Constitutional Models and Political Parties
Constitutionalism and noble representative government are concepts and practices that have existed longer than the American Republic. The existence of these concepts provided the foundation for the formation of the American Democratic Experiment through acting as ingredients towards this process. Since the foundation of American Republic, there are various constitutional models that have been established. These different models have been established in attempts to respond to several governance issues that emerge from time to time. Actually, these different models have provided the foundation for governance models and practices for better governance of the society. Some examples of constitutional models include the 18th Century Madisonian and Hamiltonian constitutional models and Barker's normative democratic theory, which differ with regards to their major components.
Madisonian and Hamiltonian Models v. Normative Democratic Theory
The 18th Century constitutional models basically relied on principles introduced by Madison and Hamilton. Madisonian constitutional model emphasized separation of powers and checks and balances while Hamiltonian model emphasized strong, unitary president. In Federalist Papers no. 48-50, James Madison mourned that developing a government and a Constitution to oversee governmental powers is not an adequate protection against intrusions that result in tyrannical concentration of all governmental powers in the same individuals (Garrison, 2008). As a result, he introduced a constitutional model that divided governmental powers between federal and state governments, three arms of national government, and separation of the Legislative Department into two i.e. House of Representatives and Senate (Madison-Federalist 47,48, 51). The accumulation of all powers i.e. executive, legislative and judiciary powers in the same hands may be precisely regarded as the actual definition of tyranny.
On the contrary, Alexander Hamilton's constitutional model emphasized strong unitary president through centralizing the judicial power of the national government. This model was developed on the premise that energy in the executive is a leading attribute or component in defining good government. In essence, a feeble executive contributes to feeble execution of governance-related processes and activities. Hamilton emphasized the need for a strong unitary president on the basis that energy in the executive is important towards safeguarding the community against external attacks and for strong administration of the laws (Hamilton-Federalist, 70).
These constitutional models that dominated governance...
Barker's theory postulates that governance system must proceed through different stages including party, electorate, parliament, and cabinet (Barker, 1942). Through suggesting that a system of government progresses in these four major stages, Barker utilized the British model in his normative democratic theory. Ernst Barker introduced his model through a classic argument for government by discussion, which initiates the party model of government.
One of the major differences between the 18th Century Madisonian and Hamiltonian constitutional models relates to political parties. Unlike Madisonian and Hamilton's constitutional models, Barker's normative democratic theory consider parties and rational choice as core components in governance systems. This emphasis was based on belief that parties are attractive because they provide order, accountability, and efficiency in governance. On the contrary, Madison stresses intentional, balanced government while Hamilton's model centralizes powers. Secondly, 18th Century models differ from Barker's theory with regards to factions where Barker proposes that factions enable the electorate to have programmatic choice whereas Hamilton and Madison consider factions as components that weaken national interest (Woll, 2010, p.58). Third, the 18th Century constitutional models were rooted in political reality while Barker's theory seemingly ignores political realities. Actually, Madisonian system is regarded realistic because it is based on laws of normal political behavior whereas Barker's model is relatively idealistic since it is centered on democratic ideal rather than political realities.
Framers' View of Political Parties
As reflected in Madisonian and Hamiltonian constitutional models, political parties were viewed differently by Framers of the Constitution. This is in contrast with Barker's normative democratic theory, which views political parties as major components of the democratic process. The constitutional and governance models during the framing of the Constitution did not include political parties, which imply that these factions did not play an important role in the political process. According to Philips (2012), the system of representative democracy in the late 1780s was primarily an experiment by the Framers of the Constitution. This is mainly because there was no other country with a democratic representative government.
The Framers of the Constitution viewed political parties as factions, which would contribute to division of the republic. As a result of this…
Constitutional, Legal and Ethical Issues in Criminal Justice Police abuse remains one of the most serious and divisive human rights violations in the United States. The excessive use of force by police officers, including unjustified shootings, severe beatings, fatal chokings, and rough treatment, persists because overwhelming barriers to accountability make it possible for officers who commit human rights violations to escape due punishment and often to repeat their offenses. Police or
The court held that the district court's refusal to reopen the case and receive additional evidence after the remand from the court was not error. The court did not remand with directions to reopen the case and retry it. The only direction was that the district court was to make more detailed findings on the question of allegedly discriminatory hiring practices that adversely affected the educational opportunities afforded the Mexican-American
Crime Control Model and the Due Process Model In this paper we shall examine and differentiate between two "ideal type" models of the criminal process: the Crime Control Model and the Due Process Model. Crime control underlines an efficient criminal procedure by means of early determination of responsibility by law enforcement representatives (Aviram, 2010). The model necessitates considerable reverence to police officers and prosecutors, the "torchbearers" of the criminal process (Feeley,
Conflict/Crime Control Model vs. The Consensus/Due Process Model Over the years, theorists have developed several theories to describe crime as a social phenomenon. Two of today's most popular theories are the conflict/crime control model and the consensus/due process model. Both theories attempt to explain the origins of crime, but they approach crime from two very different perspectives. The conflict/crime control model is focused on crime control and aims to enforce the
The main Woolworth's store was already on strike, and the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union (HERE) was threatening to escalate the strike to all of the stores in Detroit." (Cobble, 2003) Myra had been nicknamed the: "Battling Belle of Detroit" by media in the Detroit area because Myra is said to have:.." relished a good fight with employers, particularly over the issues close to her heart. A lifelong member
PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER IN THE U.S.A. In spite of the fact that the constitutional order puts across a series of elements from which the American public (as a whole) benefits, it is also responsible for enabling many individuals to freely express religious fanaticism through criminal acts. It is very surprising that matters in the U.S. were relatively peaceful for the last two centuries, with the recent decades marking a