Congressional behavior = how members of the House and Senate act and vote—shaped by elections, parties, districts, and personal role conception (trustee, delegate, or politico). Key drivers: partisan voting and polarization (which can cause gridlock), incumbency advantage, redistricting/gerrymandering (subject to cases like Baker v. Carr and Shaw v. Reno), and divided government (which raises conflict over presidential initiatives, especially during lame-duck periods). Why it matters: behavior determines whether Congress can pass laws, confirm appointments, and respond to constituents—so ideological splits or strategic voting can speed policy or produce stalemate. On the AP exam, Topic 2.3 links directly to Concept Application FRQs (LO 2.3.A)—you should be ready to explain causes (elections, gerrymandering, partisanship) and effects (gridlock, policy outcomes). For a focused review, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ); for broader unit review and 1,000+ practice questions, visit (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2) and (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Partisanship shapes votes in Congress by making party loyalty a major factor in decision-making. When members vote along party lines (partisan voting), ideological divisions and polarization increase the chance of gridlock—bills fail because parties won’t compromise (EK 2.3.A.1). In divided government, partisanship intensifies; Congress may block presidential initiatives or confirmations from the other party (EK 2.3.A.3). Individual members still balance roles: trustees, delegates, or politicos—so some break with the party when constituency pressure or personal judgment demands it (EK 2.3.A.4). For the AP exam, be ready to explain cause/effect: how polarization + divided government → more party-line votes and less governing effectiveness (LO 2.3.A). Want a clear study summary and practice questions on this topic? Check the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and unit overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2). For extra practice, try the 1,000+ AP practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

A trustee and a delegate are two ways members of Congress think about who they represent. A trustee uses their own judgment and expertise to make decisions they believe are best for the country or their district—even if constituents disagree. A delegate acts as a direct agent of constituents, voting the way the majority of their voters want, regardless of the member’s personal view. A politico mixes both approaches: they act as delegates on high-salience votes and as trustees on complex or less-visible issues (CED EK 2.3.A.4.i–iii). On the AP exam, you might see this on multiple-choice or FRQ items asking how accountability or partisanship shapes congressional behavior (Unit 2). For a quick refresher, check the Topic 2.3 study guide on Fiveable (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ). For extra practice, use the 1,000+ Gov practice questions at (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Gerrymandering makes elections unfair because map-drawers pack or crack voters to dilute certain groups’ power—giving one party or racial group extra safe seats and reducing competition and accountability (incumbency advantage, polarization). That skews representation away from voters’ actual preferences and can increase gridlock. Courts handle it by allowing equal-protection and racial-apportionment challenges: Baker v. Carr opened the door for judicial review of malapportionment, and Shaw v. Reno limited race-based lines as unconstitutional racial gerrymanders. The Supreme Court looks for justiciable standards (whether lines violate the Equal Protection Clause) and may order maps redrawn or require states to adopt neutral criteria. For AP prep, know these cases and how redistricting affects congressional behavior (LO 2.3.A; EK 2.3.A.2). Review Topic 2.3 on Fiveable (study guide: https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and practice more at https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government.

When different parties control the presidency and at least one chamber of Congress (divided government), you often see increased partisanship, polarization, and a higher risk of gridlock: Congress may block or slow presidential initiatives, refuse nominations, or pass only compromises both sides can live with (EK 2.3.A.1, 2.3.A.3). In lame-duck periods the opposition can be even more obstructionist. Members still respond to electoral incentives (trustee/delegate/politico roles), so bargaining, logrolling, or passing narrower bills becomes common to get things done. For the AP exam, be ready to explain how divided government affects policymaking and causes partisan voting or gridlock (LO 2.3.A). Review Topic 2.3’s study guide for examples and practice (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ). For broader review and 1,000+ practice questions, check the Unit 2 page (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2) and practice bank (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Not exactly—“gridlock” isn’t just “Congress passes nothing,” it’s when Congress can’t reach the consensus needed to enact major legislation because of structural and political barriers. The CED links gridlock to partisan voting and polarization (EK 2.3.A.1) and to divided government (EK 2.3.A.3). Causes include: sharp ideological divides between parties, intense party-line voting, a president from the opposite party, and incentives from redistricting/gerrymandering that reward extreme positions. Gridlock can be partial (some bills pass, big ones stall) or total (major priorities blocked). Remember how member incentives (trustee, delegate, politico) affect votes—electoral pressure can increase gridlock. For AP prep, LO 2.3.A asks you to explain these connections; use the Topic 2.3 study guide for clear examples (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government) to see gridlock scenarios on the exam.

