They also lay and collect taxes, declare war, coin money, provide for the army and navy, and decide on tax laws. The Legislative Branch also has power over he Executive Branch, it can kick the President out of office and override a veto if there is a 2/3 vote in both houses. It has power over the Judicial Branch too, in that it can approve and impeach judges. To qualify to serve in the House of Representatives you must be 25 years of age and an American citizen. As well as in the Senate, the only difference is you must be 30 years old to qualify.
The principle organ of the US state is to legislate, represent and scrutinise the other, safely separated, branches of the government. First of the three elements in which Congress’s primary role plays is in legislation. The very first article of the Constitution lays out how this is done. Bills initiated by both the President and members of Congress are almost certain to be substantially modified as they go through the legislative process, making it very difficult for the President or any political faction to force through their policy agenda. Congress has been somewhat effective in passing laws such as the PATRIOTIC Act under Bush and the Healthcare Reform Act under Obama both show’s that Congress can legislate when it needs be, especially with a majority in both houses.
The Senate is more elite and prestigious of the two of the two houses of Congress. The Senate differs from the House mainly because of the way they do business. The Constitution allows the Senate and the House to make its own rules for Parliamentary procedures. One of the Senate rules is a tradition to allow unlimited debate, they have no time limit on discussion of legislation. Both houses have to pass a bill before it becomes a law.
But in reality, especially in the “domain of foreign affairs”…the central legal issues rarely come before the Court at all. The law is effectively settled within the executive branch or by the informal agreements between the president and Congress” (Caplan 21). The other branches of government are aware of the overuse of presidential power but do not know how to address the issue to somehow resolve or better the situation. Too much executive power could lead to the abolishment or stacking of Congress, the judiciary system, the House and the Senate. By doing this it would lead the democracy to a dictatorship.
Under Article I of the Constitution however, Congress holds many exclusive and monumentary powers, including but not limited to: budgetary powers (taxation, control of national debt), military powers (declare war), lawmaking (passing federal legislation), representation of constituents, investigation, and serving its consittuents. Congress also has dominion over other branches of government: the House of Representatives, for example, holds control over impeaching governement officials and controls the budget for other branches. The Senate must approve treaties and holds power to confirm or unapprove “...federal judgeships, ambassadorships, and cabinet level posts” (Katznelson, Kesselman, Draper, p.45).
For any bill to become a law, both houses of Congress must have a majority vote of approval for it to move on to the next step of legislation. Also, just like the Framers envisioned in 1787, representative government serves as a check on the rest of government, therefore preventing tyranny. Finally, Congress has the power to impeach the president, which is one of the defining powers that sets the United States apart from other countries. We citizens can also help preserve this culture of liberty in our own ways. It can be as small as just exercising our birth rights as U.S. citizens.
But people still need to recognise we have an institutional responsibility to do oversight on the President” Garry Bass, Congress. This quote supports my view on the Congress being a watchdog. If the Congress is a lapdog, the President can have a free ride on running the country how he wishes and not represent the people’s view. However that is not the case as the President cannot do everything which pleases him. However, looking at the statistics such as Bill Clintons presidency, in the first 2 years which was a united government, Congress exercised limited oversight, and when needed to, asked softball questions, however , when Republicans took over Congress, things got much harder as they seek to hold the President to account, and after a while, impeach.
Signing statements by the president have received very little media coverage. They are extremely important because they define how the president interprets laws he signs. Bush uses these statements to gain more power and control by signing bills into law and altering them as he sees fit. According to “The Legal Significance of Presidential Signing Statements,” authored by Assistant Attorney General Walter Dellinger, on November 3, 1993 since American President James Madison signing statements have been utilized in two different ways. The president would use the signing statement “ to explain to the public, and more particularly to interested constituencies, what the President understands to be the likely effects of the bill, and how it coheres or fails to cohere with the Administration’s views or
‘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.
Primarily, the court systems of the two countries are grouped into several different levels of adjudication from the central to local levels. Secondary, both court system has two levels of adjudication is the first instance and appellate cases are divided into criminal and civil cases. Furthermore, both of the court system applies the appointment to judges. However, the populations of the systems differ greatly in the independence and operating principles of the courts and there is an important difference in their composition. Firstly, in the United Kingdom, parliament is the legislative body is also the highest authority in the court system of the United Kingdom, senate performing the trial through the appellate committee of the senate, parliament became the final level trial for all criminal and civil in the UK whereas in Vietnam, state power is unified, with the assignment and coordination among state agencies in the implementation of legislative, executive and judiciary.