The American government prides itself on the foundational principle of democracy which allows individual voices to be heard. Afterall, the roots of power in our nation stem from the people. The Constitution was established to ensure the balance of powers among the federal government, state legislature, and the common people. Time, however, has worked against the American people in the battle towards democracy. The idea of a governing body drawing its power directly from its constituents has been undermined by the corrupt nature of modern politics where politicians act out of self-interest. While the Constitution and later amendments had every intention of securing basic liberties, certain limitations later undermined the original intentions of the founding fathers to give power back to the people by placing the larger majority of power in the hands of the state.
Federal limitations to certain amendments, known as federal mandates, have taken power away from the masses. To secure democracy and avoid further abuses of power by the judicial courts, an amendment should be made to the Constitution prohibiting the federal government from putting down mandates that directly interfere with the power given to the states by law. Federal politicians use desultory commands as leverage to ensure that the states comply with their wishes. The federal government cannot tell the states what to do but such schemes are just unfair. An amendment abolishing federal mandates would create a stronger democracy by giving the state legislatures full control over the implementation of laws at the discretion of the voters thus placing power back in the heart of the US democracy, the people, where it belongs.
Some may argue that adding an amendment eradicat...
... middle of paper ...
... foreign land but, it is that very government not letting them have a celebratory drink upon their return home.
An amendment to the constitution eradicating federal mandates would make lead the country to be more democratic by once again placing the majority of the say in the hands of the people and therefore, with the state legislatures. The federal government takes away the state 's right to decide for themselves on any matter when it uses underhanded tactics to ensure a desired outcome. It would be undemocratic to allow the federal government to continue doing so because it would further oppress the nation’s citizens. While some may say that giving the states more power is a false sense of democracy since it only entails transferring power from the federal to state government the state is more likely to have the vested interest of the people and hold true to it.
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.
1. Our great country was founded upon a high set of principles, values, and laws. Many of these are easily seen when looking at the United States constitution. The first ten amendments are what is commonly known as the Bill of Rights. This is good and all, but until the fourteenth amendment was passed, the Bill of Rights only was applied to the Federal government. The 14th amendment has a clause that says, "no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States." The Supreme Court ruled against “Total Incorporation”, but instead ruled in favor of “Selective Incorporation”. This meaning that the Supreme Court would define the constitutionality of the treatment of a citizen by the state.
The men who wrote the American constitution agreed with Thomas Hobbes that humans were naturally evil. Therefore, they agreed that in order to prevent a dictatorship or monarchy, the citizens should have influence in the government. The writers wanted a more ideal constitution, but they realized evil human motives would never change. One of the main goals of the constitution was to create a balanced government that would allow the citizens to prevent each other from being corrupt. The writers wanted to give citizens liberty, but they did not want to give people so much liberty that they would have an uncontrollable amount of power. The writers agreed that a citizen’s influence in government would be proportionate to that individual’s property.
In the making of the United States, there were many events that are important. This paper intends to highlight a few of those events including; Magna Carta, Mayflower Compact, Declaration of Independence, Articles of Confederation and the Federalist Papers. Many events in America’s history helped to establish the United States as a free and independent country. The Declaration of Independence in particular explains the rights and freedoms that Americans. Each document is like a stepping stones that leads to the next and building upon the pervious document.
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.
The Founding Fathers had multiple reasons on why they created a federalist government, the main reasons were avoiding a tyranny, more people participating in politics, and “experimenting” the states in order to find new government ideas and programs James Madison stated the Federalist Papers, The Federalist, No. 10, If "factious leaders kindle a flame within their particular states," the national, or federal government, can "conflagration through the other states." Federalism and the 10th amendment prevents one to take control of a state or the federal government, avoiding tyranny. The idea of having more people evolved in government came from the ideals of Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson believed having both local (state) and national (federal) officials would increase participation in government.The last concept with using states as “experiments” comes from this concept: let us say that a state disastrous new policy, it would not be a disaster for everyone. In contrast, if one state 's new programs or policies work well, other states can adopt them to their own
In my opinion, the relationship between the Federal government and the States is unclear whether which institution has the authority to implement legislations. The vagueness of the American constitution particularly in the 10th Amendment of the Constitution that quote ” The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” The ambiguous of the American Constitution may be the main cause of the over power of Federal government.
