Constitutionalism

CONSTITUTIONALISM

Name

Course

Instructor

Date

The American Founders were skeptical of the dangers of a pure democracy, and thus, they favored a blend of a republic with democratic elements to avert the danger of the majority attempting to make everyone equal in the society. The separation of powers is a communal aspect of the United States of America’s Constitution since it does not employ the rule by the majority. Ideally, based on the separation of powers the laws created by the legislature that is elected by the majority can be annulled by the judiciary that represents a few individual appointed by the president. Based on that notion, the aspect of separation of powers limits the power of the majority thus culminating in a situation that is not based on the principles of absolute democracy. Ideally, with separation of powers the government is divided into three distinct branches those are independent of each other. The legislature is tasked with enacting laws for the state and approving budgetary allocations for state departments while the executive is concerned with administering as well as implementing public policy projects funded by the legislature. The judiciary serves the role of interpreting the constitutions and the laws of the state as well as solving any controversies between the other arms of government (Bernhard, William, and Brian, 2006).

However, the American constitution is inefficient since it does not allow for an absolute separation of powers. Often, government responsibilities and policies intentionally overlap as one arm seeks to accomplish certain obligations. It is prudent that segregation of powers is in line with the skepticism of the Founders’ faith in democracy since it does not vest dominant power on any branch but they all complement each other. Ideally, the executive ought to be more powerful given the fact that it draws its powers from the majority. In any pure democracy, power is derived from the people and the majority always rules. That concept is not envisioned in the separation of powers since the responsibilities and powers of the three arms have been intertwined in a system of checks and balances that do not clearly stipulate which branch is more powerful than the other. Consequently, the three branches of government are in individual competition and conflict since their interests might collide.

The fact that government powers and responsibilities have been divided in ideal since it makes governance more structured. However, each branch is given powers, but the same powers are limited and checked by another arm of government. For instance, the president of the United States of America has powers to appoint department secretaries and judges, but those needs the approval of the Congress to be valid. Similarly, the Congress can enact laws, but the president has to veto those laws for them to be ratified and become legally binding. In essence, none of these arms of government can exist in isolation, but they complement each other a factor that is against the ideals of democracy (Bernhard, William, and Brian, 2006). Conversely, by ensuring that the different arms of government are accountable to each other makes it difficult for any arm of government to usurp the power to become dominant. In light of that perspective government will be ruled detrimental to the democratic spirit of the majority ruling over the minority. The majority that elected the president, as well as the members of the Congress, will not have the privilege of governing the country since their powers are limited by the check and balance system.