Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Separation of powers in the usa
Separation of powers in the usa
Separation of powers in the usa
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Separation of powers in the usa
When a case advances to the Supreme Court, the court asks a strange question: Is the law constitutional? The court is not overly concerned with the morality of the law. Admittedly, ethics are always a consideration, but when the time comes to make a ruling, the court bases its decision chiefly on Constitutionality. Amazingly, two hundred years after its conception, citizens of the United States remain fixated on the Constitution as the foundation of their society. And this happens on both sides of the aisle, on one side conservatives claim the second amendment provides them with a constitutional right to own an AK-47, while on the other, liberals argue that net neutrality protects their right to the freedom of speech. However, if the framers …show more content…
Originally, after winning the Revolutionary War, the United States instituted the Articles of Confederation, which delegated most of the power to the states, only giving the federal government minor powers. However, without the ability to tax, among other weaknesses, the government was unable to do its job and the country quickly fell into a state of political and economic instability known as the ‘critical period’. Having experienced these problems, “[t]he framers understood that a strong and stable government was necessary…” That being said, many of the ‘founding generation’ were weary of giving the federal government too much power for two reasons: First, they found it “incompatible with the Declaration of Independence” . Additionally, Americans had just fought to break free of an oppressively strong national government – Why would they want to implement something similar? The original Constitution diffuses this worry by dividing power between the federal and state governments. This original division is where we get the original federal …show more content…
While common belief dictates that direct democracy represents the most fair form of government, there exists a glaring weakness: majority rules. Now this would not be a problem if the majority always seeks the greatest good, but as Madison reminds us in Federalist 51, men are not angels. “If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary.” According to Madison, human nature leads all social groups, even majorities, to act as factions because of their fidelity to their own self interests. For instance, what is to stop the majority faction from committing harm onto the minority for their own benefit? In this same way, a fifty-one percent majority could vote to enslave a forty-nine percent minority. However, Madison proposes solution to the problem of the ‘”majority tyranny”’ , which refrains from abolishing citizens’ liberty: “A republic… promises the cure for which we are speaking.” By breaking up legal power and placing it in the hands of many small factions, all attempting to better their own positions, the founders ensure representation for a far greater number of people. Because the United States (used in its original plural form) are so large and diverse when put together and represent so many people, a republic prevents any one faction from becoming oppressively
Constitutional monarchies like the UK have combined the best aspects of democracy, monarchy, and aristocracy in hopes of removing tyranny, anarchy, and oligarchy. In the United States we give power to an elected body of many individuals, however, we retain power as citizens and individuals of this country through our right to vote for these elected officials. The power of a citizen outside of politics is fixed based on their ability/inability to vote. However, certain politicians have done specifically what Madison hoped this Constitution would prevent. They have created “democratic” factions through a populist perspective that has put certain people in a position of power by appealing to the common people. They have divided our society leading in comparison to the way in which other democracies as Madison explains have
In his speech, The Making of the U.S. Constitution, Gordon Wood discusses the history of how the U.S. Constitution came to be. He explains what factors contributed to its making and what the general consensus was about it during the time. He explains that the reason the constitution was created was because the government needed more power. Why did the government need more power? In short, to unify the 13 states and make life, in general, easier for its citizens, officers, artisans, and even to help with commercial interests (Wood, 2012).
The year of 1776 was a time of revolution, independence, and patriotism. American colonists had severed their umbilical cord to the Mother Country and declared themselves “Free and Independent States”.1 The chains of monarchy had been thrown off and a new government was formed. Shying away from a totalitarian government, the Second Continental Congress drafted a document called the Articles of Confederation which established a loose union of the states. It was an attempt at self-government that ended in failure. The Articles of Confederation had many defects which included a weak central government that lacked the power to tax, regulate trade, required equal representation and a unanimous vote to amend the Articles, and had only a legislative branch. As a result the United States lacked respect from foreign countries. These flaws were so severe that a new government had to be drafted and as a result the Constitution was born. This document remedied the weak points of the federal government and created one that was strong and fair, yet still governed by the people.
Republicanism brought change to America, but called into question was the way this change was brought to America. James Madison through the Virginia Plan proposed a republic nation. The formation of the Republican opposition in the 1790’s continued the legacy of the American Revolution. Even though a republican government meant everyone in America would be under the same government it took away the “individual” freedom they fought for in the revolution but this government is representative of the people. Madison had a vision of an “extended republic” that would include everyone, however he would need a lot of support in order to get this republic. “Over the course of 1790’s, Jefferson and Madison would help turn their objections to Hamilton's
The first reason is republic has more efficiency to prevent the tyrant of majority than pure democracy. Madison thinks the pure democracy is not a cure for faction. In his paper, he wrote “A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole… And there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual (Page 67).” When using pure democracy as the form of government, the decision is made by majority people. Yet, when a faction is majority itself, it can constantly acquire the vote and deprive the rights of minorities. It also can use democracy’s voting system to promote their interest instead of the common good. Besides, religious beliefs and moralities cannot be relied on to regulate human from doing harm. Therefore, Madison believes a republic government is better than pure democracy for the controlling mischiefs of majority faction. Another reason is since people have different faculties from the very beginning, the government should be held by people who possess more wisdom and patriotism. They will have better skill to advance the public good and run the government. However, when Madison examines the nature of human, he suggests the human nature is ambitious, which people might become corrupted. The representative might be controlled by the few or form a faction by themselves as well. For this reason, he advocates the number of representatives should be large enough to prevent
A constitution is the system of fundamental principles according to which a nation is governed. Our founding fathers created the US Constitution to set specific standards for our country. We must ask ourselves why our founding fathers created the Constitution in the first place. America revolted against the British due to their monarchy form of government. After the American Revolution, each of the original 13 colonies operated under its own rules of government. Most states were against any form of centralized rule from the government. They feared that what happened in England would happen again. They decided to write the Articles of Confederation, which was ratified in 1781. It was not effective and it led to many problems. The central government could not regulate commerce between states, deal with foreign governments or settle disputes. The country was falling apart at its seams. The central government could not provide assistance to the state because there wasn’t a central army. When they realized that the Articles of Confederation was not up to par, they held a convention, known as the Constitutional Convention of 1787. As a result of t...
