The Separation of Powers and Checks and Balances Essay

The separation of powers and checks and balances is a system that was created in America by the founding fathers in the constitution of the United States. The separation of power plays an important role of keeping the three branches which are legislative, executive, and judicial in the government systems equal to one another and that neither branches becomes too powerful. Each branch has its very own power and duties to serve to the people and government. All three branches play a significant role in checks and balances and separation of powers, in our government and rely on each other to make sure that all of the power is equally distributed. One out of the three branches is the Legislative Branch which has the power to declare war,†¦show more content†¦The president also has the power of assigning the federal judges, and when to call Congress into session. Likewise, the president has the power to either sign or veto a piece of legislation from Congress. The Judicial branch is in charge of reviewing decisions and understanding federal laws. It is in charge of explaining the laws and having the power to decide if the laws are constitutional (Brand). The Judicial Branch is different from the other branches because, the members are appointed by the president and then approved by the Senate. This branch provides a comfort for the citizens to understand that the branches are dedicated to maintain equality and make sure they are fair laws. Even though, the judicial branch doesn’t have much power, it is just as important as the other two branches. With the separation of powers it gives citizens a voice and makes our government liberal. By providing a check and balance system, it provides less power to the president which doesn’t allow the president to make up the laws as he wishes. The checks and balances provide the citizens to be able to check the effectiveness of the laws made and if someone finds any one law unfair can take actions against it. Therefore the system of checks and balances provides an easy flowing popular system. The Legislative, Executive and Judicial branch are what makes America government system different. It creates an equilibrium ofShow MoreRelatedSeparation of Powers and Checks and Balances654 Words   |  3 Pagesreferring to checks and balances and separation of powers. Both have to do with the Government. But separation of powers is a model of government in which different parts of the government are in charge of different tasks; in the United States, these parts are known as the Legislati ve, Executive, and Judicial. Checks and balances is a means of trying to ensure that these three parts of government stay equal, and that one does not try to take over another. Separation of powers was first introducedRead MoreSeparation Of Powers And Checks And Balances1144 Words   |  5 Pagesframers believed that their government should be based on the separation of powers and checks and balances. This term of separation of powers was coined by Baron de Montesquieu, a French enlightenment writer. For the framers this idea of having separation of powers was mainly to avoid having the majority ruling with a strong hand. They avoided giving any branch of what was now their new government too much power. This idea of separation of powers by the framers was also because they believed that a governmentRead MoreThe Theory, Separation Of Powers With Checks And Balances, And Divided Government1456 Words   |  6 PagesWhy is it so difficult to accomplish anything in American government? The answer lies within three features of American government: the Hyperpluralist theory, separation of powers with checks and balances, and divided government. All these aspec ts of government result in gridlock, â€Å"a condition that occurs when interests conflict and no coalition is strong enough to form a majority and establish policy, so nothing gets done† (19). The first element of government that halts progress in America isRead MoreFederalism, Separation Of Powers, Checks And Balances And The Bill Of Rights1208 Words   |  5 Pages Federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances and the bill of rights are the four main elements that the constitution is made up of. All four of these elements are what made the constitution strong, lasting over two hundred years. Three separate branches were created that had their own specific powers. The government was then given the power to tax and enforce its laws. The structure of how this one document has governed is what makes the constitution unique. The U.S. constitution establishedRead MoreWhy Did the Founding Fathers Create a Constitution Based on the Ideas of Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, Federalism and the Bill of Rights?1533 Words   |  7 Pagesconstitution based on the ideas of separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism and the bill of rights? The founding fathers wanted to create a constitution because many believed that the national government had to be stronger than what it had been with the use of the Articles of Confederation. But at the same time they were fearful of human nature and how often it could be seen in the history of other countries such as Britain, for people in the position of power to