What Are The Three Branches Of Government
Branches of the Governmnent
Eduardo "Eddie" Aguayo
HIS 301
March 13, 2013
Branches of the Governmnent
Delegates at the Constitutional Convention also wanted to divide power within the federal government. They did not want these powers to be controlled by just one man or one group. The delegates were afraid that if a small group received too much power, the United States would wind up under the rule of another dictator or tyrant.
To avoid the risk of dictatorship or tyranny, the group divided the new government into three parts, or branches: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch.
Executive Branch:Headed by the president. The president carries out federal laws and recommends new ones, directs national …show more content…
defense and foreign policy, and performs ceremonial duties. Powers include directing government, commanding the Armed Forces, dealing with international powers, acting as chief law enforcement officer, and vetoing laws.
Legislative Branch: Headed by Congress, which includes the House of Representatives and the Senate. The main task of these two bodies is to make the laws. Its powers include passing laws, originating spending bills (House), impeaching officials (Senate), and approving treaties (Senate).
Judicial Branch: Headed by the Supreme Court.
Its powers include interpreting the Constitution, reviewing laws, and deciding cases involving states' rights.
By creating three branches of government, the delegates built a "check and balance" system into the Constitution. This system was built so that no one branch of our government could become too powerful.
Each branch is restrained by the other two in several ways. For example, the president may veto a law passed by Congress. Congress can override that veto with a vote of two-thirds of both houses. Another example is that the Supreme Court may check Congress by declaring a law unconstitutional. The power is balanced by the fact that members of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president. Those appointments have to be approved by Congress.
Very few things last long without change. Nothing is perfect. The writers of the Constitution realized this when they presented the first twelve amendments to the Constitution.
Amendments to the Constitution can be either additions or changes to the original text. It is not easy to change the Constitution. Since 1787, over 9,000 amendments have been proposed, but only 27 have been …show more content…
approved.
A recent example of a change to the Constitution has to do with a woman’s right to vote. Women were not allowed to vote when the Constitution was adopted. Times had changed by 1920, and women gained the right to vote with the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. The Constitution is flexible enough to adapt.
One of the obstacles would be to make the reform into a law it’s an important to make sure that the reform is over view because of the bill views this makes it even harder to start the right steps to look over the different way we could put it to test.
The U.S health care senator is remarkably knowledge about what will work best in the diverse political and health system incomplete. Whether we believe that the ideal reform might be national or federalist moving ahead will being a different approach to how we handle it. This makes the states think about how itself will find ways to expand coverage and include the states laws. Yet this creativity is happening while the states face financial statutory and regulatory obstacles in their efforts. Looking at the reform of this bill make it hard to overlook the bill from getting far there are steps that need to be over look and it just makes it hard to pass the bill. The division of power makes is even difficult to pass important legislation because of the different overlooks on the
bill.
( http://www.studymode.com/essays/History-1082906.html )
When the constitution was being written there was the conflict between the federalists (in pursuit of strong federal government powers) and the anti-federalist ( how pursuit a weak federal government with strong individual states powers). ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080618121032AAWAOnq )
The reason that our forefathers divided the government into three separate branches was because they planned to implement a democratic government that would work to serve the citizens and not regulate them. In other words, the forefathers wanted to devise an organization where no single individual or assembly would have too much authority. The three branches; judicial, legislative, and executive would have aptitude to administer and control what the other two branches were doing. The system that was put into place to perform these tasks was called "checks and balances". Each branch was intertwined with the other two.(2006, 10. Branches of Government. StudyMode.com. Retrieved 10, 2006, from http://www.studymode.com/essays/Branches-Government-96104.html )
The federalists said that after the articles of confederation had failed a strong national or federal government was needed to keep the young country together. Under the articles, Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. There was a requirement for unanimous approval before any modifications could be made to the Articles. Because the majority of lawmaking rested with the states, the central government was also very weak. Major laws also required approvals from nine of the thirteen states as well.
Congress was denied the power of taxation. It could only request money from the states. The states did not generally comply with the requests in full, leaving the confederation chronically short of funds. Congress was also denied the power to regulate commerce trade, and as result, the states fought over trade as well. The states and the national congress had both incurred debts during the war, and how to pay the debts became a major issue. ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080221115325AACGdgS )
The anti-federalists said that a strong federal government would be tyrannical like the King of England they had just fought to free themselves from. The anti-federalists wanted to preserve the individual states rights because they were closer to the people and understood thier own people better than the federal government could. (( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080618121032AAWAOnq )
Reference
http://www.congressforkids.net/. (2008). Congress for Kids. Retrieved from (http://www.congressforkids.net/Constitution_threebranches.htm)
Eduardo "Eddie" Aguayo
HIS 301
March 13, 2013
Branches of the Governmnent
Delegates at the Constitutional Convention also wanted to divide power within the federal government. They did not want these powers to be controlled by just one man or one group. The delegates were afraid that if a small group received too much power, the United States would wind up under the rule of another dictator or tyrant.
