leadership problems when the various branches of governance fail to agree on vital issues.

Some political analysts have asserted that as compared to presidentialism, parliamentalism is more compatible with stable democracy. The presidential democracy often introduces immobilism and rigidity in the political system (Linz and Valenzuela, pg.91). In some countries where proportional representation results to coalition governments or multiparty states, it is easy to attain stable democracy and equality. In the US government, there are distinctive roles for the head of government and head of state. Furthermore, the elected head of government also serves as the head of state. The system has the President and the Congress elected for a fixed term in office. This demands that for the Congress to be effective, it needs to cope with a vast agenda. In a scenario where there are a vast number of complex issues to be addressed, it becomes difficult for the legislators to reach collective agreement on important issues   that relate to governance. When an overloaded congress becomes too compliant with the President, turns into the Presidents rubber stamp.However, if the Congress fails to put into considerations critical issues in the agenda or habitually rejects proposals by the goverment, the process of governance can be brought to a halt. This no doubt puts the future of a country at jeopardy. On the other hand, an ineffectual President may not be discharged from office unless heshe is implicated in criminal acts. Lack of impeachment ensures that president remains in office for a fixed term .The constitution protects the president from removal from office due to maladministration until the term in office is over. Citizens therefore may be unable to discharge the president from office because the constitution prevents re-election of a president until the fixed term in office expires. In case the candidate wins the elections, the running mate becomes the vice president. This is viewed as a flaw in the presidential selection process (Rose, pg.79).

The one year campaigning witnessed in the US before the general elections gives rise to undemocratic practices in the electoral system. Studies indicate that only one third of eligible voters participate in Congressional elections while only a half vote during presidential elections (Task Force on Inequality and American Democracy, pg 9). For instance, the presidential caucuses demand that participants to spend a lot of time in political discussions. Individuals who cannot fin enough time are unable to participate. Presidential candidates are nominated through primary elections and caucuses.Traditionally, primaries are first held in states with small populations such as Iowa and New Hampshire. Despite the fact that primary elections are first held these states as compared to other states such as California which has a large population, the outcome of the election in these states is very influential in the election of the presidential party nominee. This has made populous states such as New York, Florida, Texas and New York to  call for a change in  the schedule of primary elections  where  the elections held in states with small populations  give more weight to the outcome of the presidential nominee .It is due to this reason that primaries held in Iowa and New Hampshire are considered vital in the nomination process of the presidential nominees.Furthermore,the system gives more power to some voters in certain states than those in others. A good example is whereby millions of voters including the undecided voters get ignored by political candidates during the campaigns if they live in states where the majority is expected to support one side.

The Electoral votes play an important role in US presidential elections and the creation of an Electoral College by the constitution enables all states to have an equal number of senators and representatives. All states provide electors who then elect the president (Mayer, pg.228). This has made less populous states assigned greater importance during the presidential primaries. Another problem that arises from the Electoral College is that the system results to confusion when a President is elected without a majority of the popular vote. The candidate may on the other hand win the electoral votes.Initially, there lacked an element of popular votes in during the elections. However, the birth of two-party system in the early 19th Century increased the need for elections to move towards increased democracy. This led to the incorporation of   the principle of one person, one vote. The Electoral College has been maintained to  ensure that all states are given equal importance during the elections .Despite the positive intention of the system, presidential elections where the winning candidate fails to secure majority votes undermines democracy because the electoral college gives victory to the individual who loses the the popular vote .For instance, during the 2000 US Presidential elections, the Republican George W. Bush won the elections through majority  electoral college votes against Al Gore who got the popular vote. The electors within the Electoral College system have the responsibility to vote directly for the president. The electors comprise of the states US senators and representatives of the population.Currently, 538 members (435 representatives, 100 senators and 3 electoral votes for Washington D.C) form the Electoral College. A candidate who is elected as president needs to receive majority of the electoral votes (at least 270). However, the proponents of the Electoral College are convinced that the system to some degree encourage trans-regional appeal for the presidential candidates because they campaign in many states including those with smaller populations. This   reduces political polarization .One of the founding fathers who questioned the constitution was Thomas Jefferson. He recognized the important role of the Framers of the constitution in America but he asserted that the Framers might have lacked the experience of the present. He therefore advocated for the rethinking of the constitution. He advocated against radical move to abolish the Electoral College. Instead, making a detailed plan for reforms to avoid the repetition of the 2000 presidential elections fiasco where George W.Bush won the lections by electoral votes but lost to Al Gore by majority votes is important (Posner, pg. 92). Apart from the selection process of a president through the primaries, the issue of selecting a vice-president in the US has received criticism. The means through which the vice-president is selected has been the focus of scholarly debate for a long time. The procedure of selecting the vice-president has always been an issue of controversy during the presidential selection process because the tradition allows presidential nominees to exercise unilateral power when choosing a running mate.Furthermore,the elections require great funding and that may attract funding from pressure groups and corporate groups which may undermine democracy(American Political System,np).

