The formal amendment process has two stages and those stages are the ratification and proposal stages. Each portion is necessary for an amendment to officially become part of the Constitution. Amendments can be recommended by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and House of Representatives, and sometimes by a national convention. Once a state has ratified an amendment, it cannot retract the action. However, a state does reserve the right to reject an amendment and then reconsider its decision. Congress chooses the method of ratification. While proposing an amendment, Congress can set a time limit for its ratification. Congress has set the limit for ratification to seven years. The amendment developers intentionally made it challenging to
…show more content…
In 1803 it was decided that courts have the power to nullify government actions that clash with the Constitution. This is the power of the judicial review. The judicial review forces courts to interpret the Constitution. Though this makes a lot of sense, it is problematic in theory.
The fact that the Constitution does not specifically authorize courts to practice this power. The judicial review is the courts primary check on the other branches of government. Judges play an intricate role in how the Constitution is interpreted. Therefore, judges must be extremely careful and openly consider what the words within the Constitution mean.
The Constitution is often silent on many subjects. Where as political practice has somewhat altered the distribution of power without adjustments in the Constitution. The commentators intended for Congress to be the greater branch of government. Nonetheless, the president has overtime come to dominate Congress in most instances. Political practice has changed the allocation of power without making modifications in the …show more content…
It was never the intention to create a democracy, but the result was a democratic form of government. The creators also wanted to establish a balance between the powers of state and national government. It was also a goal of the creators to build public opinion into our government structure by permitting the direct election of representatives to the House. It was believed that the actions of the House of Representatives that would reflect public opinion, particularly on crucial issues of taxes and government spending.
A bill being passed by a majority of elected officials does not necessarily reflect the opinion of a majority of citizens. Their two models of democracy referred to as majoritarian and pluralist. They differ greatly in their assumptions regarding the role of public opinion in democratic government. Majoritarian model believes the government should do what the majority public wants to do. Many Americans prefer this standpoint and polls consistently show that Americans truly feel this
In 1803 it was decided that courts have the power to nullify government actions that clash with the Constitution. This is the power of the judicial review. The judicial review forces courts to interpret the Constitution. Though this makes a lot of sense, it is problematic in theory.
The fact that the Constitution does not specifically authorize courts to practice this power. The judicial review is the courts primary check on the other branches of government. Judges play an intricate role in how the Constitution is interpreted. Therefore, judges must be extremely careful and openly consider what the words within the Constitution mean.
The Constitution is often silent on many subjects. Where as political practice has somewhat altered the distribution of power without adjustments in the Constitution. The commentators intended for Congress to be the greater branch of government. Nonetheless, the president has overtime come to dominate Congress in most instances. Political practice has changed the allocation of power without making modifications in the …show more content…
It was never the intention to create a democracy, but the result was a democratic form of government. The creators also wanted to establish a balance between the powers of state and national government. It was also a goal of the creators to build public opinion into our government structure by permitting the direct election of representatives to the House. It was believed that the actions of the House of Representatives that would reflect public opinion, particularly on crucial issues of taxes and government spending.
A bill being passed by a majority of elected officials does not necessarily reflect the opinion of a majority of citizens. Their two models of democracy referred to as majoritarian and pluralist. They differ greatly in their assumptions regarding the role of public opinion in democratic government. Majoritarian model believes the government should do what the majority public wants to do. Many Americans prefer this standpoint and polls consistently show that Americans truly feel this