• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Checks and Balances in the US system

Extracts from this document...


Government Test Essay #19: Replacement for #26 Among the one of the most prominent of the seven governing principles incorporated into the Constitution, the system of checks and balances that exists across the three branches of government (the executive, legislative, and judicial) were created ensure that no one branch becomes too powerful or corrupt. Since each branch can check the other two with powers delegated to it by the Constitution and balance the spread of power, it is theoretically intended to maintain an effective government, however this system also allows for heavy policy gridlock in the modern day with each branch of government "fighting" against the others using, even abusing, the checks and balances system. Often considered the most crucial and democratic branch of government, the bicameral legislative branch consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate are given the duties of making federal law and, thus, hold several checks and balances upon the executive and judicial branches. Upon the executive branch, Congress is delegated the powers to impeach the president, override a presidential veto with a two-thirds majority, approve all cabinet members as well as all treaties and ambassadors. ...read more.


nation from overbearing or corrupt laws passed by a simple majority of Congress and forces the legislature to reconsider the implications of the bill. Along with the veto power, the executive branch is also able to limit congressional reach since the president is given the title of Commander-and-chief of the military and the Vice President presides as President of the Senate. These appointed titles keep the legislature from fully controlling military activity and gives the executive branch the deciding vote in case of an evenly split Senate vote. According the Constitution, the executive branch is essentially the creator, yet a separate power from, of the judicial branch since executive checks over the judicial branch include the ability to appoint federal judges according to the president's criteria for such judges. This crucial power over the judicial branch ensures that the courts will not intentionally become unjust with its powers. Hence, executive checks are arguably provide most of the President's and cabinets duties in the modern day as it continually oversees congressional policy and federal judges. ...read more.


For example, the journey for a bill to become a law must pass through numerous checks of all three branches in order to be implemented as policy and at any turn, a branch may express its disapproval, including presidential veto, interpreted as unconstitutional, or voted down by the other house of Congress, and possibly compromise its success. Very rarely is policy passed quickly through the governmental system unless one faction holds a majority over the three branches. Comparable to insurance for a just government as set up by the Constitution, the system of checks and balances comes at the cost of diminishing the efficiency of government while gaining worth in protecting the nation against a tyrannical ruling power. Altogether, the system of checks and balances holds a dual duty in protecting a branch's powers from impedance by the other two and monitoring the others use of their powers correctly and efficiently. Despite its righteous intentions, this safety measure also allows for policy gridlock in the modern age and often slows the government to a minimal pace during an era of divided government. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United States section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United States essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    The US system of checks and balances is ineffective, discuss.

    3 star(s)

    they can balance the Supreme Court to be more or less Socialist or Conservative to suit their requirements however these actions can be countered by the Legislature in that if they disagree with the decision and can get a 2/3rds majority, then that appointment will not be allowed.

  2. Peer reviewed

    Are supreme court justices politicians in disguise?

    4 star(s)

    that mean the president must pick the correct candidate and not just the candidate that shares his views politically. Harriet Miers is a prime example of this where it is said Bush nominated her because of strong family ties and loyalty.

  1. Federalism essay

    The vastness and diversity of the different states required a federal constitution. Of course, anti-federalists claim that the Founding Fathers created a national government in this constitution. The US Constitution is a particularly ambiguous one, as it can be interpreted in many different ways.

  2. How effective are the checks and balances of the Constitution today?

    President, if this ten days comes to an end while Congress is adjourned, the bill seizes to exist, this is usually used as a tactic by the President so that he does not loose face. Because of the way that bills are passed through Congress, the President can 'arrange' if

  1. How is Britain's constitution changing in the 21st century?

    Primarily, the Welsh assembly is regarded as a talking shop, which has small teeth in which to exert its minimal leverage (Cowley, 2000, 111). The Welsh assembly is a reflection of the centralised Labour government. Hazell at al. asserts this echoes Labour's long standing ambivalence about devolution in Wales (Hazell et al., 2000, 247).

  2. Assess the view that the US Constitution often ensures limited government

    The judge he would be replacing was a moderate, and was often referred to as a ?swing vote?. Bork was a conservative, and so to be appointed would mean the court would be tilted to the right. Reagan withdrew the nomination[14].

  1. '9 politicians sitting on a bench.' Critically evaluate this description of the US Supreme ...

    This shows that the Supreme Court is more accurately described as being made up of 9 politicians, since they are treated as politicians during the nomination process, not like someone being interviewed for a normal job.

  2. Critically analyse the appointment and confirmation process for nominees in the US Supreme Court

    at all."[9] Thus Presidents cannot subordinate the justices, for that would contravene the rule of law (a fundamental requirement for the judiciary to be independent from executive control). In its methods politicisation is rife in the appointments and confirmation process, but in its results this trait is not definite, as

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work