Evaluate the view that Congress provides effective oversight of the executive. (30)
To provide effective oversight, Congress would have to perform its constitutional checks
and ensure accountability, provide thorough investigation and still allow the government
to function under circumstances that can help or hinder oversight, especially when there
is a united or divided government. On balance, it is more convincing to argue that
Congress is largely ineffective when it comes to oversight due to hyper-partisanship;
oversight can be extremely weak when there is a united government, and overly
partisan and politicised when there is a divided government.
On the one hand, it could be argued that Congress performs its oversight function
effectively because it uses the checks given to it in the constitution in order to constrain
the President. The most important of these is arguably the power of the purse, meaning
that the legislature can control government spending, and thereby influence the actions
of the executive branch. This was seen with the Senate, with Joe Manchin delivering the
death blow to Biden’s $1.7 trillion Build Back Better plan, forcing it to be scaled down to
just the Inflation Reduction Act (2022). In addition, Congress can reject, amend or delay
presidential bills, such as Biden’s 2024 bipartisan border security bill. These examples
point to a legislature that is unwilling to simply acquiesce to the executive’s agenda,
thereby preventing a concentration of power to a tyrannical executive. Further to this,
both chambers of Congress can take part in the impeachment process, with the House
initiating impeachment trials and the Senate convicting Presidents. For instance, Trump
has been impeached twice by the House in 2019 and 2021, and a third impeachment
process was started against him in April 2025. As these constitutional checks are only a
few of many powers granted by the constitution to scrutinise the executive, it can be
argued that at least to some extent, Congress can perform its oversight function
effectively. However, it is more convincing to argue that these constitutional checks are
largely ineffective, as they are often under-utilised or abused. In terms of foreign policy,
the executive can largely be seen as imperial, as they are able to marginalise Congress’
role by exploiting their constitutional power of Commander-in-Chief and Head Diplomat,
which was seen in the March 2025 Signal-gate scandal, where leaked chats between
top members of Trump’s cabinet - such as Vice President JD Vance and Defence
Secretary Pete Hesgeth - revealed the orchestration of strikes against Houthi rebels
without consulting Congress. The secrecy involved in these intelligence
communications, with the 1973 War Powers Resolution providing a weak check on the
executive’s exercise of military might, exposes how the legislature is largely ineffective
at conducting scrutiny in this respect. Furthermore, in terms of impeachment, the highly
partisan and polarised nature of Congress has seen this check turn into a politicised
mechanism of points-scoring rather than effective oversight. This can be seen in Nancy
Pelosi’s inclusion of anti-Trump Republicans like Liz Cheney on the January 6th
© Humanities Unlocked. | Edexcel A-level Politics 2025 | For personal use only. Redistribution is
prohibited.
To provide effective oversight, Congress would have to perform its constitutional checks
and ensure accountability, provide thorough investigation and still allow the government
to function under circumstances that can help or hinder oversight, especially when there
is a united or divided government. On balance, it is more convincing to argue that
Congress is largely ineffective when it comes to oversight due to hyper-partisanship;
oversight can be extremely weak when there is a united government, and overly
partisan and politicised when there is a divided government.
On the one hand, it could be argued that Congress performs its oversight function
effectively because it uses the checks given to it in the constitution in order to constrain
the President. The most important of these is arguably the power of the purse, meaning
that the legislature can control government spending, and thereby influence the actions
of the executive branch. This was seen with the Senate, with Joe Manchin delivering the
death blow to Biden’s $1.7 trillion Build Back Better plan, forcing it to be scaled down to
just the Inflation Reduction Act (2022). In addition, Congress can reject, amend or delay
presidential bills, such as Biden’s 2024 bipartisan border security bill. These examples
point to a legislature that is unwilling to simply acquiesce to the executive’s agenda,
thereby preventing a concentration of power to a tyrannical executive. Further to this,
both chambers of Congress can take part in the impeachment process, with the House
initiating impeachment trials and the Senate convicting Presidents. For instance, Trump
has been impeached twice by the House in 2019 and 2021, and a third impeachment
process was started against him in April 2025. As these constitutional checks are only a
few of many powers granted by the constitution to scrutinise the executive, it can be
argued that at least to some extent, Congress can perform its oversight function
effectively. However, it is more convincing to argue that these constitutional checks are
largely ineffective, as they are often under-utilised or abused. In terms of foreign policy,
the executive can largely be seen as imperial, as they are able to marginalise Congress’
role by exploiting their constitutional power of Commander-in-Chief and Head Diplomat,
which was seen in the March 2025 Signal-gate scandal, where leaked chats between
top members of Trump’s cabinet - such as Vice President JD Vance and Defence
Secretary Pete Hesgeth - revealed the orchestration of strikes against Houthi rebels
without consulting Congress. The secrecy involved in these intelligence
communications, with the 1973 War Powers Resolution providing a weak check on the
executive’s exercise of military might, exposes how the legislature is largely ineffective
at conducting scrutiny in this respect. Furthermore, in terms of impeachment, the highly
partisan and polarised nature of Congress has seen this check turn into a politicised
mechanism of points-scoring rather than effective oversight. This can be seen in Nancy
Pelosi’s inclusion of anti-Trump Republicans like Liz Cheney on the January 6th
© Humanities Unlocked. | Edexcel A-level Politics 2025 | For personal use only. Redistribution is
prohibited.
