AP® United States Government and Politics review sheet from Aim for Five (aimforfive.com/gov/units/2/2-15)
Unit 2 · Topic 2.15
2.15 Policy and the Branches of Government
Congress, the president and the courts each have tools to shape what the bureaucracy does, and they often pull in different directions. Because power is spread across branches, people and groups have many places to push for change, but no single branch can set national policy alone. Policy usually emerges from the interaction of all three.
Key terms
- accountability
- multiple access points
- separation of powers
- checks and balances
Each branch's hold on the bureaucracy
| Branch | Main tools | What it can't do alone |
|---|---|---|
| Congress | Writes and rewrites agency laws, controls funding, holds oversight hearings, confirms leaders, can overturn rules | Can't run agencies day to day or enforce laws itself |
| President | Appoints and directs agency leaders, issues executive orders, sets enforcement priorities, shapes budget requests | Can't create agencies, fund them or change the laws they carry out |
| Courts | Review whether agency actions follow the law and the Constitution; can block or require agency action | Can only rule on cases brought before them; can't enforce their own rulings |
The courts and agency action
Courts become involved when someone sues over an agency decision. A judge can rule that an agency went beyond the power Congress gave it, didn't follow required procedures, or failed to do something the law requires. For example, in Massachusetts v. EPA (2007), the Court ruled that the Clean Air Act gave the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases from new cars and that it had to give a lawful reason if it chose not to. In other cases, courts have blocked agency rules for going beyond what Congress authorized (2.13).
Elections and policy change
Elections are the public's main way to steer the bureaucracy. A new president brings new appointees and priorities, and agencies may rewrite rules from the previous administration. A new congressional majority can change budgets and launch investigations. Because elections for the presidency and Congress happen on different schedules, the branches often have different goals, which is a built-in feature of separation of powers.
A policy that passed through every branch
The Affordable Care Act shows how policy moves across branches:
- Congress passed the law in 2010, setting broad goals and leaving many details to the Department of Health and Human Services.
- The executive branch wrote regulations to carry it out, and later administrations adjusted those rules in different directions.
- The Supreme Court upheld the law's core in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012) but ruled that states couldn't be forced into the Medicaid expansion.
- Congress later changed the law again, reducing the penalty for not having insurance to zero starting in 2019.
Multiple access points and accountability
Because each branch has a say, groups that lose in one place can try another: lobby Congress for a new law, push the president for a new executive order, comment on a proposed rule, or sue in court. This is the same multiple-access-points idea from 1.6, now applied to the bureaucracy.
The upside is that no branch can impose policy on its own, which protects against abuse. The downside is that responsibility gets blurred: when a program fails, each branch can blame the others, which makes it harder for voters to hold anyone accountable.
Worked examples
Try each one yourself first, then open the solution.
- Example 1
Tracing a policy across branches
An agency issues a rule restricting a pesticide. Farm groups oppose it. Describe how the farm groups could use two different branches to challenge the rule.
Show the solutionHide the solution
- Step 1: Courts: the groups could sue, arguing the agency went beyond the authority Congress gave it or skipped required procedures. A court could block the rule.
- Step 2: Congress: they could lobby members to pass a resolution overturning the rule under the Congressional Review Act, or to cut funding for enforcing it.
- Step 3: (The president is a third option: the groups could ask the White House to direct the agency to reconsider.)
- Step 4: Link to the concept: having several options shows how separation of powers creates multiple access points.
Answer: They could sue to have a court block the rule, and lobby Congress to overturn it or defund its enforcement, showing how divided power creates multiple access points.
Common mistakes
- Saying courts supervise agencies on their own initiative. Courts act only when someone brings a case.
- Assuming the president alone controls agencies. Congress creates, funds and oversees them, and courts can block their actions.
- Treating multiple access points as only a benefit. They also blur accountability and slow policy change.
On the exam
- Free-response questions may describe a policy dispute and ask how two branches could respond. Match each branch to a specific, realistic tool.
- Use the phrase multiple access points and connect it to separation of powers or federalism when explaining why policy is hard to change.
Connected topics
Videos
Check yourself
4 questions on 2.15 Policy and the Branches of Government. Pick an answer to see if you got it, and why.
Which of the following best illustrates the federal courts holding the bureaucracy accountable?
Step 1: Congress passes a law telling a federal agency to reduce pollution from power plants.
Step 2: The agency writes a rule requiring every plant to cut emissions by 30 percent within five years.
Step 3: A group of power companies sues. A federal court rules that part of the rule goes beyond what the law allows.
Step 4: Congress passes an amendment to the law that gives the agency the power the court said it lacked, and the president signs it.
Hypothetical scenario
Which step best shows an interest group using the courts to influence policy?
Taken together, the four steps best support which conclusion?
Suppose the power companies had lost in court. Which of the following would be their most likely next step to change the rule?
0 of 4 answered