A bill from the start to the White House The beginning of this process legislation is introduced; any member can introduce a piece of legislation. The legislation is then given to the clerk of the House or placed in a hopper. Senate Members have to get the attention of the presiding officer to announce the introduction of the bill, then the following steps are implemented: The bill is assigned a number. The bill is labeled with the sponsor's name. The bill is sent to the Government Printing Office (GPO) and copies are made.
Once a bill makes it onto the calendar, it will go up for debate. Debating a bill is the process in which members of Congress can ‘Pick apart’ the bill’s wording, its consequences, and its requirements. Members might amend our initial bill to state that the country will lower emission in ten years instead of five. Congressmen and women then vote on the bill. If the bill passes the vote, it will go to the other legislative chamber to repeat the process.
Every bill which passes the House of Representatives and the Senate is presented to the President of the United States before it become a law. (B) What does The Common Body of Tax Law consist of and how does a tax bill become law? The legislative process for most tax bills is as follows: Upon its introduction, a tax bill is referred to either of two Congressional committees, the House Ways and Means Committee or the Senate Finance Committee. After hearings and committee deliberation, the bill is sent to the floor of the House or Senate, where it is deliberated on before a vote. A bill that is passed in one chamber will then be sent to the other chamber and is called an engrossed bill.
Each bill has to go through First reading, Second reading, Committee stage, Report stage and Third reading in both the Commons and Lords. Second reading consists of a debate on the principle of the bill which involves shadow minister and backbenchers. During the committee stage a public bill committee established for the bill may take evidence and carry out meticulous scrutiny on each clause of the bill, as well as making amendments. Finally, during the third reading there is a debate on the final bill and a vote may take place. After passing through one House, the bill will have to be passed by the other House before it could become law.
The majority of new laws or changes to existing laws come from government but the can also come from MP’s, Lords or even a member of the public. E.g. ‘Sarah’s Law’. Both the House of Commons and House of Lords must debate and vote on the proposals. 2.
ISSUE 5 Does the President Have Unilateral War Powers? I found this to be an interesting issue about the President having unilateral war powers. I can definitely see the “grey” area and reason for this issue to arise. As stated in the book, the confusion/conflict comes from the constitution and how it’s written. In summary, the Congress is given the power to declare war and “to raise and support armies”, but the president is authorized to serve as commander-in-chief of the armed forces “when called into actual service of the United States.” This means the President has the power to move troops where he deems fit regardless of congress.
The Commons Select Committees are generally responsible for overseeing the work of government departments and agencies, whereas those of the Lords look at general issues, such as the constitution or the economy. Both Houses have their own Committees to review drafts of European Union directives. Rarely, there are also select committees of the Commons. Their role is to carry out detailed analysis of individual Bills. Most Bills since 2006-07are referred to public bill committees.
Judicial review was established through judicial interpretation in court case Marbury v. Madison. The Supreme Court justices interpreted that the Constitution gives them to right to review laws for constitutionality. Another informal method is incorporation of traditions, precedent and practice. Although not enumerated in the Constitution, a traditional practice may be widely used because of widely acceptance. Political faction is one example of amending the Constitution informally.
‘A political, not a judicial institution.’ Discuss this view of the Supreme Court. It can be argued whether the Supreme Court is more of the political or judicial institution because of the number of issues such as appointment process and who judges appointed by, as well as their power of judicial review which could stop any legislation by determining it unconstitutional. However, there are still cases when Supreme Court judges could decide to make restraint decisions, which are independent from any other branch of the government and those decisions are purely based on the Constitution. To start with, the Supreme Court can said to be a political institution because all the judges are being appointed and confirmed by politicians, who are members of other two branches of federal government (Congress and President). It is clear that president choose his nominee from people who share the same (similar) political philosophy and ideology.
Both houses have to pass a bill before it becomes a law. An other advantage is allows for representation on a reasonably equitable footing for both large and small states. Only the House can impeach a President or executive officer in government. Then the Senate plays judge and jury in all impeachments bought on by the House. The disadvantages are the recurrent gridlock seen in Congress, even if the a House passes a bill it still has to go to the Senate.