If the Governor can’t hire or fire his subordinates, then he has less or no control over them. Power is highly decentralized and spread out to several different officials, which prevents the governor from having too much power, but it also prevents the governor from effectively doing his job. Those that wrote the 1876 Constitution saw this and decided that it’s better to have a weak and ineffective governor than a powerful and effective governor. The lieutenant governor, who heads the Senate and appoints its committees, has more power than the governor. The Texas governor serves as the commander in chief of the state's military, the Texas National Guard, and enforces all the state's laws with his limited police powers.
Branches of Government Jefferson said it best, “My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government” (The Thomas Jefferson Foundation, Inc., 1996-2012, para. 1). After the ultimate control while under rule of the crown, the founding fathers sought to create not only a government that provided for rights and liberties of the people, but also to ensure that government interaction and authority was spread amongst various branches. This distribution of power would provide checks and balances to guarantee reduced influence, while allowing each section to operate independently. However, agreement of each party would be problematic to achieve when needing to enact new laws and regulations.
First of all, it is true that the Governor of Texas is constitutionally weak, yet he enjoys a range of important functions that he is able to implement. For example, the Governor controls the regional planning and federal grants applications. Also, he has the right to veto on the legislature, which in most cases is an absolute power. In addition, the Governor of Texas is the commander in chief of the military forces, and he can control others law enforcement agencies during difficult times. Furthermore, Texas Governor might not have the direct control over the state, yet he has the control over the presiding officers of appointed board and commissions, as being the head of the executive branch on the state government.
The system of the United States is a presidential democracy. We can categorise the United States as a democracy as there are competitive elections for the Presidency and the Legislature. However, the United States should be classified as a ‘flawed’ liberal democracy, as there is an entrenched two-party system which makes it nearly impossible for third parties to be elected to the legislature or the Presidency. Further, the political system of the United States lacks an even playing field for political candidates, as there are no limits on electoral campaign spending, a large amount of resources and funds is required to gain election. However, the United States’ regime does have many liberal facets including civil liberties, rule of law, accountability measures and fair
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
The Constitution changed the structure of power of the government from that which existed within the British system. Two ways this can be proven is that the Constitution separated the powers of the government into three branches. Also, the British system does not have a written constitution, only a collection of parliaments. One feature of the American constitution is the strict separation of the powers of the executive, the legislature and the judiciary. The British political system has no such formal separation of the powers.
The Executive Branch, which includes the president, is in charge of enforcing laws, the Legislative Branch controls making laws, and the Judicial Branch is a system of courts that interpret the laws created and enforced by the other branches. Hamilton stated as opposed to the Executive and Legislative branches of government, “...[The Judicial Branch] has no influence over the sword or the purse;” (Federalist #78) Because the Executive branch has the power to enforce law and the Legislative branch has the power to declare war and make laws, Hamilton argues that the Judicial branch is the least dangerous. Although I believe the Judicial branch has many positive aspects, I agree with Hamilton’s argument
Therefore the parliament lacks the legitimate right to ignore the mandate and tends to accept the government’s right to govern. However, despite large majorities, the House of Commons has the authority to dismiss a government through a vote of no confidence. For example, the 1979 vote of no confidence removed Prime Minister James Callaghan from office after a sustained period of industrial unrest and economic problems. This suggests that although government may be powerful, if it tests the limits and becomes autocratic or inefficient, parliament can take measures to
The Presidency Review 1. The framers of the Constitution both admired and feared centralized leadership. Although they knew that a strong president was needed to protect the nation against foreign and domestic threats, they also worried about the potential abuse of power. The framers believed that having given a much longer list of powers to Congress, they saw the president as a powerful check on legislative action, and as essential to the administration of government. 2.
Our country is as divided as ever and there is a substantial lack of unity among the political parties and the citizens of the United States. At the federal level, the two political parties refuse to work together in the best interest of our country. In addition to seeking reelection, their main focus is furthering their political agenda as they refuse to compromise and negotiate with one another. In addition, citizens do not feel accurately represented by these elected federal officials. The citizens are given limited options when voting because only the dominant parties have a realistic chance of winning.