Critics of the Electoral College system emphasize that the presidential election outcome should be based more on the national popular vote than the electoral votes. After 1968, the presidential elections primaries became the means through which presidential nominees were appointed. The presidential candidates during the primaries seek majority of delegates in the national convention in the Electoral College system (Steed and Moreland, pg.23). During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, deciding the outcome of presidential elections based on national popular vote was considered to be inadequate because the public was not familiar with candidates across the country.  This made the public lack sufficient information about candidates in various states.  Although the objective of using Electoral College votes to elect the president was good for democracy 200 years ago, the system currently seems to undermine the will of the people when the popular vote is nullified by the results of the Electoral College votes.  The democratic value of every citizens vote is equally important.  Despite the increasing demands to have the Electoral College eliminated, it enjoys support for its benefits.  For instance, the Electoral College ensures that the political tradition of honoring state rights in the US is maintained. The system therefore makes sure that presidential candidates do not ignore states with small populations. Another advantage is that the Electoral College system is important in maintaining a stable political party system because electoral votes are allocated on winner take all basis.  Although there have been strong support for direct election of US president by the voters, there are several challenges to this.  One major challenge is that making a constitutional amendment that can abolish the Electoral College can be difficult to enact because a constitutional amendment needs to be approved by a two thirds majority in the Congress. Though calls for reforms in the system continue to be witnessed, changes in the system have been experienced progressively (Benett, pg.46).

The American political system is defined by the Declaration of Independence of 1776 and the US Constitution.   The Separation of powers principle is the heart of the US constitution which ensures that power is divided amongst the legislature, the executive and the judiciary (US Senate, np).  The principle aims at ensuring there are checks and balances .Despite the fact that   power is counter-balanced and spread in a presidential system, the presidential system makes a government complicated, slow and legalistic.  This is a disadvantage in a world where rapid economic and political development is being witnessed.  The Framers of the constitution intended to reduce the excessive power of leadership experienced in monarchial systems.  However, the expansion of US Federal bureaucracy has provided more power and greater role to the president in a political system.  The presidential system has the president serving as the commander in chief of the military hence heshe has power over the federal government executive branch and the military.  The executive branch provides the president with constitutional powers to manage national matters and to give executive orders in matters relating to internal policies. The bicameral legislature is the other important branch in government The House of Representatives forms the lower Chamber of the Congress. The Senate is the upper chamber of the bicameral legislature. The Framers of the constitution intended the Senate to be a regulatory group.  Currently, it has become the dominant chamber and the powerful upper house of the US legislature body.

The constitution supports an undemocratic legislative process where the Senate has great control over important matters in the state (Levisnon, pg.25).Some criticism about the US bicameral legislature relates to the composition of the Senate. The constitution requires that every state regardless of its population produce two senators to serve for a fixed term in office. This is considered to undermine the democratic principle of one person, one vote. Some states such as California have a population of about 35 million people while other such as Wyoming have a population of about half a million people. This means that states with smaller population are viewed as equal to those with huge populations.Consequently, nearly a quarter of the Senate is comprised of representatives whose population account for less than five per cent of the nations total population (about 14 million people).For example, in 2004, Barbara Boxer managed to retain her seat when she received about six million votes in California while in South Dakota, John Thune who defeated Tom Daschle received about 198,000 votes. This raises concern on how democratic the process of election is in the states. In the House of Representatives, the principle of one person, one vote is upheld because the representatives of the states are appointed based on the total population of the states. This does not translate to good representation because the Senate can stop the passing of legislation. As a result, a large national majority that intends to enact legislation may be prevented by a small minority within the Senate. This scenario has been attributed to the US government redistribution of resources from the highly populated states to the lowly populated states. Furthermore, the Senate composition has promoted disproportionate representation of racial minorities and this departs from democratic ideals. Based on its nature, the bicameral legislature makes it difficult for any legislation to be enacted. This is because legislation measures   can be easily defeated whenever one House is not willing to approve the measure. Another objection to bicameralism legislature is that it provides for many veto points (Rhodes, pg.480). This often allows democratic will to be undermined. Since the Constitution was framed more than two centuries ago, the presidents rarely exercised the veto power and in cases where they did, the president believed that the relevant legislation was unconstitutional. Over time, this has changed. The president may veto legislation if based on policy he fails to favor the legislation. Although some critics of the constitution point out presidential veto power as undermining democracy, the veto power is considered a benefit to the nation when it increases consensus before legislation is passed. For instance, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt is viewed as a veto-happy president and one of Americas most popular presidents.

Finally, the difficulty of having the president removed from the office has been viewed as the US constitutions provision of great power to the presidency. When an electorate votes a party out of power in a decisive manner, it expresses its lack of confidence and trust in the party and its administration (Schantz, pg.89).The supporters of the constitution argue that the Framers of the Constitution were right to make it difficult to remove a sitting president from office by forbidding the impeachment of a president due to maladministration. They therefore intended to preserve a system of checks and balances by protecting the president against legislative reprisal. This is a great advantage to the country because it decreases the possibility of having the country destabilized when the presidents relative independence is undermined. In addition, negative impact of partisan efforts to remove the president from power is prevented.

Conclusion
The US Constitution is considered to be one of the most fundamental documents in governance and leadership. The document which was produced more than two centuries ago has been questioned on how it expresses the will of the current American citizens. The standard by which the constitution serve people well and meet democratic standards has attracted   debate and critical analysis of the document. This has had a wide range of views presented to support or oppose the argument that the American Constitution is undemocratic. Competitive elections in a democracy should be procedural and fair.  For citizens to be actively involved in governance issues, freedom of speech, freedom of political expression and freedom of the press are vital.