America’s three branches of government differ in many ways. Write an essay discussing how they differ in terms of accommodation, deliberation, and accountability.
Order Instructions:
America’s three branches of government differ in many ways. Write an essay discussing how they differ in terms of accommodation, deliberation, and accountability. In other words:
1) How much accommodation has to be made for
each branch to reach a decision?
2) How much deliberation goes into the making of
decisions within each branch? and
3) How much input from the public goes into each branch’s decisions, and how can the public hold each branch accountable for its decisions?
SAMPLE ANSWER
America’s three branches of government
America’s three branches of government differ in many ways. Write an essay discussing how they differ in terms of accommodation, deliberation, and accountability. In other words:
1) How much accommodation has to be made for each branch to reach a decision?
For any organization to be able to function properly, it needs it various departments to work in synch and not engage in unnecessary competition. A business benefits when the department work to complement each other in the knowledge that combined the make a more formidable force as opposed to individually. The same is true about governance and its operatives. The executive, judiciary and legislature – Congress, must exist independently yet depend on each other for their smooth operation and ultimate success in delivering their mandate (van, de Kerkhof, 2006). The legislature needs the judiciary to implement the laws passed and the executive to enforce the said laws.
On their part, the judiciary expects the legislature to be a bit sensitive to the environment when they consider the laws they pass. Similarly, the executive must enforce the laws humanly otherwise they will be at cross-purposes with the judiciary. The interaction between the branches begets a complex web of relationships all based on the knowledge that for each branch and the government to succeed – deliver improved life to citizens, then all branches have to accommodate each other (van, de Kerkhof, 2006). In accommodation, each branch acknowledges the important role played by the other and actively engages in actions that promote inter-branch operations.
When Congress or the executive act or engage in actions that are contrary to the constitution, it is the responsibility of the Judiciary to protect the citizens. If Congress or the Executive had only taken time to consult and appreciate the constitutionality of each of the actions, instances when the Supreme Court kicks out laws for being unconstitutional would be greatly minimized if not eliminated (van, de Kerkhof, 2006). For example, in the Brown v. Board of Education, the courts reversed the earlier Plessy v. Ferguson, which had given legal backing for having racially segregated public facilities. Despite the courts hiding behind the 14th Amendment, the biggest pressure must have come from Congress and the Executive which wanted segregation ended for political reasons.
2) How much deliberation goes into the making of decisions within each branch?
Within each branch are a number of stakeholders with real and imagined stake in the success of the branch. From elected, selected to employed persons, each branch has individuals seeking individual improvement while at the same time seeking branch development. As a result in each branch, the most effective and beneficial decision are those entered to after deliberation. Deliberation entails allowing all stakeholders to express their views before coming to a final decision.
In congress, laws can only be passed when deliberative politics is practiced. Deliberative politics involves allowing all including dissenting voices an opportunity to express their objections. By then allowing the issue to be decided by a vote with the majority winning, congress epitomizes the use of deliberation in decision making. With time even those who get defeated, get to understand the dynamics of Congress and have laws that they are passionate about passed due to understanding and engaging in deliberations (Honig,, 2007).
In the judiciary, when decisions have to be made in criminal and civil cases, the constitution provides for trial by a ‘jury of one’s peers’ (Gastil, John, and Phillip J. Weiser, 2006). This jury then gets to listen to the evidence to and against while being guided by a learned person – on the intricacies on justice. In the end, the decision that is arrived at is one that needs deliberation to get. In cases one party is not happy with a decision; they are allowed to appeal the decision to a higher court. The Supreme Court – the highest court in the land makes its decision by relying on deliberations. Having an odd number of judges means that even when they do not deliberate, they still do not stagnate and can still keep the operations running.
In the executive, the president is the leader and gets to make the final decisions. However, in many administrations and in a habit most probably picked during campaigns, deliberations play a central role in the operations of the executive. When vote hunting, the constitution demands that each presidential candidate declare their running mate – vice president. Given the contribution, when finally in office, it is prudent that the president consult the vice president as a matter of courtesy and realization of election pledges and attainment of a smooth succession when the time comes. It is the desire of each leader to have a smooth transition not to mention someone who will ensure their projects succeed.
3) How much input from the public goes into each branch’s decisions, and how can the public hold each branch accountable for its decisions?
Within each branch, public participation is a very important component of how the branch operates. In Congress, public participation is achieved in two ways. Congress holds all its activities in public making the public fully aware of what they are doing. Given that the senators and representatives are but representative of the people, it is deemed that when they ask questions, they are a voice of the people. Secondly, when a committee of Congress engages in an act of interrogating a public issue or public servant appointee, it conducts this session in public and actively seeks the public assistance in providing background information. Politics is all about activity public participation in decision making.
The judiciary also does apply public participation in its operations. The input from the public in the judiciary is mainly in performing jury duty (Gastil, John, and Phillip J. Weiser, 2006). On the unique characteristics of the American justice system is the use of jury’s to hear cases. This way the public is able to contribute by being the main actors and their decision thus becomes the basis for the judge in deciding the appropriate sentence. Additionally, when the prison services are considering paroling a prisoner, they ask for petitions from the victims of the crime they were convicted for. Part of the government’s desire it to have released prisoners be remorseful of their action, rehabilitated and ready to reintegrate in to the society. When the society or prisoner is not ready, the strategy fails.
On its part the executive could be called the most public sensitive of the three branches. This could be from the fact that the occupant of the office has to get elected universal suffrage and thus needs to understand what the public wants. For example, when former First Lieutenants’ supporters launched an online petition, they knew that if they could get 100,000 signatures within 30 days, White House would have respond – it has a policy to respond to all petitions that get 100,000 or more signatures within 30 day (Tan, 2015)
Works Cited:
Gastil, John, and Phillip J. Weiser. “Jury Service as an Invitation to Citizenship: Assessing the Civic Value of Institutionalized Deliberation.” Policy Studies Journal 34.4 (2006): 605 27. ProQuest. Web. 15 Mar. 2015.
Honig, Bonnie. “Between Decision and Deliberation: Political Paradox in Democratic Theory.” The American Political Science Review101.1 (2007): 1-17. ProQuest. Web. 15 Mar. 2015.
Tan, Michelle. “Petition Forces White House Response for Imprisoned LT” Army Times: A Gannet Company. 21 Jan. 2015. Accessed 16 March 2015 from
http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/2015/01/19/lorance-murder-white-house-petition/22014195/
van, de Kerkhof. “Making a Difference: On the Constraints of Consensus Building and the Relevance of Deliberation in Stakeholder Dialogues.” Policy Sciences 39.3 (2006): 279 99. ProQuest. Web. 15 Mar. 2015.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
