Ways such as certain rights that are listed within the two documents. Although both the documents compare, they also contrast greatly such as in their provision of governmental structures. There are many rights that the State of Ohio holds that the U.S. Constitution does not. There are also amendments within the Ohio Constitution that are not listed within the U.S. Constitution as well. Due to the larger size of the Ohio Constitution, there are many amendments that appear to be unusual, in other words, are parts of the document that you wouldn’t expect to be part of their constitution.
Part of the system is the introduction of proportional representation that meant parties in the Riechtag would gain seats depending upon the number of votes they got in the most recent election. The consequence of this was that it brought a number of parties together with the help of another key feature of the constitution, the “Bill of Rights”. This meant that parties could express their views, as the “Bill of Rights” was a law that gave people the freedom of speech. This union made representation of many opposing parties very open, which effectively made the Weimar constitution more democratic. However P.R made it difficult for a lot of parties to gain a majority of seats in the Reichstag, which made it harder for one major party to take control of the country.
Essentially, The Constitution displays fairness between the states and Congress, giving moderate power to each of them. This practice makes this document the favorite of the two. The Articles of Confederation, compared to The Constitution, displayed inferiority and weakness. Their policies were unfair, and did not function well with the nation’s interest as a whole, and as individual states. The election process was far more one-sided compared to that of the Constitution.
Explain the Argument on Federation The debate on federation was lengthy and included various arguments both in favour and against the uniting of colonies under one central (federal) government. Arguments in favour included Better Communications, Stronger Defence and a more divers Trade System. Fears of the small colonies, farmers and employers and the labour movement were topics that worked against the idea of a federal government. Communications in the 1880’s was a telegraph link between all capital cities and a telephone line linked Sydney and Melbourne. The Railway lines in some states were different to others but were used along with steamships to make transport quicker and to make the colonies feel less isolated.
There are pros and cons for public speaking, some cons are if people speak too much, it could jeopardize the security of our country. The establishment of free speech for all citizens is a successful political strategy for everyone; for people who disagree with those in power as well as those who agree. Allowing free speech adds to the marketplace of ideas, and keeps society involved in important issues. If there was not public speech there would be no media, or newspaper, people wouldn’t be informed about things that concern or help citizens. Some individuals are afraid to protest, because people don’t agree with the government, can become dangerous and get out of control, and they can even danger themselves as well as the safety, property, and lives of
The federal government currently holds the power but the states can counter that power if they want. On a number of issues, states have the right to form their own regulations and acts. According to Lombardo (2014), because of checks and balances provided by the Constitution the states are allowed to
Nick Wright U.S. History Ms. Wilkinson May 6, 2011 The Powers of the Federal Government One issue in politics is the amount of power that the federal government should be allowed to have. One side believes that the government should be there, helping us, but we shouldn’t be able to notice their presence. The other side believes that the government should actively participate in the everyday lives of citizens. In the United States today, the power of our government tends to lean towards the former of the two. We know that the government is there, protecting us, providing for us, and ensuring that our lives are good.
If drug uses could grow their own weed, for example, it wouldn’t be a gateway drug therefore no black market. I would suggest selling weed in smoke shops, or liquor stores so the tax profits would increase at the same time. Legalization would get rid of some problems but yes I would also agree it would cause some as well. There would be a spike in the drug use because of the big ‘legalization hype’ but eventually it would go down. The best way I believe to reform this is put the government in change of selling them or assigning places to sell them, like the example I used in the liquor stores.
It is often overlooked because it is not physical like money or gangs, but it is this power is omnipresent. Public opinion is arguably the most influential things in America. We conform to society for the appeasement of the people around us. This often makes us uniform as a nation. We conform our behavior to match that of our neighbors.
Marijuana being illegal is only making us spend more money. All of this would make America better in my opinion. The only downside I see to legalizing marijuana would be the easy access to everyone. Specially the children, they are ones we worry about, but if we are as strict as we are with cigarettes and liquor, I think things will be ok. We will just need to raise the fines and be harsh with them. Now stores would not want to sell it illegally to minors.