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
The House of Representatives originates and spends bills. The Senate impeaches officials and approves treaties. The soul duty of the Legislative Branch is to make Laws. “Under the Constitution, Congress has legislative authority, but that power is partly shared with other branches and thus checked by them” (Patterson 51). This describes that the legislative branch does not have power over any other branch of government; there is checks and balances always occurring throughtout the government.”Within Cogress, there is a further check on legislative power: for legislation to passed, a majority in each chamber of Congress is required” (Patterson 51).
The parliament would have been able to muster volunteers, but there was no money to equip them with weapons, and the only way that the Parliament would have been able to make money, would be by introducing taxes. However, the Parliament simply couldn’t just create money from taxes as everyone refused to pay the taxes. The payment of taxes could have been enforced, but there was no army to do the enforcement. There were no consequences to the people of the German Empire if they disobeyed the decisions of the Frankfurt Parliament, so decisions were not followed by the people. This was not surprising, as there was no previous history of a democracy in Germany before the Frankfurt Parliament, therefore there was not much support from the ordinary people for the new concept.
Due to the reports produced by Select Committees not being binding governments can disregard the advice from specialists, and reports that are produced tend not to be yananymous - especially when a general election is near. Not only that, but governments can refuse to provide certain information which could be important evidence, and often select committees are under-resourced meaning they can not provide fully effective scrutiny to the actions of the executive. Public Bill (Standing) Committees are - unlike Select Committees - able to ammend and improve legislative bills. They scrutinise each clause of a bill clause by clause and ammendments can be made. These committees are formed from between 16-50 members in reflection of party affiliation in the House of Commons from back bench MPs - with the whip system in place - and are established for each new bill, and are dissolved after the report has been made.
The delegate model of representation poses a threat to the form of representative democracy used on the UK as the public will have more say on issues which undermines the Burkean model. Likewise it undermines parliamentary sovereignty as parliament is already bypassed by the government, referendums only make it worse. An example of this is when Labour were voted in and in their manifesto contained a referendum on devolution however the result didn’t turn out in their favour in contradiction of the government, further undermining their power. Moreover the public may not be well advised/trusted to make decisions on issues such as capital punishment as the polls show a majority in favour of it, however MPs can see the faults in the use of the death penalty and vote against it. Also the public may not be educated on some of the deeper issues such as the role of central banks in relation to a single currency.
Washington and Monroe believed that the United States should not become involved in European affairs because of the weakness of the US. They didn’t want to get involved in foreign affairs because they did not have the muscle to deal with war if war should come. They figured that it was better to not get involved than to get involved and work themselves into a corner. It is possible to follow the Monroe Doctrine today, if one is referring to political affairs, and not to trade. Just because its possible doesn’t mean we should or are doing it.
This essay is my own work. 4. I have not allowed, and will not allow, anyone to copy my work with the intention of passing it off as his or her own work. Signature_______________________________ Essay Topic: "Countries that use proportional representation as an electoral system are much more likely to have a government whose policies are influenced by smaller and more radical political parties than those with majoritarian electoral systems.” Using a minimum of four countries as case studies, critically assess whether the above statement is true or false" When considering if proportional representation as an electoral system are much more likely to have a government whose policies are influenced by smaller and more radical political parties than those with majoritarian systems it becomes very easy to conclude at face value that proportional electoral systems are more likely to be influenced by smaller and more radical parties however this is not the case in some countries. South Africa and Argentina have proportional electoral systems yet here we have a majority party that takes no heed of the smaller parties as they can get anything through parliament due to their majority standing created by the Proportional electoral system.
Fraud cannot be proven, meaningful audits cannot be carried out, and government actions are not open to review (International Records Management Trust, 2011). In addition, the people of the government cannot make an informed contribution to the governance process or claim their rights. Governments which rely upon the rule of law depend upon legislative records, court records, police and prison records (World Bank, n.d). To demonstrate accountability to its citizens, a government relies upon policy files, budget papers, accounting records, procurement records, personnel records, tax records, customs records, and electoral registers, property and fixed assets registers. Lack of records
This kind of government doesn‚Äôt have enough power to monitor internet or to even start enforcing things like that. Even if they attempted, it still probably wouldn't work out. The people would probably end up being the stronger force in that situation anyways. So trying that would just be a lost