Constitutional Principles: Separation of Powers
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2012
- The US Constitution describes separation of powers throughout the first 10 amendments. Do you understand why separation of powers is important for protecting our freedom? This short, engaging video focuses on the constitutional principle of separation of powers.
Clear definitions and graphics, an engaging historical narrative, brief scholar interviews, and memorable quotes will make this 6-minute video perfect for use any time of the year! A short viewing guide is also available at www.BillofRightsInstitute.org.
About the Bill of Rights Institute:
Established in September 1999, the Bill of Rights Institute is a 501(c)(3) non-profit educational organization that works to engage, educate, and empower individuals with a passion for the freedom and opportunity that exist in a free society. The Institute develops educational resources and programs for a network of more than 50,000 educators and 70,000 students nationwide.
Official Site: billofrightsinstitute.org
Facebook: / billofrightsinstitute
Twitter: / brinstitute
Instagram: / brinstitute
BRI Educator Newsletter Sign Up Page: billofrightsinstitute.org/new...
Here from Business Law class ! Professor Sheila Fogitta
This short video was very informative. Thanks for putting this on UA-cam.
Here from government class
This works in theory and in practice it works pretty well but there are some flaws that we are encountering now. When politicians run for Congress, their election is very dependent upon their campaign. Campaigning for a political office is like advertising. The more people know about a product or see ads everywhere, then the more likely they are to buy it. Likewise, if politicians have a large, widespread campaign the more likely they are to get elected (within reason).
But campaigning requires money. Large companies figured out that they could fund campaigns for politicians, then once those politicians are in power, they would help pass laws that benefitted those companies. Political unions also began to pop up where people give money to unions that hold ideas they support and those unions fund political campaigns too. However, wealthier people can pour more money into unions and thus making the politicians that they support more likely to get into office. So essentially what happens is that the wealth are represented more than the poor which isn't how a democracy should work.
Here's a video that really does a good job of explaining this corruption: ua-cam.com/video/5tu32CCA_Ig/v-deo.html
This can be solved by prohibiting subsidies. Civil parties should be financed only with donations from their members. The more members a party have the more advertising they are, so more posibilities to be elected by people.
The thing is that big companies would have money anyways and they can make you think what they want in a certain way. Therefore, at the end of the day, you may vote for a member whose interests matches tha ones of the bif companies.
Nevertheless whether big companies fund or not fund politicians, these politicians must follow what their district told him/her. If he/she votes against the will of the district he/she can be withdrawn (i'm not from the US) I guess.
The US is the only country in the world one can say there are separation of powers.
Good stuff...
here from Civics class
HAHA, SAME. We have this group project and most of us are here at 11pm. It's g r e a t. It makes me feel human though too, which is a good thing
except the Environmental Protection Agency... it's part of the executive and has its law enforcement, but passes its own "laws" by calling them "regulations" and then has its own courts in which the accused does not have appeal to courts under the judicial branch.
That is the fault of the Legislative Branch not doing its job or consciously enabling the Executive Branch.
But it also means that there is no-one to credit and no-one to blame when things go right or wrong. And it also allows for the government to shutdown.
So what are the options when individuals are confronted by an entity that knowingly is crossing those bounds. BATF for example, fall under the executive branch but think and act like they have the authority of the legislative and even judicial.
They know they would lose in a court of law, but they don't care as their goals are immediate results.
If reversed, it would be like a bnak robber saying he has a right to rob the bank and the police are unable to stop him because he says he has that authority. Forcing the police to take him to court months down the road, and when the court orders him to pay back the money, he indicates he can't find it.
Nothing is reasonable about this. So what are the REASONABLE legal options for an individual when facing that situation?
"A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."
why there are so many teacher like to use this video???????
How can government endanger the rights of the people, when the people vote for the government?
The ppl don't vote
misspelled "judicial" at 1:13
who's watching this in 2018?
But the majority IS the public. They are one and the same.
here from 7th grade
bruh what are thes comments
gay.
No! The judiciary's role is to apply the law, not interpret it. To say that their job is to interpret the law is to give them the power to rewrite it. If their job is to interpret the law, who is anyone else to say that they misinterpreted it? The judiciary is supposed to apply the law.
i hate learning 😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡
You will get more respect of you spell entitled correctly. If you can't spell, leave the hard work to us intelligent people.