The dangers of faction can somewhat outweigh the good. The framers of the American Constitution feared the power that could possibly come about by organized interest groups. Madison wrote "The public good is disregarded in the conflict of rival factions citizens who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." However, the framers believed that interest groups thrived because of freedom, the same privilege that Americans utilize to express their views. Madison saw direct democracy as a danger to individual rights and advocated a representative democracy to protect individual liberty, and the general public from the effects of such inequality in society. Madison says "A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischief's of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
Madison is adamant about the dangers of a pure democracy, and the negatives a democracy poses when faced by the dangers of factions. A pure democracy could not function effectively at controlling the effects of factions, as a common sentiment will be felt by the majority of the whole in more cases that not. This would lead to an oppressed and largely ignored minority. Pro...
Before the adoption of the United States Constitution, the U.S. was governed by the Articles of Confederation. These articles stated that almost every function of the government was chartered by the legislature known as Congress. There was no distinction between legislative or executive powers. This was a major shortcoming in how the United States was governed as many leaders became dissatisfied with how the government was structured by the Articles of Confederation. They felt that the government was too weak to effectively deal with the upcoming challenges. In 1787, an agreement was made by delegates at the Constitutional Convention that a national judiciary needed to be established. This agreement became known as The Constitution of the United States, which explicitly granted certain powers to each of the three branches of the federal government, while reserving other powers exclusively to the states or to the people as individuals. It is, in its own words, “the supreme Law of the Land” (Shmoop Editorial Team).
The American Revolution stirred political unity and motivated the need for change in the nation. Because many Americans fought for a more balanced government in the Revolutionary War, they initially created a weak national government that hampered the country's growth and expansion. In the Letter from Abigail Adams to Thomas Jefferson, Mrs. Adams complained about the inadequacy of power that the American government had to regulate domestic affairs. The Articles of Confederation was created to be weak because many had feared a similar governing experience that they had just eliminated with Britain. The alliance of states united the 13 local governments but lacked power to deal with important issues or to regulate diplomatic affairs. Congress did not have the power to tax, regulate trade, or draft people for war. This put the American citizens at stake because States had the power to refuse requests for taxes and troops (Document G). The weakened national government could not do anything about uprisings or small-scale protests because it did not have the power to put together an army. The deficiencies of the confederation government inspired the drafting of the American Constitution. The document itself embodied the principle of a national government prepared to deal with the nation's problems. In James Madison's Federalist Paper, he persuades the American public to adopt the Constitution so that the government can protect humans from their nature and keep them out of conflicts.
What are the pros and cons of federalism in the US? Federalism is a political system in which regional governments share power with a central or national government, but each level of government has legal powers that are independent of the other. Federalism is what keeps our government so called balanced. I will start with the pros first. We can say that federalism mobilizes political activity, various levels of government gives citizens different levels to be heard, it gives them higher levels of command to go through to get where they want to be. Federalism affects the interest groups more than anyone because they cannot just take over national governments but have to go through the state and local government first. This is where we get the dispersal of power, “a key objective for the founders was to disperse power and a two-level system that divided power not just among branches of government, but also between levels of government helped accomplish this goal” (Bond, pg. 80). For example, the legislative branch makes laws, the executive branch carries out the laws, and the judicial...
Madison compared the tyranny of the majority to the oppression of a tyrant monarch, something all too familiar to the American people. However, in essence it was not at all an exaggeration. The same way the British monarchy denied Americans of rights such as property and liberty, the all powerful majority could also take these away. One example could be that in a town of 100 people, there are 49 supporters of gay marriage but 51 opposers. In a direct democracy, gay marriage would be illegal in that town. Now, look at this on a larger scale, if the entire United States was based off a system of direct democracy, and the same proportion of support to a opposition existed. In this situation, the rights of the minority group are being denied. Legally, in a pure democracy, the majority is allowed to do this, as the law is majority rule. In order to prevent this, republicanism allows the election of representatives who make decisions for the people. They represent the beliefs of the people of their state or district. The use of the bicameral system in the United States is immensely important to republicanism, as in the Senate, all states get equal
Even before the Constitution was ratified, strong argument were made by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison in the Federalist Papers urging the inclusion of a federal form of government to replace the failed confederation. In Federalist Paper No. 9 Hamilton states, “This form of government is a convention by which several smaller states agree to become members of a large one, which they intend to form. It is s kind of assemblage of societies that constitutes a new one, capable of increasing, by means of new associations, until they arrive to such a degree of power as to be able to provide for the security of a united body” (Usinfo.state.gov). The people of the United States needed a central government that was capable of holding certain powers over the states.
Another matter concerning federalism is social welfare programs. The consequent division of government power between national-state level have left it unclear who should be held responsible for issues regarding social welfare. It accounts for the complexity of administering the social welfare programs within a shared authority system, especially when it comes to both joint and individually funded programs. Also, federalism leads to impartiality in many program coverage concerning seniors’ benefits, one’s eligibility requirements and different rules in each state.
Federalism is a legal concept that is centered around the concept that law is best handled as a two layered responsibility. Federalism is also built on a belief that sharing power with the local government is key to a successful governance. According to the text book, “the United States was the first nation to adopt federalism as its governing framework” (pg83). The following are a few examples of some advantages, as well as disadvantages of Federalism.