infringe on the rights ofRead MoreSystem of Checks and Balances in America Essay1215 Words   |  5 PagesConstitution creates separation of power by dividing the government into three separate branches. These branches include the executive branch, the bicameral legislative branch and judicial branch. In order to ensure that no branch were to overpower the other two branches, the forefathers of the United States of America created a system of checks and balances. Because the United States of America Constitution created the separation of power that is supported by a system of checks and balances, the United StatesRead Mor eThe Constitution Defends a Tyranny-free Government773 Words   |  3 PagesConstitution defends against tyranny are federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Federalism is one of the ways that helps defend against tyranny. Federalism granted powers to the central government and to the state. They share a portion of the powers between them, as shown in the diagram, like the power to take and borrow money (Doc A). With overlapping powers, neither groups would have complete control, yet would retain enough power to subdue any uprising made by the other party.Read MoreEssay on Separation of Powers in the US Government877 Words   |  4 PagesThe separation of power throughout the united states government prevents one part of the government from becoming so strong that it can infringe on the freedom of the governed (Bernstein 24). The united states government is a representative republic. A representative republic is a type of democracy where the people elect representatives to vote for them in the nations matters, rather than having every person vote on every single election and issue. The U.S. government is separated into three mainRead Mor eEu - Separation of Power?1629 Words   |  7 PagesIn this essay I shall attempt to analyse whether the separation of powers is respected in the attribution of competences within the European Union. The separation of powers In order to assess this question we first have to consider what the doctrine of separation of powers actually is. The idea was developed by the French jurist Montesquieu in the 18th Century. It is based on a division of power between the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Each institution have their distinct and largelyRead MoreThe Separation of Powers Doctrine Essay1040 Words   |  5 PagesThe Separation of Powers Doctrine The Separation of Powers Doctrine can be traced as far back as ancient Greece and essentially the meaning attributed to it is the dividing functions of government between groups with different interests, so that no power in the centre can act without the cooperation of others. However there are many interpretations of the doctrine, one being that of Aristotle, who favoured the division of power according to class interests of the

The Libertarian Philosophy That Robert Nozick Advocates

The Libertarian Philosophy that Robert Nozick advocates in his seminal works Anarchy, State and Utopia delves deeply into the concepts of distributive justice and equality we, humanity, are entitled to. Nozick emphasises the effectiveness of the minimal state as a political system that is successful in ensuring the traditional libertarian view of negative liberty that secures what Nozick believes to be our inalienable rights. Quite clearly Nozick is a supporter of minimal interference from a governing body over people as it infringes on their ability to live freely. Whilst, ‘taxation is on a par with forced labour,’ can be initially interpreted as a bold and sweeping statement is in fact, once evaluated in relation to the libertarian view†¦show more content†¦In Nozick’s opinion there is no need for a welfare state. Nozick argues that interference from the state is detrimental to the liberty of the individual. In his famous thought experiment from Anarchy, State and Utopia, he expresses in a very convincing way that taxation can in fact be equalled to forced labour. The properly basic belief Nozick holds is that to take n amount of money earned from an individual is equal to taking n number of hours from the same individual. For Nozick, they equate to the same value. This is because when an individual chooses to work a greater number of hours to receive an income more than that needed for them to live sufficiently they choose to do this so they may indulge in extra goods such as clothing, holiday’s and costly luxuries. In contrast, there are others who prefer to spend less time gaining an income and instead like to spend more time enjoying leisure. This is just the nature of society, some are driven by wealth and the possibility of gaining extra goods whilst others desire to work less and enjoy their own leisure. However, if we were to take away an individual’s right to enjoy their own leisure for them to work a greater number of hours because of the requirement to support the needy we would consider this an unjustifiable act of forced labour as we have violated their right to choose how they spend their own time. Yet when we require taxes from an individual who earnsShow MoreRelatedTheories of Justice3826 Words   |  16 Pagesindividual rights. Libertarian Justice This form of justice promotes liberty, each person living as they please, free from