(no subject)
so i've spent the last 4 hours reading for and writing this paper.
now i can't sleep because i have to be up and in class in two hours.
but if you care to read it, i've posted it below the cut.
beware. it's boring.
Bowden 1
Joshua Bowden
Dr. Franklin
P SCI 2010 MWF
September 19, 2005
Federalism: Does It Work?
The United States Constitution and the Tennessee State Constitution both have fundamental similarities: system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and rules and regulations of governing. Also included in each constitution, are checks and balances between, not only branches at each level, but between national and state government as well. The United States Constitution, however, is not subject to the Tennessee State Constitution, or any other state constitution. Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee, John Roberts Jr., believes “the limits in the Constitution on Congress are as important as limitations on state legislatures in the Constitution” (Transcript). While maintaining internal integrity of each branch, the United States Constitution also allows for each branch of government and each level of government to be checked for misuse of power; this “checking” is what gives our government (national and state) its balance. I believe that the national government should be supreme and the states should remain subject to the United States Constitution and those individuals whom uphold it; regardless of flaws or loopholes, no government has obtained perfection, but has changed and adapted to fit the circumstances of the times and to the needs of the people.
The division of executive, legislative, and judicial power, at national and state level, allows for there to be balance in that power; by allowing the legislative branch to impeach a president or governor and allowing a president or governor to have the right to veto this division
Bowden 2
of power can be “checked.” The ability of the legislative branch to override a veto by a two-thirds majority in both houses, House of Representatives and Senate, seems to lend more power to Congress, but the President has tricks up his sleeve, as well; Congress, by Article I Clause Eleven, is the only branch with the ability to declare war, but the President, as commander-in-chief, has the authority to make war without a formal decision. I think these “loop-holes” (ways of getting around the other) in the system simply make the system work. Congress may decide to not formally declare war, but the President can still make that decision to send troops and make war. For war, the president has the ability to call on the National Guard, state voluntary militia; Tennessee, however, in Article 3, Section 5, gives the governor chief command of the National Guard “except when they shall be called into the service of the United States.” This means that the governor is not really in control of the National Guard, but rather the United States, especially the president, has the power over the National Guard.
There are some powers reserved for the states; these were given in Amendment Ten of the United States Constitution, which states “the powers not delegated to the United States… nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states…” States are and always will be subject to the Constitution. The Articles of Confederation gave created a weak central government and gave supreme power to the states over each one’s designated areas. The United States Constitution was not written to suppress the states, but to create a system of government in which it was more powerful at the national level than at the state level. A major debate over this idea stems from Article One, Clause Three, which gives Congress power over the regulation of interstate commerce. This Clause has been used in suits ranging from preservation of an endangered species to patients being able to sue states under the American Disability Act (the most current
Bowden 3
debate). Does the national government have the authority to give patients the power to sue states under the Act? I believe that a strong, national government would allow for it; whether the case is substantiated or not, justice will prevail under a strict and consistent interpretation of the United States Constitution. If states have to ask the national government whether each are allowed to do something, then perhaps the country is not running as smoothly as we believe.
The judicial branches are the final say on the interpretation of “constitutionality” of every act brought before it. At the state level, Tennessee has a state supreme court; its primary function should be to decide whether or not actions committed in Tennessee qualify as constitutional. The national government does the same regulation and determination of the interpretation of the United States Constitution. No actions by any branch of the government (state and national) can be deemed justifiable if in violation of the respective constitutions. Article VI, Clause Two gives the Constitution of the United States supreme law of the land. States, under Amendment Ten of the United States Constitution, have power to pass legislature and govern by means expressed and given, as well as those not restricted, but only if these actions, bills, or laws do not conflict with the United States Constitution.
State sovereignty is fundamentally impossible if we are to maintain a strong national government. Sovereignty is “supremacy of authority or rule” (Sovereignty). States cannot have supreme authority if still subject to the United States Constitution. The system of checks and balances in the United States has changed and been amended throughout, but the majority of power still lies at the national level. In my opinion, I think there are too many legal hoops to jump through to get something done. James Madison’s model of government, which separated the powers of government, allowed for protection against one branch getting more power than
Bowden 4
another; it also made it a lot harder to get things done. Even if bills get signed into law by the president/governor/Congress, the judicial branch can still have the final say in whether or not it is constitutional and can overturn it. Precedents by the Supreme Courts have been set, repealed, and overturned over time to allow for either a more strict or loose interpretation of the powers reserved to the states or national government. Supreme sovereignty and power should lie with the national government because this allows for one policy between interstate trade rather than fifty different ones, for an example; instead of fifty different policies on every issue, a strong, national policy on each issue would allow for a more functional government.
Bowden 5
“Sovereignty” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
2000 Houghton Mifflin Company.
“Transcript: Day Two of the Roberts Confirmation Hearings” Washington Post
September 13, 2005 .
now i can't sleep because i have to be up and in class in two hours.
but if you care to read it, i've posted it below the cut.
beware. it's boring.