Polarization in Congress comes from several linked causes: ideological sorting (members and voters are more consistently liberal or conservative), partisan voting that rewards party loyalty, and incentives from elections—safe, gerrymandered districts make members cater to primary voters instead of the center (gerrymandering/redistricting). Incumbency advantage and strong interest-group money also push lawmakers to stick to party positions. Divided government intensifies conflict because parties block the other side’s agenda, creating gridlock (EK 2.3.A.1, EK 2.3.A.3). It’s getting worse because districts have become more homogeneous, nationalized media and social networks amplify extreme messaging, and strategic party leaders enforce discipline (party-line voting), so compromise is rarer. For AP purposes, link these causes to trustee/delegate/politico role choices and to consequences like gridlock on policy. Review Topic 2.3 study materials on Fiveable for examples and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and try practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Supreme Court redistricting cases change elections by setting rules about how district lines can be drawn—and that changes who votes together, who gets represented, and how competitive races are. Landmark rulings like Baker v. Carr let courts hear “one person, one vote” claims, forcing states to equalize populations across districts; Shaw v. Reno limited race-based gerrymanders under the Equal Protection Clause. Practically, when courts strike down a map they can order new lines that reduce an incumbent’s safe seat, increase competitiveness, or protect minority representation. That shifts congressional behavior: more competitive districts reduce incumbency advantage and can change partisanship and polarization (EK 2.3.A.2, EK 2.3.A.1). On the AP exam you may need to compare these cases (SCOTUS Comparison FRQ)—so know facts, holdings, and reasoning. For a focused review, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and extra practice problems (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

A lame duck president is an elected president who’s nearing the end of their term (after a successor is elected or in the final months) and therefore has less formal political power and less electoral accountability. Congress—and especially members of the opposition party—often vote against a lame duck’s initiatives and appointments because of incentives described in the CED: divided government and heightened partisanship make members more willing to block the president when they don’t fear electoral consequences (EK 2.3.A.3). Senators and Representatives balance re-election incentives, party loyalty, and constituency demands (trustee/delegate/politico roles), so they’re more likely to oppose last-minute policy pushes or controversial nominees from a lame duck to signal partisan strength, gain leverage for the incoming administration, or avoid association with unpopular moves. For more on congressional incentives and polarization, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and the Unit 2 overview (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2). Practice with related multiple-choice and FRQ items at (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Trustee, delegate, and politico are three ways members of Congress think about who they represent. - Trustee: A member uses their own judgment and expertise to vote for what they believe is best for the country and their constituents, even if some voters disagree. (CED EK 2.3.A.4.i) - Delegate: A member acts as a direct agent of their constituents and votes the way their voters want, even if the member personally disagrees. (CED EK 2.3.A.4.ii) - Politico: A mix of both—lawmakers act like delegates on high-salience local issues (or when constituents are watching) and like trustees on complex or national matters where expertise matters. (CED EK 2.3.A.4.iii) On the AP exam, these models show up in Concept Application FRQs and multiple-choice (they test accountability and how elections/partisanship shape behavior). For a quick review, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ). For extra practice, check Fiveable’s practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Gerrymandering connects to the Equal Protection Clause because extreme district lines can dilute voters’ representation based on race or other classifications, which the Court treats as an equal-protection issue. Use Baker v. Carr (opens courts to reapportionment claims under the Equal Protection Clause) and Shaw v. Reno (racial gerrymandering can violate Equal Protection) in your FRQ: explain facts, holding, and how the Court set a standard that maps drawn with predominant racial intent require strict scrutiny. Tie this to Topic 2.3: show how redistricting/gerrymandering affects partisan behavior, incumbency advantage, and polarization (EK 2.3.A.2). For exam strategy, briefly state the constitutional clause, name the cases, and explain causation—how discriminatory maps reduce equal political participation and how the Court’s rulings allow judicial remedies. Review the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and practice FRQs (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Partisan voting makes it harder for Congress to reach the bipartisan consensus needed to pass broad or controversial bills—that’s gridlock (EK 2.3.A.1). When members vote mainly along party lines, you get fewer compromise bills, more failed bills, and more use of partisan tools: united majorities push through priority items (or use budget reconciliation), while the minority blocks nominees, amendments, or floor time. Under divided government partisan voting intensifies confirmation battles and blocks presidential initiatives (EK 2.3.A.3). Consequences include more incremental policy, reliance on executive actions, packed committee fights, and clearer electoral accountability (voters punish/support party behavior). For the AP exam, connect this to LO 2.3.A (explain how partisanship influences congressional behavior) and use terms like polarization, gridlock, and divided government. For a quick review of these ideas, see the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ). Want extra practice? Try the AP Gov problem set (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