interference of others. Libertarian justice totally rejects utilitarianisms concern for total social well-being. The Libertarian believes that as long as you are not doing something that interferes with anyone elses liberty, then no one including government should disturb you in living the life you choose, regardless of maximizing social happiness. Libertarian justice consistsRead MoreAnalysis Of Ethical Ideologies By Jeremy Bentham1748 Words   |  7 Pagesoffers an example of a situation that compares the two versions of utilitarianism: in a community, a large group of people is protesting against a certain religion that a smaller portion of that community practices. In this situation, Bentham would advocate abolishing that religion in order to enhance utility. However, Mill would argue that in the long run, it would be harmful towards that community to suppress any attempts of individuality. It wo uld be a wiser course of action to respect the individualRead MoreMarx And The Capitalist System1186 Words   |  5 Pageseasily surrendered. I would now like to discuss another theory of political philosophy that is quite different to Marxism and that is Libertarianism. Libertarianism carries with it the ideal that each and every person should have absolute freedom to live their lives in any manner they see fit so long as one person’s freedom does not infringe upon the rights of another’s. This generally means that most Libertarians advocate for a minimalist government on the basis that it should have no say whatsoeverRead MoreThe Role of Justice in Society2403 Words   |  10 Pagestreated alike. For one to exhibit justice, one must portray the quality of being fair and reasonable in all situations. While egalitarians evaluate justice based on equality, utilitarians are only interested in justice as a means to an end. Smart advocates the principle of utility, which defines the morally action as whatever produces the greatest net happiness for everyone affected by that act. To identify an act as ‘just , Rawls employs the theory of justice as fairness. This theory stresses theRead More The Role of Justice in Society Essay2374 Words   |  10 Pagestreated alike. For one to exhibit justice, one must portray the quality of being fair and reasonable in all situations. While egalitarians evaluate justice based on equality, utilitarians are only interested in justice as a means to an end. Smart advocates the principle of utility, which defines the morally action as whatever produces the greatest net happiness for everyone affected by that act. To identify an act as ‘just,’ Rawls employs the theory of justice as fairness. This theory stresses theRead MoreThe Issue Of Distributive Justice2521 Words   |  11 Pageslibertarianism. An example of this can be seen in libertarian philosopher Robert Nozick, who embraced the opposite of Marx’s economic philosophy stating â€Å"from each as they choose, to each as they are chosen† (Heffernan 117). However, this id eology of extreme economic libertarianism does not lend itself to a meritocratic society and can result in societal harm that is just as destructive as the opposite extreme. A system such as that which Nozick advocates allows families to pass down wealth and betweenRead MoreThe Right Of The Group, Government And Equitable Treatment1857 Words   |  8 Pagesplutocratic, are barred from equitable status and representation under the social contract of the current political landscape. Due to all of these historical events or current systems being motivated and driven primarily by economic incentive, I advocate that these peoples are denied their seat at the table in addressing modifications to constraints of the current contract by the economic defenses entrenched in its current incarnation. The aforementioned notion of Justice, however, has a flawedRead MoreCustomer Perception on Buying House5873 Words   |  24 Pagesreversibility. A very different view of rights is based on the work of libertarian philosophers such as Robert Nozick. They claim that freedom from constraint is necessarily good, and that all constraints imposed on one by others are necessary evils, except when they prevent even greater human constraints. The only basic right we all possess is the negative right to be free from the coercion of other human beings. Libertarians may pass too quickly over the fact that the freedom of one person necessarilyRead MoreLiberal Perspective of a State7979 Words   |  32 Pagesthat rulers were subject to the consent of the governed, and that private individuals had a fundamental right to life, liberty, and property. The revolutionaries in the American Revolution and the French Revolution used liberal philosophy to justify the armed overthrow of tyrannical rule. The nineteenth century saw liberal governments established in nations across Europe, Latin America, and North America. Liberal ideas spread even further in the twentieth century, when liberal democracies

Entrepreneurship Versus Intrapreneurship free essay sample

This paper provides a review of theoretical studies on the concepts of entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship, pinpointing the similarities and differences between them. Entrepreneurship continues to thrive in almost all corners of the world. Entrepreneurs are reshaping the business environment, creating a world in which their companies play an important role in the vitality of the global economy. But there is not always necessary to establish a company in order to implement new ideas. A great potential lies in applying business principles within existing organizations. Keywords: entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, human capital, business, leadership JEL classification: L26 Introduction Why are entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs suddenly more important today than before? An explanation to this question would be that the world is changing nowadays more rapidly under the influence of new technologies. The increasing competition hinders our work. It does not suffice anymore to stand before our competitors simply driven by our will of competing; we have to bring something new to the market. Entrepreneurs and intrapreneurs play a decisive role as they help the company (newly established or existing) to engage in new business and enter new markets. Intrapreneurship represent the initiation and implementation of innovative systems and practices within an organization, by some of its staff under the supervision of a manager who takes the role of an intrapreneur, in order to improve the economical performance of the organization, by using a part of its resources, namely those that previously have not been used in an appropriate manner. Intrapreneurship improves the economical and financial performance of the company, by applying a more efficient use of the resources and by using a suitable motivational system for its employees (Istocescu, 2003). Similarities and differences between entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship Unlike the entrepreneur, the intrapreneur acts within an existing organization. The intrapreneur is the revolutionary inside the organization, who fights for change and renewal from within the system. This may give rise to conflicts within the organization, so respect is the necessary key in order to channel these conflicts and transform them into positive aspects for the organization. Even though intrapreneurs benefit from using the resources of the organization for the implementation of the emerging opportunities, there are several motives why innovation is more difficult to implement in an existing organization, such as (Malek Ilbach, 2004): †¢ The size: the bigger the organization the more difficult it is to have an overview of the actions of every employee †¢ Lack of communication: Specialization and separation, help in concentrating on the areas of interest, but hinder communication. Internal competition: Internal competition amplifies the problem because instead of sharing the knowledge with others it borders the knowledge sharing. Everyone wants to keep the information for themselves. †¢ Feedback received in case of success/mistake: Costs in case of failure are too great and the reward for a successful outcome too small. Intrapreneurs must be allowed to commit mistakes, because such mistakes are an inevitable part in the entrepreneurial proc ess. The recognition of success is also very rare. No company provides payment in advance for what an entrepreneur might accomplish, but a lot of them like to talk about the concept of intapreneurship and expected their employees to get involved and assume their risk. But finally, when motivated employees get involves and have success their only reward is a small bonus. †¢ Dullness: Many companies are slow and reluctant to change. Intrapreneurs bump many times into the well known sentence â€Å"We always did it this way†, which leaves little or no space to creativity. The willingness to try new things appears only when the companys shortcomings become apparent, but even so they don’t give room to an innovative leadership. †¢ Hierarchies: Organizational hierarchies compel employees to ask permission for actions that fall outside their daily duties. The more complex the hierarchy the more difficult it is to impose change. Hierarchies 972 Volume 12, Issue 5, December 2011 Review of International Comparative Management have also tended to create a short-term thinking. Employees on lower hierarchical levels have a â€Å"Victim-Mentality† due to a reduced area of action and reduced responsibilities. Those who wish to implement innovative ideas should first consider what the best option for them is: as an intrapreneur, as part of an existing organization, or an entrepreneur in a newly established company. In order to give an answer to this question an analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of both concepts is required. The table below helps someone decide what type of business best suits him after confronting him with the advantages and disadvantages that await him. Table 1: Entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship: advantages and disadvantages ENTREPRENEURSHIP Advantages Disadvantages You are your own boss independency †¢ Money pressure – giving up on the security of a regular paycheck The income increases †¢ Less benefits as the business is new You have the chance to be original You have part of excitement and adventure †¢ Long working hours †¢ Mistakes are magnified There are a lot of possibilities Salary potential – you decide upon your †¢ All decisions must be made alone own