Larry Sabato author of “A More Perfect Constitution” implies the United States Constitution could use some revision. Written over two hundred years ago, I do not think this concept is astonishing. I believe the founding father were aware of potential flaws, allowing for amendments or changes. Sabato book proposes some changes and the “calling for a twenty-first-century constitutional convention.” This book review will look at four of Sabato suggestions; reforming the Senate, balancing the budget, a six-year presidential term, and the Electoral College. These four recommendations were of greatest interest and intrigue. Although I do agree with all his ideas, I do feel there is more to improvement in our constitution and commend his efforts is awakening the American people to a need for reform.
The first recommendation is the reform of the Senate. I agree with Sabato statement “The United States is still a federation of semi-independent entities,”(Sabato, 23) as others I am proud to be an Utahn. In 1787 with the writing of the United States Constitution there were thirteen states represent approximately 2.5 million people. Today, the United States population is over 320 million
…show more content…
The Electoral College started in 1789, even then controversy arose. Key factors supporting the Electoral College are representation in states with a small population, prioritizes the organization of campaigns, and provides equality throughout the United States. Candidates would campaign in the major populous regions, overlooking rural area. Virtually placing emphasis in the major cities, neglecting small towns leaving them obsolete. Keep America a two-party system intact in important, how could a candidate win the majority with four or five parties. The South would vote their candidate, California their candidate, East Coast their candidate, causing an enormous problem, avoiding a recount, saving time and
Originating in 1787, the Electoral College was created as the official body within American politics that elects the president and vice president. The decision of who will win is based off the vote totals in each state, and “the founding fathers established it in the constitution as a compromise between election of the president by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens.” (U.S. National Archives and Records Administration, “What is the Electoral College?”). During this time, the job of the Electoral College was to make peace between differing states and federal interest groups, provide popular participation in elections, give a vote to less populated states, and keep the president’s powers separate from Congress.
In the book, “How Democratic Is the American Constitution”, Robert A. Dahl takes us deeper into the complexities of demonstration of American majority rule government were surrounded. An intriguing part of this book is the examination with different popular governments as far and wide as possible. His tables and graphs in the book are helpful for the situation. The book also given an idea of majority rules system in the Netherlands, Sweden and Switzerland.
Since its very conception, the Constitution of the United States has while holding great reverence, been a great topic of debate amongst the political scholars left to analyze it in all its ambiguity. Two such scholars, John Roche and Charles Beard, in their analyses of the Constitution aim to tackle a layer of the uncertainty: how democratic the Framers truly intended the Constitution to be. John Roche speaks in unquestionably high regard of the Framers in advocating that they so evidently compromised their own values in order to create a democratic document that would strengthen the US as a whole. Charles Beard conversely insists that as the economic elite of their time, the Framers were influenced primarily by their private interests to
The United State’s Constitution, the shortest written Constitution in the world, only has twenty-seven amendments, and now it is time to add another. The power of a presidential line-item veto was denied to the Clinton Administration in 1998, but with this last Congress being the least productive Congress ever, it is time to re-think the power distribution in the legislative process. In Congress, on average, only 10% of the bills proposed make their way through, and ever reach the President’s desk. In this modern day and age a bill, on average, is 3,105 words. When Congress was first created the idea was that each proposed legislation would be contained in one bill, now bills are comprised of various provisions. Which is why the power of the line-item veto would be beneficial to expand presidential authority. This line-item veto authority is the ability to cross out certain provisions while still being able to sign in to law the entire bill. This would be beneficial to the United States government, as an amendment that would allow the president to cut out unnecessary spending to in turn lower the national deficit. The United States government needs to pass an amendment to allow Presidents to use the line item veto.
Gordon Wood calls the new Federal Constitution a "radical experiment", and believes the framers of that Constitution to be political radicals, why does he believe so?
