Summary The three branches of government should be independent No branch should have power over selecting who makes up the other two branches However, the citizens cannot practically elect individuals for every office for example, the people may not be able to distinguish what makes a good judge (for judicial branch). the government has to be able to govern itself, meaning since men can be greedy, there must be constitutional walls that prevent one branch from becoming too powerful Usually, legislative branch is the most powerful in a republican government The legislative branch is divided into two to avoid an unfair concentration of power Majorities threaten the interests of the minorities Solution one: have a powerful government whose will is more powerful than the simple majority Solution two:
This can guard against tyranny because when one person gains too much power, then tyranny is almost guaranteed because there would not be an easy way to stop them from doing only what they desire. For example, if the president had all the power over everyone they would be able to do whatever they want and make laws that maybe no one agrees with. Next, if the power is divided and shared between people, then there will be a strong central government. John Madison presented this idea. When there is a strong central government then it means that the government would have a strong middle, which can guard against tyranny because it keeps the government successful and strong.
The founders of this country wanted to be sure that this tyranny was not present in the laws and functions of this new nation. Even though there is no “federalism” named in the US Constitution; federalism was the government system that created this nation. It was the creation of a federal government overseeing politically independent states that has made the government of the United States so unique. Federalism is “the division of powers and responsibilities between the national and state governments” (Fallon Jr, p. 961) The Constitution of the United States includes many provisions with the powers and responsibilities of the federal and the state governments. These provisions underlaying the division of responsibilities between the national and state government.
The Framers of the Constitution chose to use the Electoral College as the method for selecting the president as it assured that the president would be capable and qualified, eliminated corruption, and lessened turmoil in the election process. The Electoral college was a successful method of election as it eliminated corruption from the process. In The Federalist 68 Alexander Hamilton points out, “They have not made the appointment of President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes” (The Federalist 68). The electors have no preconceived notions about the president, and will not allow their votes to be bought out. They are unbiased which allows for a fair and uncorrupt election.
Some may think that because of the Constitution’s unclear definition of powers, the powers can be up for interpretation. However, there is no part up for interpretation in the 10th Amendment. Some rules or laws might be changed or removed, but the power the parts of government have stay the same giving the US’s government the ability to only strengthen, and not
He stated that one government cannot direct all the affairs within the country, but a state government can conduct its affairs more efficiently and productively. The separation of power also prevents the United State from "consolidating into one". Another example that supported the Jeffersonian view of a strict understanding of the constitution is a letter written by him in the 1800th to, Samuel Miller, a Presbyterian minister. In it he stated that, according to the Constitution, the federal government has no authority to regulate
As previously talked about in The Federalist 10, the majority group most often threatens the rights of the minorities. Madison believes that there are only two ways to avoid the wrongs brought about by citizens. The first solution is to create a powerful government. This solution would be chancy because a government of this type may place power behind a certain group that is working against the common good. Ultimately if this occurred, the purpose for creating a powerful government would be overlooked.
America a place where people could feel safe and now that we are the most powerful nation we are able to feel safe. The only way to keep our safeness is to elect very strong Presidents. Some of the strong presidents might not be able to run because of the “natural born law”. This law does not allow immigrants who are now American citizens to run for president. Even though Immigrants have all of the other requirements to become president they are not allowed to run.
They add that its thoughts of loyalty and propriety are believed to make it impossible for people to express their views in the process of policymaking and justify their government policy. There is also no mechanism for government to strike the balance between two parties, leading to biased decisions and unfair policies which could undermine social harmony and stability. In fact, democracy includes decisions made by majority which is also compatible with the Doctrine of Mean in Confucianism (Xu, 2006). By general consent, a consensus can be reached and a relatively acceptable decision can be made after a series of discussion. The decision made through a democratic process by majority is often regarded as an eclectic decision which aims at making compromise between two extreme political parties.
It is reasoned that the substantive contents of a constitution adopted by a country at a particular point of time reflect the will of its framers. However, it is not necessary that the intent of the framers corresponds to the will of the majority of the population at any given time. In the Indian setting, it is often argued that the members of the Constituent Assembly were overwhelmingly drawn from elite backgrounds and hence did not represent popular opinions on several vital issues. Furthermore, the adoption of a constitution entails a country’s precommitment to its contents and the same become binding on future generations. Clearly the understanding and application of constitutional principles cannot remain static and hence a constitutional text also lays down a procedure for its
Ratifying the Constitution Ratifying the Constitution has saved our country from being like England and from not falling apart. Before the constitution we had the articles and those weren’t working out at the time and we weren’t able to fight against rebellions and or against other countries when. We could act faster with the Constitution and we had a checks and balance system and also we had a checks and balances system. We could have acted faster with the constitution instead of wanting around for all states to agree on doing something. When bacon’s rebellion had happen we weren’t able to do anything because all the states weren’t agreeing to do anything about it but if we would of had the constitution we could act fast and take out and
By today 's standards the governments of the colonies were semi-democratic. Each colony had its own legislature of land owning males and a governor that was sent from britain. Each colony was able to create and enforce it’s own laws. However, the british government could change any rules if it did was strongly opposed to any rules that the colonies had. Despite the fact that the Colonies could make their own rules the did not control their financial system.
The Bush and Truman doctrine have caused a heated debate between the people of America for some time now. Although many people believe that the Truman Doctrine was a better decision than the Bush Doctrine, both doctrines have had their ups and downs. Even though doctrines are solely based on the president’s decisions, perhaps the citizens should also get a say in the
Allowing each state to maintain a degree of sovereignty over its own structure of government. Apportioning states to adopt, preside new rules under their own Constitution is a frustrating, tiresome and a waste of taxpayer 's money. Not to discredit the ancestors, attributes and reasons for establishing state Constitutions, but moving to present day there is now a process called the Constitutional Amendments. Nevertheless, in a legal sense, all state constitutions are inferior to the United States Constitution and the final say on this controversial issue; ultimately, it will fall to the federal government.
The ability to set the legislative agenda by the majority party does in fact create a platform to deliver on. No politician would truly experience the potential difficulty of getting their promises to the people done, just as long as it falls in line with the party. This is where Cox and McCubbins’ argument fails. Since the majority party maintains that they avoid party-splitting policies this does not allow for individual party members to enact policies radical to the party. Blind partisan policy-making is not quite persuasive in explaining the function of