One of the more interesting topics discussed in the chapter involved the underlying principles of the U.S. Constitution, and how these principles affect the government today. The Framers decided to utilize a federal system that allows power to be shared between the state and national governments. This system was chosen in favor of the unitary system modeled by Great Britain. There were many people against having a strong national government (known as Anti-Federalists), but the Framers introduced the concept of "separation of powers" that makes use of the "checks and balances" in order to try and ease the concerns of the Anti-Federalists.
Separation of powers is the way our government spreads out the powers and duties among the three branches of government. Without this, whoever would be leading the country would have the possibility of turning into a tyrant with nothing it their way to stop them. According to our textbook, there are three major features of this method:
- Separate the U.S. Government into three unique branches; the executive, the judicial, and the legislative.
- Three separately staffed branches of government to execute these functions.
- Constitutional equality and independence of each branch.
There are numerous powers each branch possess that are unique to only that branch. For example, the executive branch can propose legislation to Congress or create foreign treaties, while the legislative branch can pass all federal laws proposed. Meanwhile, the judicial branch can interpret the federal laws and determine if they are constitutional or not. In addition to these distinct powers, each branch has a number of checks that they can utilize in order to limit the other branches' powers. For example, the legislative branch can pass a controversial bill into law, but the executive branch can overturning the ruling by vetoing the bill. Or, the judicial branch can rule that the bill or law in question is overall unconstitutional in nature. The Framers of our government wanted to have a pure system of separation of powers, but instead, what evolved was a symbiotic relationship between the three branches that has allowed our government to be pretty successful for over 200 years.
The system of checks and balances can be seen pretty much everyday in the political world. Over the course of U.S. history, there have been 44 presidents that have to deal with this system in order to be able to enforce the policies they want to support. For example, the textbook uses the example of George W. Bush. As the commander in chief, Bush had the power to deploy troops to Iraq for war in 2003. However, in order to keep troops overseas for more than 90 days, he needed to get the authorization from Congress. Numerous examples of the checks and balances system can be observed just in the past two to three years under Barack Obama's administration. In order to get the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka "Obamacare") passed, he needed to get the approval from Congress in order to make the bill become a law. The same can be said about the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which was the major stimulus package Obama wanted to get passed in order to try and help the economy recover from the recession. As you can see, everything needs to be approved and revised by all branches in order to pass the best "product" into law.
Things can get very difficult for the President at times dealing with this system, especially when the House of Representatives and the Senate are not in the majority towards the political party of the President. However, I believe that this overall system is a solid system that has proven to be successful over the years even with the times of disagreement between the executive and legislative branches. Through the separation of powers in our government, we can ensure that no single person possesses too much power. The balance that exists within our government is what I think makes it one of the top governmental forms in the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment