Abstract
This paper states that, although the Federal Constitution of the United States with its "Checks and Balances" makes it the best-known and most democratic system in the world today, most governments, even dictatorial ones, have a similar mechanism to balance the exercise of power among its branches. The author feels that the U.S. Constitution was and will be a reaction piece to events that happen to the people. This paper concludes that power must be controlled and accounted for: It is not only a right and a privilege but also, more so, a responsibility.

Table of Contents
Introduction
Checks and Balances in the Legislative Branch
The System and the People's Rights
The System and the Judiciary
A Brilliant System in Present Times

From the Paper
"The system has been tested by actual situations. After the Civil War, President Andrew Johnson vetoed 20 bills (Anonymous), after which Congress overrode more than 20 bills vetoed by the President. In 1918, Congress turned down the Treaty of Versailles, which then President Woodrow Wilson worked hard for. The Treaty was to end World War I. In 1935 to 1936, Supreme Court declared that the NIRA and the AAA, New Deal programs passed by the Roosevelt Administration, were unconstitutional. Likewise, former President Ronald Regan appointed Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, but his appointment or nomination was rejected by Congress."

Tags:legislation, judicial, state, democracy, balance, responsibility

Abstract
The Constitution of a democratic government provides for the control of powers through a system of Checks and Balances. The paper explains that this system refers to constitutional controls of the separate branches of government, i.e., executive, legislative and judicial, over one another to insure that not one will have more power over the two others. The paper shows that it is commonly believed that the policy provided by the checks and balances of the Federal Constitution of the United States makes it the best-known and most democratic system in the world today.

Paper Outline:
Checks and Balances in the Legislative Branch
The System and the People's Rights
The System and the Judiciary
A Brilliant System in Present Times

From the Paper
"The system has been tested by actual situations. After the Civil War, President Andrew Johnson vetoed 20 bills (Anonymous), after which Congress overrode more than 20 bills vetoed by the President. In 1918, Congress turned down the Treaty of Versailles, which then President Woodrow Wilson worked hard for. The Treaty was to end World War I. In 1935 to 1936, Supreme Court declared that the NIRA and the AAA, New Deal programs passed by the Roosevelt Administration, were unconstitutional. Likewise, former President Ronald Regan appointed Judge Robert Bork to the Supreme Court, but his appointment or nomination was rejected by Congress."

Tags:congress, president, Bill, Clinton

Abstract
This paper explains that one of the most vital aspects the founding fathers implemented in the U.S. Constitution was that ability of each branch to check on the other branches to make sure that one branch does not become too powerful. The author points out that one of the most powerful checks, which is not implemented in the Constitution, is judicial review, which has been implemented many times to ensure that the legislative and executive branches have been within the law. The paper states that Congress was established as the major and most powerful body of the government; therefore, Congress has the most checks on the other branches such as, on the executive branch, the power to override presidential vetoes or, on the judicial branch, the power to alter the size of the Supreme Court.

From the Paper
"The judiciary branch consists of a system of courts. The courts are political institutions in which the decisions that they make are only as useful as the enforcement methods following. The most known of all the courts is the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is the superior law of the land and the ruling that are issued are enforced the most. The court chooses which cases it hears, and it hears very few cases ach year. The cases that are heard have gone through a very rigorous selection process. A request is made called the writ of certiorari, from there the "Rule of Four" follows, meaning four judges must agree to hear the case. Most cases chosen are major controversial cases in which there is a public out-cry for a ruling. "

Tags:judiciary, executive, congress, racial-barriers, equality

Abstract
This paper explores the three branches of government that create a system of checks and balances and separation of power. It outlines how laws are passed and how they are defeated. It also shows how this system of government came to be.

From the paper:

"The separation of the functions of the three branches of government, viz. the executive, the legislative and the judiciary, is one of the basic principles of American democracy and government. The purpose of having three separate independent branches is ostensibly to keep checks and balances between them so that they do not exceed their powers and keep a watch over one another's functioning."

Tags:U.S., politics, law, executive, legislative, judiciary

Abstract
This paper examines James Madison's concept of pluralism and its impact on American politics. The paper analyes Madison's views of pluralism and a system of checks and balances on U.S. political power among competing groups, and whether or not pluralism is still characteristic of modern American politics and factionalism.

From the Paper
"Since the founding of the United States, the concept of pluralism as proposed by James Madison has been a part of U S political and social life. Madison viewed the disputes arising from differing viewpoints of interest groups as fundamental to political life in a democracy. Madison was influential in ingraining pluralistic principles in the U S Constitution. The separation of powers in the Constitution envisioned each branch of government as a counterbalance or system of checks and balances to the others."