To avoid the risk of dictatorship or tyranny, the group divided the new government into three parts, or branches: the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch.
Executive Branch:Headed by the president. The president carries out federal laws and recommends new ones, directs national …show more content…
defense and foreign policy, and performs ceremonial duties. Powers include directing government, commanding the Armed Forces, dealing with international powers, acting as chief law enforcement officer, and vetoing laws.
Legislative Branch: Headed by Congress, which includes the House of Representatives and the Senate. The main task of these two bodies is to make the laws. Its powers include passing laws, originating spending bills (House), impeaching officials (Senate), and approving treaties (Senate).
Judicial Branch: Headed by the Supreme Court.
Its powers include interpreting the Constitution, reviewing laws, and deciding cases involving states' rights.
By creating three branches of government, the delegates built a "check and balance" system into the Constitution. This system was built so that no one branch of our government could become too powerful.
Each branch is restrained by the other two in several ways. For example, the president may veto a law passed by Congress. Congress can override that veto with a vote of two-thirds of both houses. Another example is that the Supreme Court may check Congress by declaring a law unconstitutional. The power is balanced by the fact that members of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president. Those appointments have to be approved by Congress.
Very few things last long without change. Nothing is perfect. The writers of the Constitution realized this when they presented the first twelve amendments to the Constitution.
Amendments to the Constitution can be either additions or changes to the original text. It is not easy to change the Constitution. Since 1787, over 9,000 amendments have been proposed, but only 27 have been …show more content…
approved.
A recent example of a change to the Constitution has to do with a woman’s right to vote. Women were not allowed to vote when the Constitution was adopted. Times had changed by 1920, and women gained the right to vote with the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment. The Constitution is flexible enough to adapt.
One of the obstacles would be to make the reform into a law it’s an important to make sure that the reform is over view because of the bill views this makes it even harder to start the right steps to look over the different way we could put it to test.
The U.S health care senator is remarkably knowledge about what will work best in the diverse political and health system incomplete. Whether we believe that the ideal reform might be national or federalist moving ahead will being a different approach to how we handle it. This makes the states think about how itself will find ways to expand coverage and include the states laws. Yet this creativity is happening while the states face financial statutory and regulatory obstacles in their efforts. Looking at the reform of this bill make it hard to overlook the bill from getting far there are steps that need to be over look and it just makes it hard to pass the bill. The division of power makes is even difficult to pass important legislation because of the different overlooks on the
bill.
( http://www.studymode.com/essays/History-1082906.html )
When the constitution was being written there was the conflict between the federalists (in pursuit of strong federal government powers) and the anti-federalist ( how pursuit a weak federal government with strong individual states powers). ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080618121032AAWAOnq )
The reason that our forefathers divided the government into three separate branches was because they planned to implement a democratic government that would work to serve the citizens and not regulate them. In other words, the forefathers wanted to devise an organization where no single individual or assembly would have too much authority. The three branches; judicial, legislative, and executive would have aptitude to administer and control what the other two branches were doing. The system that was put into place to perform these tasks was called "checks and balances". Each branch was intertwined with the other two.(2006, 10. Branches of Government. StudyMode.com. Retrieved 10, 2006, from http://www.studymode.com/essays/Branches-Government-96104.html )
The federalists said that after the articles of confederation had failed a strong national or federal government was needed to keep the young country together. Under the articles, Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. There was a requirement for unanimous approval before any modifications could be made to the Articles. Because the majority of lawmaking rested with the states, the central government was also very weak. Major laws also required approvals from nine of the thirteen states as well.
Congress was denied the power of taxation. It could only request money from the states. The states did not generally comply with the requests in full, leaving the confederation chronically short of funds. Congress was also denied the power to regulate commerce trade, and as result, the states fought over trade as well. The states and the national congress had both incurred debts during the war, and how to pay the debts became a major issue. ( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080221115325AACGdgS )
The anti-federalists said that a strong federal government would be tyrannical like the King of England they had just fought to free themselves from. The anti-federalists wanted to preserve the individual states rights because they were closer to the people and understood thier own people better than the federal government could. (( http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080618121032AAWAOnq )
Reference
http://www.congressforkids.net/. (2008). Congress for Kids. Retrieved from (http://www.congressforkids.net/Constitution_threebranches.htm)