Upon the opening words of the Constitution, "We the People do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America," one must ask, who are these people? While the American Constitution provided its citizens with individual rights, many members were excluded. Elite framers manipulated the idea of a constitution in order to protect their economic interests and the interests of their fellow white land and slave owning men' by restricting the voices of women, slaves, indentured servants and others. Therefore, the Constitution cannot truly be considered a "democratic document." However, because it is a live document, malleable and controllably changeable according to the interest of congress, it has enabled us to make reforms overtime. Such reforms that have greatly impacted America, making us the free, independent nation that we are today.
The Founders built certain protections for individual rights into this country's founding documents. The United States Constitution was one such document. In particular, such protections guard Americans who hold minority viewpoints from those who side with the majority. For example, the First Amendment protects the right of free speech to ensure that people who hold unpopular views have just as much freedom to express those views as do people who tend to agree with the majority. The United States Constitution, therefore, was intended to protect the individual rights of Americans from a tyrannical government and majority. However, today, the Electoral College does not represent the vibrant democracy into which the United States has grown.
The United States is run by a democracy. There are many pieces to democracy that must be in good health in order for democracy to be effective and work. In this essay I will critique some of the most important parts of democracy in America and go deeper. I will first focus on the strengths of United States democracy and then I will dive into categories of democracy that I believe to not be thriving. I believe that the current conditions of United States democracy are becoming a hindrance to this nation, because the opinions and freedoms the public possess are being stripped away through poor media, education, and economy.
“A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have” (Democracy Quotes). Years ago, Thomas Jefferson was among many who, during drafting and ratification of the constitution, voiced their wariness over the creation of a strong national government. Professor I.M. Skeptic argues that the constitution was born out of a distrust of democracy. I do believe that the constitution was created out of distrust; however I believe this distrust is for a strong central government that was displayed through Britain 's monarchy, not of democracy.
The United States of America is a republic, or representative democracy. Democracy, a word that comes to us from Greek, literally means the people rule (Romance, July 8). This broad definition leaves unanswered a few important details such as who are the people, how shall they rule, and what should they rule on (July 8). Defining the answers to those questions means defining a model for a democratic system. William E. Hudson defines four such models in his book American Democracy in Peril: the Protective, Developmental, Pluralist, and Participatory models of democracy (Hudson, 8-19). Of these models, perhaps Participatory comes closest to an ideal, pure democracy of rule by the people (16-19). In practice, however, establishing a stable ideal democracy is not entirely feasible. In a country the size of the United States, it quickly becomes unwieldy if not impossible to have direct rule by the people. To overcome this, the compromise of the representative system allows the people to choose who will rule on a regular basis. The political culture that defines American politics shows that despite this compromise, America is still very much a democratic society.
Between 1787 and 1791 the Framers of the US Constitution established a system of government upon principles that had been discussed and partially implemented in many countries over the course of several centuries, but never before in such a pure and complete design, which we call a constitutional republic. Since then, the design has often been imitated, but important principles have often been ignored in those imitations, with the result that their governments fall short of being true republics or truly constitutional. The Framers of the Constitution tried very hard to design a system that would not allow any one person or group within the government to gain too much power. Personally, I think they succeeded. In order to guard against what one of the Founding Fathers called an "excess of democracy," the Constitution was built with many ways to limit the government's power. Among these methods were separating the three branches, splitting the legislature so laws are carefully considered, and requiring members of Congress to meet certain criteria to qualify for office. The Founders did leave a few problems along with their system.
The state needs democracy. Such as, the United States is under the rule of democratic and republicans. This was a very good idea in cooperation from the public and their representatives. Without the democratic, the people would never listen and hate their country because they wouldn't feel the United States and the representatives are fair and reasonable. The government of the United States uses the thoughts of the public and makes their decision based on what the people want and what is best for the whole state and its people. The people all abide by the rules of the United States because they were really the ones to suggest these laws in the first place for more fairness. If the government had not listened to their people the whole system would collapse.
I agree with the article authored by Lara M. Brown, which points out that Americans live in individual states and not in one enormous nation. The federal government controls should be precise and limited to protect individual liberty and freedom for all Americans. It is my opinion that the state and local governments should focus on the policies that affect the segments of the local community. Each state has unique conditions that are specific to the regional population and that requires separate laws for that community that would not be practical if applied to the nation as a whole.