Tags:democracy, President Bush, tax cuts, media, interest groups, wealthy, poor, social institutions, government

Abstract
This paper explains that the constitutional system of checks and balances has served the country well over the years, notwithstanding its original intent to avoid majoritarian power. The author points out that the amount of power wielded by one branch of the federal government compared to the others has tended to swing from one extreme to another, expanding in scope and power until brought under control by the checks and balances of the others. The paper relates that, since 9/11, the president has emerged as the temporary heavyweight champion among the three branches of government today; however, when the real and perceived threats to the nation's interests have been resolved, it would seem certain that the system of checks and balances would provide the impetus needed to once again diminish the powers of an "imperial presidency".

From the Paper
"According to "Black's Law Dictionary" (1990), checks and balances are an "arrangement of government powers whereby powers of one governmental branch check or balance those of other branches." This separation of powers, of course, has been a fundamental feature of the American federal government from the outset, but the intent, purpose and net effect of this approach has not been exactly what the Founders may have envisioned. When the nation's Founders gathered to forge a constitution, Goldwin and Schambra (1980) suggest that the checks and balances provisions that were adopted were not intended to keep the forces of government under control but were rather intended to keep the popular majority from exercising any substantive degree of influence over its operation."

Tags:majoritarian, checks, balances, 9/11, control

Abstract
This paper sheds light on the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances in the US system of government that regulates the powers of the executive, legislative and judicial branches. The paper also discusses the concerns that the failure by the Supreme Court or Congress to interfere with the executive's actions in the current Iraq war may be resulting in the abrogation of constitutional protections. Furthermore, the paper shows how the system of checks and balances was established to safeguard against encroachment by one branch onto another and to ensure that no member of the executive or legislative branch is placed beyond the scope of the law during the course of his or her time in office.

From the Paper
"Congress fulfills the legislative role, and is the only body that can make federal laws. Moreover, Congress cannot delegate its legislative powers to any other governmental body. However, Congress can delegate some of its lesser powers to other governmental branches. In addition, Congress retains some control over the executive and judicial branches through the power of impeachment. The President fulfills the executive role, and is in charge of executive officers who ensure that the nation's laws are enforced. However, presidential power only extends to executive agencies, not quasi-judicial or legislative agencies. The executive branch exercises some control over the judiciary because it nominates judicial appointees. In addition, the executive branch exercises some control over the legislative branch because of the power of the Presidential veto. The judicial power is given to the Supreme Court and the lower courts. The judicial power is only exercised by constitutional courts; though Congress can establish legislative courts to determine issues of public rights, those courts cannot exercise judicial power."

Tags:checks, balances, Supreme, Court, Congress, President, Constitution

Abstract
This paper examines the specific use of a bill passed in Congress in the balance of powers in U.S. democracy. It explores the history of the U.S. government and what the original framers of the constitution had in mind for a power sharing government.

From the paper:

"If we study the history of the government we realize that the Constitution establishes three separate branches of government: the legislative, executive, and judicial. Each branch has its own area of authority. These areas overlap, making it necessary for the three branches to share in, and compete for, the power to govern effectively. Each branch has some constitutional authority that it can use to impede the functioning of the other branches, creating a system of checks and balances."

Tags:Congress, constitution, Senate, law, federal

From the Paper
"James Madison (1751-1836) was one of the leading promoters for the independence of the American colonies. At the outbreak of the Revolutionary War in 1776, Madison was elected a member of the convention which drew up the Virginia constitution. In 1780 he was a delegate from Virginia to the Continental Convention and during the three years of that body he strongly advocated the establishment of a central government. As a member of the Virginia delegation to the Constitutional Convention which was convened in 1787 in Philadelphia, Madison drew up an outline for the Convention which basically was an expansion of the Virginia Constitution. Among the more notable features was the concept of a balanced system of government in which national authority would be limited by reserving certain powers to local governments and to the people. The creation of a .."

From the Paper
"In 1974 the Watergate crisis marked the end of the Nixon presidency; it also signaled a reaction to the trend of executive sovereignty that had been in development for forty years. At the time, the expansion of presidential power was clearly accepted as politically and constitutionally legitimate. However, the effect of removing political restraints upon the executive office was a usurping of congressional power. The Congress, often viewed as an impediment to a strong presidency, was purposely deterred by the executive office in the name of progressive reform and the interest of national security. Richard Nixon, acting largely on precedent, extended the expansion of his political power by antagonizing Congress time and again, impounding government monies, instating sweeping veto powers.."