While the government of the United States owes its existence to the contents and careful thought behind the Constitution, some attention must be given to the contributions of a series of essays called the Federalist Papers towards this same institution. Espousing the virtues of equal representation, these documents also promote the ideals of competent representation for the populace and were instrumental in addressing opposition to the ratification of the Constitution during the fledgling years of the United States. With further reflection, the Federalists, as these essays are called, may in turn owe their existence, in terms of their intellectual underpinnings, to the writings of the philosopher and teacher, Aristotle.
Through the years many changes have taken place, and technologies have been discovered, yet our Constitution remains. Some say that the Constitution was written for people hundreds of years ago, and in turn is out of step with the times. Yet its principals and guidelines have held thus far. The framers would be pleases that their great planning and thought have been implemented up until this point. However this does not compensate for the fact, that the we the people have empowered the government more so than our fore fathers had intended. Citizens were entrusted with the duty to oversee the government, yet so many times they are disinterested and only seem to have an opinion when the government’s implications affect them. As time has changed so has the American people, we often interpret our freedoms in a self serving manner, disregarding the good of the whole and also the good for the future. Thus there are no true flaws in the Constitution, it appears that the conflict emerges in the individual and their self, and poses question when we must decide when to compromise the morals that our Constitution was founded on, or when to stick to what we know is right and honest.
The United States' Constitution is one the most heralded documents in our nation's history. It is also the most copied Constitution in the world. Many nations have taken the ideals and values from our Constitution and instilled them in their own. It is amazing to think that after 200 years, it still holds relevance to our nation's politics and procedures. However, regardless of how important this document is to our government, the operation remains time consuming and ineffective. The U.S. Constitution established an inefficient system that encourages careful deliberation between government factions representing different and sometimes competing interests.
During and after the turmoil of the American Revolution, the people of America, both the rich and the poor, the powerful and the meek, strove to create a new system of government that would guide them during their unsure beginning. This first structure was called the Articles of Confederation, but it was ineffective, restricted, and weak. It was decided to create a new structure to guide the country. However, before a new constitution could be agreed upon, many aspects of life in America would have to be considered. The foremost apprehensions many Americans had concerning this new federal system included fear of the government limiting or endangering their inalienable rights, concern that the government’s power would be unbalanced, both within its branches and in comparison to the public, and trepidation that the voice of the people would not be heard within the government.
The Electoral College has been the favored method by the United States to elect the president for many years. When the College was first created in 1787 it was seen as an efficient and reliable way to vote the president into office. It has been more than 2 centuries since this method of electing was chosen and many things have changed in U.S. society. The Electoral College is failing to keep up with these advancements in society and a new method must be chosen soon.
The Electoral College can be a bit confusing to understand. It was created by the founding fathers and according to the History, Art & Archives, U.S House of Representatives, “…established in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution, the Electoral College is the formal body which elects the President and Vice President of the United States.
The Electoral College was created by the framers at the Constitutional Convention in 1787. They believe that it wasn’t a good idea for the people to elect the president directly because they did not trust that voters would have enough information to make a good choice. The Electoral College basically chooses who the next president will be since it takes away our freedom to vote away. The Electoral College should be abolished because it’s undemocratic, the small states are overrepresented, and it hurts third parties.
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 gave birth to the Electoral College system. The Electoral College system can be briefly described as a system where voters are able to vote for candidates(electors) on election day. Electors then cast their vote for a candidate in their respective party. Our Founding Fathers described the electoral college system in Article
The Electoral College was a compromise between those at the Constitutional Convention who wanted the US president elected by popular vote and those who wanted congress to select the president. They believed that having it where each state would get a certain number of votes based on population would keep a manipulative and charming person out of office. They thought it would prevent bribery and corruption along with secret dealings. I don’t think that this is the case and it one of the reason I feel that the Electoral College should be abolished.
The United States of America is one of the most powerful nation-states in the world today. The framers of the American Constitution spent a great deal of time and effort into making sure this power wasn’t too centralized in one aspect of the government. They created three branches of government to help maintain a checks and balance system. In this paper I will discuss these three branches, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial, for both the state and federal level.