For much of 2011 and 2012, public dissatisfaction with Congress rose to all time highs, with 70-80% expressing disapproval with how Congress does its job. Many commentators note that Americans are fed up with Washington "grid-lock" that makes government apparently unable to address important problems. Other observers believe that the national government is acting according to its design, based on separation of powers and checks and balances.
In at least 200-250 words, analyze how the U.S. Constitution implements separation of powers and checks and balances. Briefly explain why the constitutional framers based the new government on these ideas. Evaluate how separation of powers and checks and balances are working out in practice today, justifying your assessment with persuasive reasoning and examples.
I know this went a bit long, but you can take what you want from it and leave the rest.
The US Constitution is quite clear that, in order for a bill to become law, it must pass the House, Senate, and be signed by the President. All must be on board for a law to pass. Later on, the development of judicial activism led to the doctrine of 'judicial review' where the Supreme Court developed the power to stop any law it deemed unconstitutional. In the Federalist Papers, we read:
"No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value, or is stamped with the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty, than that on which the objection is founded. The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very ...
The expert examines national american government.