Evaluate the view that the Senate is more powerful than the House of Representatives.
“Evaluate” requires you to weigh the arguments on both sides and reach a substantiated judgement about the relative power of the two chambers. For 30 marks, write a developed essay with accurate examples, sustained comparison and evaluation throughout, rather than a descriptive list of powers.
Edexcel A-Level Politics: question, source and specification
Question: Evaluate the view that the Senate is more powerful than the House of Representatives.
You must consider this view and the alternative to this view in a balanced way. (30 marks)
Source: No source extract was supplied. This is a standalone essay question, so there is no accompanying extract to reproduce or analyse.
Specification code: Edexcel A-Level Politics
9PL0.Component: 3A: Comparative Politics, USA.
Relevant content: Section 2: US Congress, particularly the distribution of powers, legislative and oversight functions, and debates about the relative importance and effectiveness of congressional powers.
The following is an original, indicative mark scheme aligned with Pearson’s assessment framework. It is not an official Pearson mark scheme for this exact question.
Edexcel A-Level Politics: indicative mark scheme
Assessment objectives
Assessment objective | Marks | What a strong answer demonstrates |
AO1: Knowledge and understanding | 10 | Accurate understanding of shared and exclusive powers, congressional procedures and relevant political examples. |
AO2: Analysis | 10 | Developed explanations of why these powers increase influence, directly comparing the chambers. |
AO3: Evaluation | 10 | Supported judgements about which differences matter most and whether formal powers translate into practical influence. |
A strong response distinguishes between the power of a chamber, the influence of an individual member and the practical effects of party control.
Indicative levels
These are concise paraphrases of the generic assessment levels.
Level | Marks | Typical characteristics |
5 | 25–30 | Thorough knowledge, perceptive analysis and sustained, well-supported evaluation leading to a convincing conclusion. |
4 | 19–24 | Accurate knowledge, clear analytical connections and mostly developed evaluation with a justified conclusion. |
3 | 13–18 | Generally sound knowledge and some developed analysis, but uneven evaluation or partly supported judgements. |
2 | 7–12 | Some relevant knowledge, limited analysis and weakly supported evaluation. |
1 | 1–6 | Limited knowledge, largely descriptive assertions and little effective evaluation. |
0 | 0 | No creditworthy material. |
Pearson’s Section C guidance states that answers which do not consider both views in a balanced way cannot progress beyond Level 2. Balance requires serious consideration of competing arguments, rather than an identical word count for each side.
Indicative content: arguments supporting the view
1. The Senate has exclusive authority over important presidential appointments.
It confirms Supreme Court justices, other federal judges and many senior executive appointments.
The House has no equivalent confirmation role.
Judicial confirmations can influence public policy long after the president and senators responsible have left office.
Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation in October 2020 illustrates the Senate’s direct influence over Supreme Court membership.
Evaluation: This is a particularly strong argument because the Senate can exercise a consequential power without requiring House approval. However, party alignment may encourage senators to support presidential nominees rather than scrutinise them independently.
2. The Senate has a distinctive role in treaty approval.
The consent of two-thirds of senators present is required before the president can ratify a treaty.
The House has no equivalent constitutional role.
However, presidents also use executive agreements, which do not require this treaty-consent process.
Evaluation: The Senate has an advantage in formal treaty making, but this does not give it exclusive control over foreign policy. Both chambers influence foreign policy through legislation and funding.
3. Senators can exercise considerable procedural influence.
Want to read more?
Subscribe to revision-notes.com to keep reading this exclusive post.