There are a few clear reasons. First, members of Congress see their role differently: some act as trustees (use their own judgment), delegates (follow constituents), or politicos (mix of both). A trustee might vote against local opinion because they believe it’s better long-term. Second, partisanship and polarization push members to vote with their party—especially in a divided government where opposing parties block each other. Third, electoral incentives (incumbency advantage, campaign donors, and interest-group pressure) can pull representatives away from local preferences. Finally, district lines (gerrymandering) and unequal constituencies mean “constituent opinion” isn’t uniform; safe districts reduce electoral pressure to follow every local preference. For AP exam prep, this maps to LO 2.3.A and EK 2.3.A.4 (trustee/delegate/politico) and EK 2.3.A.1–3 (partisanship, polarization, divided government). Review Topic 2.3 on Fiveable for a focused study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and try practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Elections shape behavior in Congress in predictable ways. Incumbency advantage (name recognition, fundraising) makes members responsive to reelection, so they cater to constituency interests (delegate behavior) or mix trustee choices with constituent cues (politico). Redistricting and gerrymandering create safe seats, increasing partisan voting and polarization because members face primary threats more than general-election challengers; Supreme Court cases like Baker v. Carr and Shaw v. Reno relate to these issues. Divided government and polarization make members more likely to block the other side’s agenda (gridlock), especially on presidential nominations during lame-duck periods. For AP exam prep, expect Concept Application items that ask you to connect these election incentives to legislative behavior (LO 2.3.A). Review Topic 2.3 study materials on Fiveable (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and practice questions (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).

Redistricting is how states redraw House district lines after each census. Unequal representation happens when those lines make some votes worth more than others—either accidentally (population shifts) or intentionally through gerrymandering, which packs or cracks voters to dilute their influence. That creates districts where some constituents are over- or under-represented, weakening accountability and skewing policy outcomes. The Supreme Court has allowed equal-protection challenges (Baker v. Carr) and limited racial gerrymandering (Shaw v. Reno), so courts can sometimes fix extreme cases. For AP exam purposes, know the terms gerrymandering, redistricting, unequal representation, and the role of SCOTUS decisions (EK 2.3.A.2). If you want a quick refresher, check the Topic 2.3 study guide (https://library.fiveable.me/ap-us-government/unit-2/congressional-behavior/study-guide/gPDpFICFTq9m3anbhFTJ) and practice questions at (https://library.fiveable.me/practice/ap-us-government).