%%USERNAME%%    %%ACCWORDS%% %%ONOFF%% |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| >> Message Forum >> Political >> ID #832617 |   |
| |||||||||||||
  WELCOME ! This Forum invites GLOBAL input from Writing.com Community Members of every race, religion, nationality, and creed. This forum recognizes that the United States is not the sole player on the field of global affairs, and invites and appreciates the opinions and input of all. This little literary niche represents safe harbor for participants to come together to express, discuss, and debate all things political. Our intent is to break through barriers and dismantle alienation by providing a forum for sincere input and, just as importantly, thoughful consideration and response to the ideas expressed herein. This forum is non-partisan and assumes absolutely no political stance of its own. Instead, it will serve as a resource and "town hall" meeting place encouraging discussion on any issue of interest that writers wish to examine. There is but a single "rule" for freely participating in events/discussions/posts here; please show respect for others' viewpoints and courtesy toward one another in what we post. We can disagree and debate with fervor WITHOUT being abusive toward others who happen to hold differing views. Let us endeavor to come together to learn, reason, and solve issues - both by speaking our own minds AND by truly listening to others as they do the same. To that end, post here any and all input, thoughts, and responses you desire in any genre of your choice: posted commentary, essays, poetry, short stories, etc. If you wish to post a piece of your work as opposed to simple commentary, please do so in {bitem: 000000} form, inserting your Item number in place of the zeros and deleting the space between "bitem:" and the numbers you insert. This will save space in our port for more input! If you have questions about creating bitem links in your post, click on this link: "The illustrated guide to linking"  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (Author's Note: We are doing a Congresional hearing and my topic is "What is Govenment?" here is my opening statement; need some help on editing it. Please help!!!!!!!!!! What do you think? Do you have any tips for it? ): According to most legends, as the triumphant Benjamin Franklin stepped out of the last session of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in September of 1787, a curious woman questioned him, "What kind of government have you given us, Dr. Franklin?" Franklin answered, "A Republic, Madam, if you can keep it." Remarkably, over 200 years later, the United States has kept its constitution, and the republic for which it was created has thrived ever since. While growing democracies across the continents have modeled the frameworks of their governments after the U.S. Constitution, the America's system of democracy remains amazingly unique and successful, largely due to its constitution. The framers of the Constitution created a flexible device of government, which withstands the test of time through a system of checks and balances and separation of powers. At the Constitutional Convention, the framers set out to develop a form of government stronger than a confederation; it could not be one persons idea though, otherwise the states would not confirm it. They borrowed ideas from both of these forms of government to form a federal republic. Once federalism was decided upon to unify the states without pressuring them, the next step in developing a lasting constitution was creating a separation of powers. James Madison wrote in The Federalist, "No political truth is certainly of greater intrinsic value, or is stamped with the authority of more enlightened patrons of liberty, than that ... the accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands ... may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." The framers wholeheartedly combined into the Constitution three ways to ensure a clear separation of powers among the three branches of government. First, the leaders in the different branches come to power in different ways; the president is elected through a national election, the congressmen are elected on a state level, and the federal judges are appointed to their positions. Next, the bureaucracy is appointed by the president but only by the consent of the Senate. Also, each power serves for a different amount of time. This keeps the powers separate by ensuring that a majority party can only take control over part of the government at one time. For instance, the Republicans controlled the House of Representatives after the election in 1994, but President Clinton would represent the Democrats in the executive branch for at least two more years. By separating powers between the states and the federal government, and by separating the federal powers among three equal and independent branches of government, the framers of the Constitution laid the foundations of a long-lasting democracy. The framers further developed this foundation of democracy through a system of checks and balances. They were aware that "the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others ... Ambition must be made to counteract ambition." Though the legislative branch creates laws, it is up to the executive branch to enforce them and the judicial branch to interpret them. The judicial branch's ability to interpret the law is essential to the adaptable nature of the Constitution. The Supreme Court case of Marbury vs. Madison (1803), which took place during the significant Marshall Court, established the constitutional principle of judicial review. It was emphasized that the Court may strike down state as well as federal laws and that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. This case was significant because judicial review gives the right to interpret the Constitution to the branch of government which has been unaffected by political parties or public opinion. The Court also is most fit for this job because they have the best knowledge of the law. Judicial review is still an important part of the way the United States democracy works, as demonstrated by the 2000 presidential elections. Though the correct course of action regarding the slate of electoral voters to be chosen for the state of Florida was widely unclear, the final outcome depended on a ruling by the Supreme Court. Many people believe that the "...[time] of the election of the President of the United States may be considered as a crisis in the affairs of the nation" yet even this year's election was far from a crisis because of the stability of the Constitution. The Constitution also remains adaptable to society because of the option of adding an amendment. During the Revolutionary period, not all were supporters of the proposed Constitution. The Antifederalists thought that the most telling criticism of the Constitution was its failure to include a bill of rights. The Bill of Rights was eventually added to the Constitution and is the first ten amendments. As proof of the constant importance of the Constitution in American society, seventeen amendments have since been added. Thomas Paine declared that "...government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one..." By these standards, the United States government is far from the worst possible state, as the Constitution has lasted throughout the federal government's entire existence. The United States Constitution is assuredly essential to the success of this country and will always remain so. TO KICK OFF DISCUSSION ON ANOTHER TOPIC, THE FORUM PROPOSES THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: WHERE DO YOU STAND ON THE WAR IN IRAQ? Were Americans deceived regarding the reasons for invading Iraq? If so, who should be held responsible? If America's cause in invading Iraq is just, how should we proceed? If you believe it to be unjust, what should be done? These questions were inspired by the following comments, generated by a Writing.com poll: "Has the War in Iraq made America Safer?" " That's a great question to ask! I know it may seem like Bush has deceived us all by what the media is saying, but my father is in intelligence and knows a lot about what's behind it all. He says half of what the media is saying is false. Also, keep in mind that President Clinton applauded Bush for how he has been handling the situation. "
 " Americans were lied to, Bush didn't listen to the UN and completely alienated anyone who didn't go to war with America. Thus, the war was poorly planned and has cost 500 soliders' lives since the war "ended". I do agree that Suddam had to be removed from power, but the cost was too great. " What are YOUR views on these or any other political/global issues? Post your input below! |
#19. A Country Divided~ #18. Re: OT Question #17. Food for Thought #14. OT Question #12. Drinking Age #10. OT: An Interview #4. The French Ban |
 Log In To Leave Feedback |
Static Items
Books
Forums
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
