Cabinet Positions of the US Government
Cabinet Positions -The United States Department of Agriculture The Department of Agriculture, often called the USDA, is the government entity that is responsible for creating and executing all policies and regulations having anything to do with farming, food, and agriculture in general. Using its budget of 94 billion dollars, it aims to help farmers and ranchers, promote trade of agricultural products, assure safety of food and protect natural resources. One of the most important day to day jobs of the department of agriculture is the inspecting of meat, vegetables, fruit etc. which is marked for consumer use. -The United States Department of Commerce The Department of Commerce is a small but important department of the cabinet. The main concern of the Department of Commerce is to promote economic growth and prevent economic stagnation. To do this, it ensures that new jobs are being created, living standards are improving and that there is sufficient infrastructure in the American capitalistic system to promote growth of the American economy. This department was originally part of a larger department, The United States Department of Commerce and Labor which obviously included the current Department of Labor. The Department of Commerce also contains the recognizable Bureau of the Census and NOAA, or National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for some reason. -United
Where Power Lies in Congress
WHERE POWER LIES IN CONGRESS SAMUEL COVE Each chamber of Congress has a different focus of power. The reasons for this are partly because of the Constitution. With the Senate, it gives the power to ratify or reject treaties (such as the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty) and confirm executive (often ambassadorial) appointments. Further, Senators are appointed per state rather than per district, this contributes to giving them a more national (and international) outlook, rather than for the 'folks back home'. These factors increase the Senate's influence over foreign affairs. Although it could be argued that this 'power' in the Senate is only in theory. With Presidential Executive Agreements used in place of treaties more often, and EXOP officials having much power, thus reducing the importance of executive confirmations. These factors undermine the Senate's power. The Senate also has the power to confirm (e.g. Chief Justice Roberts, Justice Samuel Alito) or reject (e.g. Harriet Myers, forced to withdraw after conservative pressure) Supreme Court appointments; a potentially long-reaching power that far outstrips the individual term of any congressmen (6 and 2 years for the Senate and House respectively) - although it should be noted that the high rate of incumbency makes this effect slightly lessened. Individual Senators are often seen as having a higher prestige than
The Religious Right
The Religious Right Huw Owen and Sam Cove Overview "I can sum it all up in three words: Evolution is a lie." - christianforums.com The Religious Right began, significantly, in the 1960s from a coalition of religious conservatives in the U.S which wanted to exert political power as a group who had largely stayed out of politics until then. It is a group of interest groups, who collectively fall under the banner of new social movements (NSMs), but they each could be considered a single issue group. One of the most prominent groups of The Religious Right is the Christian Coalition, made prominent by Ralph E. Reed Jr. The Christian Coalition and Ralph Reed The Christian Coalition is a group mainly fundamentalist and evangelical Americans, which reports itself as having two and a half million members. Although started in 1988 by Pat Robertson and Timothy LaHaye, the group came into prominence when Ralph Reed took control of day-to-day operations from 1989, distributing voters' guides to conservative Christian churches, methods later used to support Bob Dole. At the height of his Coalition career, Reed was named "the Right Hand of God" in 1995 by TIME magazine. But by 1996 the influence was in decline when Reed supported unsuccessful Republican nominee Bob Dole. Reed resigned in 1997, the year that the Coalition lost its tax-exempt status and divided into two parts: the
Identify and explain how the constitution attempts to create a separation of powers in the United States' political system.
IDENTIFY AND EXPLAIN HOW THE CONSTITUTION ATTEMPTS TO CREATE A SEPARATION OF POWERS IN THE UNITED STATES' POLITICAL SYSTEM In the 18th Century, the French philosopher Montesquieu, who had been one of the inspirations behind the French Revolution, argued that limitation would be necessary within government within government in order to avoid tyranny. He identified the Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary as the four braches of government which needed to be separated. To do this, he suggested the 'Separation of Powers', a mechanism built internally into government where each branch would have powers enabling it to limit those of another so no one branch becomes too powerful. The Founding Fathers of the American Constitution agreed with Montesquieu's ideas and introduced a system of checks and balances into the Constitution to support the Separation of Powers. There are several ways in which Separation of Powers is achieved by the Constitution. If we take the Executive and Legislature first, the Executive in the US government is the Presidential Office and the Legislature is the two Houses of Congress - the House of Representatives being the Lower House and the Senate being the Upper House. The Senate has the power to confirm all major presidential appointments. The combined Houses of Congress controls the Executive budget and appropriation (expenditure),
"Presidents Have Only The Power To Persuade" Discuss
"Presidents have only the power to persuade" Discuss Firstly, I will say that in this answer, I will be looking at the overall 'office' of the Presidency, as opposed to looking at the personality of individual Presidents. The traditional view of the Presidency is that of the 'imperilled Presidency', as described by former President Gerald Ford, in contrast to Arthur Schlesinger's idea of an 'imperial Presidency'. The 'imperilled Presidency' idea describes a Presidency in which the President does not have enough power to be truly effective, and we see Presidents attempting to go beyond their constitutional powers. Richard Neustadt challenged this idea by saying that "Presidential power is the power to persuade, and the power to persuade is the power to bargain." In more simple terms, this means that the ultimate power of the President is to persuade people that his opinions are in their best interests. However, I would like to prove that it really depends on the situation to how the President chooses to use his power, and under certain circumstances the Presidents power of persuasion will be most successful. Firstly, I will look at the Constitutional powers given to the President. The Founding Fathers created the constitution in an attempt to prevent a tyrannical rule, like the British. The Constitution therefore would ensure that no one particular Government Branch could
In today's society, a debate over the legalization of marijuana has been on going.
