During the late seventeen hundreds, many tumultuous events resulted in Colonial opposition to Great Britain. The conditions of rights of the colonists will slowly be changed as the constriction of the parliament becomes more and more intolerable. During the Seven Years' War England was not only alarmed by the colonists' insistence on trading with the enemy, but also with Boston merchants hiring James Otis in order to protest the legality of the writs of assistance (general search warrants) used to hunt out smuggled goods. "let the parliament lay what burthens they please on us, we must, it is our duty to submit and patiently bear them, till they will be pleased to relieve us....". This is a very strong dictum, that in 1764, the colonists were of a submissive nature, and were weakly pleading for self-autonomy. This small fire of anger will become a huge conflagration as the rights are slowly rescinded. On October 19, 1765 the Stamp Act Congress and Parliamentary Taxation committee's passed some laws that attempted to strengthen the grip of the English crown. "I.That his Majesty's subjects in these colonies, owe the same allegiance to the Crown of Great Britain that is owing from his subjects born within the realm, and all due subordination to that august body, the Parliament of Great Britain." This statement can be used as a summation of the entire document that the Stamp Act Congress had initiated. The statement depicts the colonists has having to be submissive and servile in the view of Great Britain, this policy angered the colonists very much, and was another component of the transition of the colonists' rights and liberties. When the Declatory Act was passed in March of 1766, many colonies were attempting to claim that they were "seceding" from England. "Whereas several of the houses of representatives in his Majesty's colonies and plantations in America, have of late, against law, or to the general assemblies of the same, the sole and exclusive right of imposing duties and taxes upon his Majesty's subjects in the said colonies....be it declared ...., that the said colonies and plantations in America, have been, are, and of right ought to be, subordinate unto, and dependent upon the imperial Crown and Parliament of Great Britain;". The Parliament of course denounced the attempt at independance and still dogmatilcally passed the following law to show that the colonists were still british subjects. Again, the colonists were infuriated and later will resist the british imperialism on the colonies. "All before, are calculated to regulate trade, and preserve prpromote a mutually beneficial intercourse between the several constituent parts of the
0 Comments
Principles and Articles of the US Constitution Essay When one speaks of checks and balances in government you must understand what is really being asked. It is simply a system set up of the three branches of government that can either amend or veto an act of another branch as to prevent any one branch from having too much power over the other. Is this system effective? Over time, the Constitution has been interpreted and amended to adapt to changing circumstances, and the powers exercised by the federal government have changed with it. For instance because the federal government can influence the states it has the right to withhold federal funds from the states that do not want to go along with their plans whatever they maybe. Because the government can only exercise those powers specifically granted by Constitution, it is important to protection the rights and powers of the people. This includes the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to be free from unlawful searches and to a trail by jury, all of which are the first 10 amendments. Numerous real life conflicts have put this system to test over the past couple of centuries, but have stood fairly strong for over 200 years. From the resignation of Nixon over the Watergate scandal to Clinton’s impeachment over the affair with Ms. Lewinsky (Checks and Balances within the U. S Government) it proofs that this system can guard the U. S from any tyranny from administration corruption, scandals and cover-ups. So yes this system proves to be effective to me and that all the government branches remain important and no reform is deemed necessary at this time. How does a bill become a law? Getting a bill passed as a law takes time and effort on part of the U. S. House of Representatives. I’ll give a brief summary of the steps from bill to law. First and foremost a bill is just an idea either from the representatives or the people at which time if agreed upon it then becomes a bill. Next, other representatives have to support the bill, if so then it is placed in a box next to the clerks’ desk, assigned a number and then read to the house. The speaker of the house then sends it to the committee for review, research and revisions before sending it back to the house floor. Sometimes additional information is required and then the bill is sent to sub-committees before being an approved. Once approved the bill is then ready for debate by the House of Representatives where they will agree or disagree on the bill. Changes are then made and now the bill is ready for voting. It takes majority of the Representatives to say or select yes on the matter at which time it is then delivered to the U. S. Senate by the clerk of the house. Just like the U. S. House of Representatives the U. S Senate goes through some of the similar steps. The Senate committee discusses the bill and then report to the Senate floor for yet again another vote. If the vote is “yea†then off to the President it goes. The President has the option to sign and pass the bill, veto the bill or do thing at which time the house makes the decision based on what is happening in the house. If by chance the bill has passed in both the U. S. House of Representatives and the U. S. Senate and is approved by the President then the bill becomes a law and will then be enforced by the government. I believe that because the three branches were put in place for the people it has worked to some extent. The people get a chance to vote and elect who they want to run the country in which they must live. We get the option of having a trail that is to be fair and without prejudice. Sometimes though you have to ask yourself when making decisions are all the decisions about the people or are they thinking about themselves and personal agendas. I would have to say sometimes it is both. When the vote is about raising taxes who does this hurts the poor man not the wealthy. When they want to vote on cutting jobs in higher offices then they try and fix the budget. How unfair is that. Decisions should always be made to suit the country as a whole and not when it deems necessary. Some things that I did learn was that when it came to voting that it was something called electoral votes and is made by an electoral college who actually cast the votes for which the candidates really become president. a person running for president can lose the overall popular votes, but still become President because of the votes casted by the electoral college†(Kimberling, 1992). Now my take on this is that in actuality as a people we are not really electing a president that we pick because of this rule from the Electoral College, so why have us vote? The U. S. Constitution had been around for over 200 years and has managed to with stand the test of time with minimum problems so I believe that we should just allow this document to run its course and see it through the end of time.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |