How does our system of checks and balances help protect our rights?

As we have already seen our Constitution is very much a reaction to the events that came before it. Our founding fathers had several goals, foremost among those goals was to avoid tyranny. In order to do this several different systems were set up to prevent the abuse of power. Federalism was one of these systems. Federalism was designed to balance the power of the national and State governments and thus limit the powers of the national government. Jefferson and others were convinced that state government was closer to the people and thus more democratic.

Another system that was developed was the system of checks and balances. Checks and balances, or the separation of powers, is based upon the philosophy of Baron de Montesquieau. In this system the government was to be divided into three branches of government, each branch having particular powers

Not only does each branch of the government have particular powers each branch has certain powers over the other branchs. This is done to keep them balanced and to prevent one branch form ever gaining too much power. For example:

Congress may pass laws........but the President can veto them.

The President can veto laws.......but Congress can override the veto with a 2/3 vote.

The President and Congreess may agree on a law..........but the Supreme Court can declare a law unconsitutional.

The President can appoint Judges and other government officials.......but Senate must approve them.

Supreme Court judges have life terms.......but they can be impeached.

As you can see there are many ways (there are many more than listed) that the Constitution balances power. Real life conflicts that test the system have occured throughout history. These checks and balances are used on a regular basis.

• After the Civil War President Andrew Johnson vetoed over 20 bills.
• After the Civil War Congress overrode overrode over 20 Presidential vetoes!
• In1987 President Ronald Reagan appointed Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, his nomination was defeated.
• In 1935 and 1936 the Supreme Court declared the NIRA and then the AAA (two New Deal programs passed during the Roosevelt administration) unconstitutional.
• In 1918 Congress refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles, a peace treaty ending World War I that President Wilson had worked very hard on.

There are thousands of examples of checks and balances at work. As we continue this year we will examine these and many more.

The Stamp Act 1765 (short title Duties in American Colonies Act 1765; 5 George III, c. 12) imposed a direct tax by the British Parliament specifically on the colonies ofBritish America, and it required that many printed materials in the colonies be produced on stamped paper produced in London, carrying an embossed revenue stamp.^[1][2]These printed materials were legal documents, magazines, playing cards, newspapers and many other types of paper used throughout the colonies. Like previous taxes, the stamp tax had to be paid in valid British currency, not in colonial paper money.^[3] The purpose of the tax was to help pay for troops stationed in North America after the British victory in the Seven Years' War. The Americans said there was no military need for the soldiers because there were no foreign enemies and the Americans had always protected themselves against Native Americans, and suggested it was rather a matter of British patronage to surplus British officers and career soldiers who should be paid by London.

The Stamp Act was very unpopular among colonists. Many colonists considered it a violation of their rights as Englishmen to be taxed without their consent—consent that only the colonial legislatures could grant. Colonial assemblies sent petitions and protests. The Stamp Act Congress held in New York City, reflecting the first significant joint colonial response to any British measure, also petitioned Parliament and the King. Local protest groups, led by colonial merchants and landowners, established connections through correspondence that created a loose coalition that extended from New England to Maryland. Protests and demonstrations initiated by the Sons of Liberty often turned violent and destructive as the masses became involved. Very soon all stamp tax distributors were intimidated into resigning their commissions, and the tax was never effectively collected.^[4]

Opposition to the Stamp Act was not limited to the colonies. British merchants and manufacturers, whose exports to the colonies were threatened by colonial economic problems exacerbated by the tax, also pressured Parliament. The Act was repealed on March 18, 1766 as a matter of expedience, but Parliament affirmed its power to legislate for the colonies “in all cases whatsoever” by also passing the Declaratory Act. There followed a series of new taxes and regulations, likewise opposed by the colonists.

The episode played a major role in defining the grievances and enabling the organized colonial resistance that led to the American Revolution in 1775.

Поиск по сайту: