Advantages And Disadvantages Of Dual Executive

Governing the U.S. is a hard endeavor, and thus the founding fathers aw fit to establish the constitution in such a way that divides the powers of governing into three branches. Of these three branches it can be argued that either congressional power or executive power is appropriate for governing the nation, however it is my opinion that the executive branch is the best choice of leadership. The central thesis for this paper is, do to the “separate intuitions, and sharing powers” portion of the constitution, the president is best suited to leadership do to his abilities to negotiate and in turn implement good strategies. The structure of congress and the president is largely different, where congress is governed by multiple individuals

It is also important to consider the effect that the principle of subsidiarity can have on the central European Parliament, as it is required to only carry out “those tasks which cannot be performed effectivity at a more immediate or local level” . This importance of decisions being taken as closely as possible to the citizen, can be monitored through constant checks being made to verify that the higher EU level is legitimately required. After members of the European Parliament were granted the power to approve or reject legislation in 1979 , it was then established in Article 5 of the Treaty of Lisbon that member states must also be given the ability to repeal an adoptive legislative act. This is particularly regarding one of shared areas, to certify “the efficiency and democratic legitimacy of the union and to improve the coherence of its action” . There is also much concern that unless EU voters can “become more credible and legitimate in the eyes of the voter” , particular areas of the Union may begin to tangle.

With regards to the claim that the European Parliament is too weak (the second of Weiler's standard version claims), Moravcsik (2002; 2003) emphasises the fact that during the last twenty years, the European Parliament is the institution which have experienced the most reforms, regarding its increase of powers, compare to the Council and the Commission. The latter argument is in fact accurate because ever since the Single European Act (1986), the European Parliament gains more and more power by reforms in every signed Treaty (Moravcsik, 2003, p. 7). Despite that, however, the Parliament is still considered to be weak compared to the other institutions, as it will be analysed later in the essay.

The multigovernmental nature of the European Union and the national governments of its member states also helps to decrease the democratic deficit, not only on a supranational level, but on a national level as well (Eising 2011). Because there is a division of powers and sovereignty between these two levels of governance, citizens have the capacity, through interest group activity, to represent their interests to two different legislative bodies that could pursue legislation in their favour (Kohler-Koch 1997; Eising 2011). Similarly, due to the relatively nascent state of European Union interest group activity, many groups with similar interests are combining and coordinating efforts in order to have a bigger influence over policy decisions (Greenwood 2003, Eising 2011). Because of this unique phenomenon, smaller groups may work in tandem with

Living in a world where governors, politicians, presidents, councils and others are placed in a certain position to help sustain control of a certain area are quite important. Politicians have a say in how the country runs, councils help with the local government, and presidents find ways to please others by treaties and help the countries who are in need plus find ways to trade with other countries. Overall, they try to keep most things intact. They all have an important position in their job as well as a governor. A governor can do some things that a president cannot do. However, each position has a short term to refrain from getting too much power.

Most powerful of all is the Council of Ministers which deliberates in secret and until recently was not legally obliged to listen to the EP’s decisions. While indirectly accountable to voters, the link is too tenuous and the mode of interaction too technocratic to satisfy most observers. It also appears unreasonable that the deliberations of the Parliament must be public whereas the Council remains secretive. The European Council only meets every six months, largely as confirmation of decisions made elsewhere, but McCormick remarks upon its remarkable potential power: “It can in effect set the agenda for the Commission, override decisions reached by the Council of Ministers and largely ignore Parliament.”

The components can be differentiated into 3 branches, executive, legislative, and judicial. The Commission would be the executive branch. The Council and Parliament would make up the legislative branch. Finally the judicial branch would be the Court of Justice. However, the powers that lie in these components are still not clear cut. As discussed in class, the EU Court is the largest supranational court. The court makes its decisions in secret. This could affect power because this could result in judges more easily making decisions for the EU as a whole rather than the individual state if the state cannot hold them accountable. This can raise the question of whether accountability plays a role with appointed delegates and or elected officials. The only place with elected officials is the Parliament. The people who are appointed are held accountable by the individual member states where as the elected officials are held accountable directly to the people. This could create come power division between the government and the people. The powers of the different components are not necessarily clear cut because the commission does have certain legislative powers in addition to its executive

The council of ministers- This is the European Union’s main decision making body, it is composed of ministers from the National governments of each of the member states, and meets in Brussels or Luxembourg to agree legislation and policy.

From a macro scope it is evident the EU is strong promoter democracy and has deeply embedded democratic features, however, as Peterson and Shackleton point out that “understanding politics always begins with understanding institutions not at least the EU”. Taking this advice the essay will seek to examine the two main legislative bodies within the EU,

1. At State Assembly executive Cabinet is in charge of hearing and deliberating on legislature that the House and Senate chambers have passed, and to help the Governor reach a decision on whether or not to sign the bill into Florida Youth In Government Law. The Cabinet is also a key-role in the experience for a lot of delegates, and offers a truly unique opportunity for them.

This paper will assess the claim that supremacy of EU law is still an evolving and debatable concept. To do this, I have divided this paper into four sections. The first section will discuss the establishment of supremacy in EU law through ECJ case law. The second section will explore the vibrant debate surrounding constitutional pluralism that has arisen since the early 1990s. The third section will examine the debate and impact of the codification of primacy in the early 2000s. The fourth section will examine the extent to which the principle of sovereignty has been accepted in three EU Member States, namely, the United Kingdom, Germany, and Poland.

The relationship between the legislative and executive authority the presidential system has a distinct difference. In the presidential system the President is the one who heads the executive branch of government, which is separate from the legislative branch. These two branches are both independent of each other. The members of the legislative branch, along with the president, are all elected by the people, whereas the members of the head executive departments of government, the Cabinet, are elected by the President as his or her official advisers. More than having been elected by the President, the Cabinet also requires the conformation and consent of the legislative branch. The sole purpose of the legislature is to create and develop the details of plans and corrections and reviewing of laws. The executive council has the ability to show approval of a legislative agenda, and within that agenda they

An Analysis of the Powers of the European Parliament History of the European Parliament: On the 18th April 1951 the Ministers representing France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Holland and Luxembourg signed in Paris a treaty which established the European Coal and Steel Community, the ECSC was born. The most important feature of the ECSC was its supranational character, it was a supranational organization. It was aptly described as a 'quasi federation in an important economic sector.[1] The Community was endowed with five organs; 1. An executive, called the High Authority 2.

The European Union (EU) is not a typical international organization. The mix of intergovernmental and supranational institutions makes the EU a unique, distinctive political, and economic system. As Europe has spiraled from one crisis to the next, difficult discussions haves arisen about how much more power should be delegated to Brussels. Even though the EU advocates for “ever closer union”, through increased integration, states are becoming hesitant to relinquish power to the EU. This is due to the fact that state sovereignty has become threatened; it is being compromised by a combination of the lack of effective democratic institutions and the loss of states have lost control of law-making to legislation power to EU institutions. Euroenthuthiasts argue that state sovereignty is enhanced, not threatened, by reallocating power to EU institutions. However, Eurosceptics dispute that too much control has seceded to the EU making is a threat to state sovereignty. My position aligns with Eurosceptics, for the EU has weakened state sovereignty do to increased centralization of power in EU institutions that lack legitimacy. The European Project has obtained a copious amount of jurisdiction from states and eroded a basic fundamental freedom of the modern state- sovereignty. Since the EU has with goals to deepen and widen integration it’s clear that forfeiting state sovereignty will only intensify. My essay will start with a brief history of the European Union and a short

The European Commission is the Executive (governmental) body of the EU, initiating legislative proposals and also managing the EU’s budget (Europa, 2007). Each commission operates for a five-year period, with meetings taking place in Brussels every Wednesday. The Commission consists of a President of the Commission and twenty-eight commissioners (some vice presidents). Employees of the Commission are organised according to department (Directorates-General) and answer to a Commissioner. The Commission exists in order to represent the interests of the whole of the EU (thus arguably the whole of Europe), as opposed to individual Member States. The Commission represents the EU on a global basis and is the main participant in negotiations in areas such as trade. The appointment of Commissioners is the responsibility of the Parliament, with all having previously assumed senior positions in politics in their own country, usually within its national government. Proposals are drafted by the senior civil servant (Director-General. A proposal may be adopted if more than half of the Commissioners decide to adopt it. Once agreed, all Commissioners must give their unconditional support – similar to the collective responsibility held by the Scottish executives and the UK. The Commission works closely with both