A pro marijuana web page stated "Fewer than 2 percent of drug-related emergency room visits involved the use of marijuana alone in the year 1994". Are the correct in saying it is safe, not according to anti marijuana groups. In today's society, a debate over the legalization of marijuana has been on going. Two divisions have been fighting on this issue on the halls of justice for years: one those who are pro marijuana and those who are anti marijuana. Pro marijuana legalization groups such as the Physician's Association for AIDS Care, National Lymphoma Foundation argue marijuana legalization in order to treat terminally ill patients. Among them are AIDS victims who find that marijuana stimulates their appetites so they can fight off dangerous emaciation; glaucoma sufferers who have used marijuana said it has prevented them from going blind. Cancer patients, for whom it alleviates the severe nausea that is often accompanies chemotherapy and sometimes makes lifesaving treatment impossible. Lobbying groups show substantial evidence, that marijuana is an effective prescribed drug. Also, many advocates complain that very dangerous drugs like morphine and cocaine are legal. That brings up the question: why not legalize marijuana as medical drug, which is proven to be less dangerous than cocaine and morphine? Lobbying groups in a San Diego, California and the council
US constitution and reform
'The Constitution is in fundamental need of reform'. Discuss. The fact that the Constitution has survived for over two hundred years without being fundamentally altered shows that its essential strength. It has adjusted to the diversity and complexity of contemporary American society. It is striking that few commentators believe that the Constitution requires radical change and even those most critical of the current political system still claim that the principles it embodies remain valid. The relevance of the Constitution's principles associated with democracy remain resilient. The survival and strength of the Constitution may also be attributed to the amendments it has adopted and the Supreme Courts role in interpreting it. In order to assess the constitution we must look at the goal set by the 'Founding Fathers'. The founders set out to create a government that would be effective but limited. It would be efficient in undertaking its responsibilities, but would at the same time respect and protect both the citizen and the states. Subsequent debates around the Constitution have examined the extent to which these goals have been achieved. Whereas some assert that the federal government is relatively powerless, others claim that it has become overbearing. Some argue that the government lacks effective power; critics argue that the checks and balances in practice have created
Why has reforming campaign finance been difficult?
Why has reforming campaign finance been difficult? I think that reforming campaign finance has been challenging due to the personal interests of politicians. This is because, firstly, that campaign finance regulates the activities and advertising power of a candidate or incumbent, and I doubt that any politician would pass reform hindering their own political race or allow their compatriots and party members to do so. In addition, I would suggest that reform has been difficult due to the domination of Congress at the hands of the Democrat and Republican parties, the two major players in America's two-party system. Firstly, I think that campaign finance reform has been tentative and difficult because of an unwillingness to pass it from the Republicans and Democrats. This is because the majority of reform proposals would limit the monetary lead that they currently have over other parties in Presidential Elections. This is why, I believe, that proposals for reform from pressure groups such as Clear Cause have been unsuccessful and their needs and requests have not been met. For example, in the most recent 2008 Presidential Election the Democrat nominee, Barack Obama, spent nearly $650 million on his campaign, opting out of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA) public funding system. Obama's electoral rival, Republican nominee John McCain managed to raise $360
Doctrine of the separation of powers.
SEPARATION OF POWERS Although of great antiquity the modern basis for the doctrine of the separation of powers can be traced back to the writings of commentators such as John Locke, who in one of his books written in 1690 observed that "the three organs of government must not get in one hand." The doctrine was further examined by the French jurist Montesquieu who based his exposition on the British constitution of the early 18th Century. In simple terms the doctrine recognises three functions of government, namely legislative, executive and judicial. In its purest form the doctrine holds that each of these three functions should be vested in separate organs of government, with no overlap, as to concentrate more than one function in any one organ presents a threat to individual liberty. If the doctrine is followed the same persons should not form part of more than one organ. For example ministers should not sit in parliament. One organ should not exercise the functions of another. In the United States Constitution of 1787 separation of powers was clearly expressed. Each of the three primary constitutional functions was vested in a distinct organ. Legislative power was vested in Congress consisting of a House of Representatives and a Senate, executive power was vested in the President and judicial power was vested in the Supreme Court and other federal courts as established by
Overpaid and Underworked: Plight of the Canadian Senate
Overpaid and Under Worked The Plight of the Canadian Senate Chen Shu 00115919 November 6th 2007 Pol1119 - Prosperi When an architect designs a structure, one of the important questions that are posed before all others is "How useful is the structure?" An effective design is one that efficient and which every design and every structure carries with it, as sense of purpose. The founding fathers of Canada's political structure mimicked the parliamentary system with that specific purpose in mind, but what was written on the constitution and what is practiced today are complete polar opposites. The current day Canadian Senate operates with a minimal amount of practical power and serves as symbolic rubber stamp to all the policies that are initialized by the Cabinet and the House of Commons. In order to explore the need for Senate reform in Canada, it is relevant to compare it's utility with the neighboring Senate of United states on three interrelated dimensions: the powers they wield, the principles or statutes by which they are selected and the means they represent their constituencies. The comparison drawn between the two Senates should serve to note the need by Canadians who call for the Triple-E Senate reform. Effective When the Canadian founding fathers structured the design of Canada's national institution, they could not foresee the current lack of power