Bowden 1
Joshua Bowden
Dr. Franklin
P SCI 2010 MWF
September 19, 2005
Federalism: Does It Work?
The United States Constitution and the Tennessee State Constitution both have fundamental similarities: system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and rules and regulations of governing. Also included in each constitution, are checks and balances between, not only branches at each level, but between national and state government as well. The United States Constitution, however, is not subject to the Tennessee State Constitution, or any other state constitution. Supreme Court Chief Justice nominee, John Roberts Jr., believes “the limits in the Constitution on Congress are as important as limitations on state legislatures in the Constitution” (Transcript). While maintaining internal integrity of each branch, the United States Constitution also allows for each branch of government and each level of government to be checked for misuse of power; this “checking” is what gives our government (national and state) its balance. I believe that the national government should be supreme and the states should remain subject to the United States Constitution and those individuals whom uphold it; regardless of flaws or loopholes, no government has obtained perfection, but has changed and adapted to fit the circumstances of the times and to the needs of the people.
The division of executive, legislative, and judicial power, at national and state level, allows for there to be balance in that power; by allowing the legislative branch to impeach a president or governor and allowing a president or governor to have the right to veto this division
Bowden 2
of power can be “checked.” The ability of the legislative branch to override a veto by a two-thirds majority in both houses, House of Representatives and Senate, seems to lend more power to Congress, but the President has tricks up his sleeve, as well; Congress, by Article I Clause Eleven, is the only branch with the ability to declare war, but the President, as commander-in-chief, has the authority to make war without a formal decision. I think these “loop-holes” (ways of getting around the other) in the system simply make the system work. Congress may decide to not formally declare war, but the President can still make that decision to send troops and make war. For war, the president has the ability to call on the National Guard, state voluntary militia; Tennessee, however, in Article 3, Section 5, gives the governor chief command of the National Guard “except when they shall be called into the service of the United States.” This means that the governor is not really in control of the National Guard, but rather the United States, especially the president, has the power over the National Guard.
There are some powers reserved for the states; these were given in Amendment Ten of the United States Constitution, which states “the powers not delegated to the United States… nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states…” States are and always will be subject to the Constitution. The Articles of Confederation gave created a weak central government and gave supreme power to the states over each one’s designated areas. The United States Constitution was not written to suppress the states, but to create a system of government in which it was more powerful at the national level than at the state level. A major debate over this idea stems from Article One, Clause Three, which gives Congress power over the regulation of interstate commerce. This Clause has been used in suits ranging from preservation of an endangered species to patients being able to sue states under the American Disability Act (the most current
Bowden 3
debate). Does the national government have the authority to give patients the power to sue states under the Act? I believe that a strong, national government would allow for it; whether the case is substantiated or not, justice will prevail under a strict and consistent interpretation of the United States Constitution. If states have to ask the national government whether each are allowed to do something, then perhaps the country is not running as smoothly as we believe.
The judicial branches are the final say on the interpretation of “constitutionality” of every act brought before it. At the state level, Tennessee has a state supreme court; its primary function should be to decide whether or not actions committed in Tennessee qualify as constitutional. The national government does the same regulation and determination of the interpretation of the United States Constitution. No actions by any branch of the government (state and national) can be deemed justifiable if in violation of the respective constitutions. Article VI, Clause Two gives the Constitution of the United States supreme law of the land. States, under Amendment Ten of the United States Constitution, have power to pass legislature and govern by means expressed and given, as well as those not restricted, but only if these actions, bills, or laws do not conflict with the United States Constitution.
State sovereignty is fundamentally impossible if we are to maintain a strong national government. Sovereignty is “supremacy of authority or rule” (Sovereignty). States cannot have supreme authority if still subject to the United States Constitution. The system of checks and balances in the United States has changed and been amended throughout, but the majority of power still lies at the national level. In my opinion, I think there are too many legal hoops to jump through to get something done. James Madison’s model of government, which separated the powers of government, allowed for protection against one branch getting more power than
Bowden 4
another; it also made it a lot harder to get things done. Even if bills get signed into law by the president/governor/Congress, the judicial branch can still have the final say in whether or not it is constitutional and can overturn it. Precedents by the Supreme Courts have been set, repealed, and overturned over time to allow for either a more strict or loose interpretation of the powers reserved to the states or national government. Supreme sovereignty and power should lie with the national government because this allows for one policy between interstate trade rather than fifty different ones, for an example; instead of fifty different policies on every issue, a strong, national policy on each issue would allow for a more functional government.
Bowden 5
“Sovereignty” The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
2000 Houghton Mifflin Company.
“Transcript: Day Two of the Roberts Confirmation Hearings” Washington Post
September 13, 2005 .