Most of congresses oversight comes from congressional committees as unlike in Britain congress cannot hold question time as the executive is not present in congress so it is only in committees that members of congress can directly question the executive. There is much evidence to suggest that congressional oversight is only effective when the controlling party in congress and the presidents party remain distinct due to that idea that when they are not, oversight and the scrutiny that comes parallel to it, would do the executive unnecessary harm, in the words of David Broder 'no Republican committee chairman wanted to turn over rocks in a Republican administration'. This argument is highlighted by the fact that almost all of the senates rejection of presidential appointments existed in a time when the presidents party did not control congress, for example, the democrat senate's rejection of George H W Bush's appointment of John Tower to secretary of defence and the republican senate's rejection of Clinton's nuclear test ban treaty. The most noticeable example however comes from George Bush JNR's time in office where for the majority of his first 6 years in power he held a republican congress. During this time of lapdog congress, congressional oversight was practically non existent with a measly 37
Most of the power came in the expense of the states, which were no longer allowed to pass tariffs or issue money. The government got the right to declare state laws unconstitutional. But the Constitution did not leave the central government too powerful. They put internal and external restraints on the government. The Constitution
I personally say that strength is not given but earned by what you do to get others to approve your intensions. In other words, strengths and weakness depends on a personal capacity to influence the conduct of those in government. Power seems to be based on how influential or persuasive one can be. However, I also think that no matter how much the President tries to get what he wants during his term, the President will never be the most powerful man in the country. He is always sharing his power due to the checks and balances system.
Gridlock occurs when the branches of government scrutinise each other’s action to such a point where neither can pass any form of legislation, and the government therefore becomes less able to perform its duties, therefore leading to a less effective government. For example during Obamas presidency he had struggled with the majority of republican opposition in congress, and therefore had trouble to pass any major legislation such as immigration reform, jobs bill, gun control initiatives and etc. On the other hand, others may argue that the government is not ineffective because of the constitution as the checks and balances system do in fact work, as a way to prevent an overly centralised and powerful form of government, which may not stay accountable to the people as much as it does to large corporations who fund them for re-elections and etc.
· Often the views of outsider pressure groups strongly oppose the views of government, and therefore are unlikely to be consulted. What are the differences between Pressure Groups and Political parties? Pressure Groups .Do not seek power .Have views on only one or two issues .Do not put candidates up for election .Seek to represent the views of only a part of society Political parties .Seek power .Have views on the whole range of government responsibilities .Put as many candidates up for election as possible .Seek to represent the views of the whole of society REMEMBER there is not a clear cut line between PGs & PPs What methods do Pressure groups use? ( How do Pressure Groups put pressure on the Government?) Insider pressure groups ·They have strong links with decision makers and are regularly consulted, by Ministers and Civil Servants ·They are the groups that the government - local or national - considers to be legitimate and are, therefore, given access to decision makers.
c) I don’t believe my organization complies with all of the requirements because I don’t work so this does not apply. d) No one is responsible in my organization to make sure these compliance laws are met because once again I do not work so this does not apply. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA): a) It is important because it helps everyone out in a time of need and also keeps personal information safe from the public unless authorized. b) It impacts your IT environment because it lets everyone know what is supposed to be private or what how they are protected in a time of need. c) I don’t believe my organization complies with all of the requirements because I don’t work so this does not apply.
The Constitution provides even less protection for governmental employees' right to engage in collective bargaining: while it bars public employers from retaliating against employees for forming a union, it does not require those employers to recognize that union, much less bargain with it. Most states provide public employees with limited statutory protections; a few permit public employees to strike in support of their demands in some circumstances. Some states, however, particularly in the South, make it illegal for a governmental entity to enter into a collective bargaining agreement with a
5. The confidentiality agreement did limit the scope of the audit performed on ZZZZ Best. It is the job of the auditor to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence. When Ernst & Whinney were not allowed to follow-up with anyone involved in the restoration process that limited their ability to gather evidence. The company should have been able to follow up with all venders and customers to attest to the validity of the financial statements and they were not able to do this and not able to gather the “appropriate and sufficient evidence” needed.
In agreement, I believe all shall follow for strictly guidelines and restrictions, not to be precise within each Amendment, not one should uphold detail. The unwritten Constitution refers to traditions that have become part of our political system. Although George Washington warned us against Political Parties, they nominate candidates for office. Political Parties are not written into The Constitution, yet the people of the United States are left to vote and decide who the winner of the elections will be, and who will take the position as the next President of the United States. Yet, another reason why we, as a nation, alter the Constitution in our own ways, still allowing each part as an indication of mandate.
They can be controversial if MPs believe they are being used to limit or restrict debate. This shows the government can dodge attempts to have their work scrutinised by curtailing the process of debate so the HoC is not particularly effective at keeping a check on the