salary INTRAPRENEURSHIP Advantages Disadvantages Ability to stay in a friendly, well known †¢ Reward may not be up to expectation environment †¢ Innovation may not be appreciated Practicing your skills within an organizaaccordingly tion – lower risk †¢ You can be innovative but to a cerUsing companies resources, good name, tain limit – you are not your own knowledge boss Access to customers, infrastructur e †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ After seeing the pros and the cons of each concept we think that it is useful to see also the similarities and differences between these two concepts. Morris Kuratko (2002) are of the opinion that the literature is sometimes confusing in underlining what exactly makes an entrepreneur different from an intrapreneur and what they have in common. This is why they point out a serious a similarities and differences: Review of International Comparative Management Volume 12, Issue 5, December 2011 973 Table 2: Entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship: similarities and differences †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ Similarities Both involve opportunity recognition and definition. Both require a unique business concept that takes the form of a product, process, or service. Both are driven by an individual champion who works with a team to bring the concept to fruition. Both require that the entrepreneur be able to balance vision with managerial skill, passion with pragmatism, and proactiveness with patience. Both involve concepts that are most vulnerable in the formative stage, and that require adaptation over time. Both entail a window of opportunity within which the concept can be successfully capitalized upon. Both are predicated on value creation and accountability to a customer. Both entail risk and require risk management strategies. Both require the entrepreneur to develop creative strategies for leveraging resources. Both involve significant ambiguity. Both require harvesting strategies. Differences †¢ In start-up entrepreneurship, the entrepreneur takes the risk in intrapreneurship and the company takes the risk other than career-related risk. In start-up the individual entrepreneur owns the concept and business in intrapreneurship; the company typically owns the concept and intellectual rights with the individual entrepreneur having little or no equity in the venture at all. †¢ In a start-up potential rewards for the individual entrepreneur are theoretically unlimited where in intrapreneurship an organizational structure is in place to limit rewards/compensation to the entrepreneur/employee. †¢ In a start-up venture, one strategic gaffe could mean instant failure; in intrapreneurship the organization has more flexibility for management errors. †¢ In a start-up the entrepreneur is subject or more susceptible to outside influences; in intrapreneurship the organization is more insulated from outside forces or influence. †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ †¢ Source: MorrisKuratko, 2000 Other famous authors have also pinpointed some differences between entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship. Even though intrapreneurship is rooted in entrepreneurship (Amo Kolvereid, 2005; Antoncic, 2001; Davis, 1999; Honig, 2001), there are several differences between these two concepts. In this context Antoncic Hisrich (2003) note that while intrapreneurs make risky decisions by using the resources of the company, the entrepreneurs make risky decisions using their own resources (Antoncic Hisrich, 2003). Intrapreneurship takes place among employees from within an organization while entrepreneurship tends to mainly be externally focused (Antoncic Hisrich, 2003; Davis, 1999). Entrepreneurs prefer to develop tacit knowledge, in new organizations, instead of using procedures and mechanisms from other companies. On the other hand intrapreneurs work in organizations that have their own policies, procedures and bureaucracy (Antoncic Hisrich, 2003; Davis, 1999). 974 Volume 12, Issue 5, December 2011 Review of International Comparative Management Although there are several differences between entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship, they also have some connections because intrapreneurship is consistently positioned as entrepreneurship within organizations (Antoncic, 2001; Davis, 1999). Conclusions In this paper we have reviewed the literature, which explores both entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship and the relations between them. An important outcome of the review is the identification of the similarities and differences between entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship and also the advantages and disadvantages of both concepts. Nowadays, when we are facing economically difficult times, entrepreneurship and inrapreneurship are an excellent tool for breaking out of the trend trough innovation, by bringing something new on the market. Both entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship are instruments of innovation that help in creating new competencies and accessing new markets. Finally, without developing the insight towards these various aspects, no change of the company can be realized, and changing, so adapting means in fact, the survival of that company.