The US Constitution was born amidst the uncertainty and the instability that the Articles of Confederation could not correct. In crafting the set of “institutional arrangements of government” (Lowi et al 2015, p. 40), which was believed to result in the strengthening the union of the various states that the Articles were not able to do, the framers had to tread a delicate balance between state independence and federal government power. Their deliberation of the document was largely underpinned by lessons from past historic experiences that underscored the weaknesses of the Articles. In crafting the Constitution, there were several key principles that the framers relied upon to come up with a balanced fundamental law of all of the United States. Two of these key principles are separation of powers or the principle of checks and balances and federalism.
SEPARATION OF POWERS
The principle of separation of powers more popularly known as the checks and balances principle is one of the key principle of the US Constitution. Although not exactly laid down in the Constitution, it is an underlying principle that is behind the way with which the governmental power is distributed. The purpose behind this principle is to prevent a state of tyranny in which one person or one group in the government has too power in his or its hands that could be used to stymie the people or the states. In such an arrangement, a mechanism is embedded in the system in which one department can limit the power wielded by the other or other. Thus, the US Constitution created three government departments – the Executive under Article II, the Legislative under Article I and the Judiciary under Article III. Each of these departments are given broad powers, but the powers that each has are always subject to the exercise by the others of their respective powers.
The principle of separation of powers or checks and balances is manifest from the way the powers of one department can be used to check on the other or other departments. The Executive Department, for example, enforces the law, but it cannot on its own pass laws and neither can it interpret the laws. Passing laws is the function of the Legislature and the Judiciary, headed by the US Supreme Court, has the power to interpret the laws. In this sense, no one department of the government has monopoly where laws are concerned and, thus, is deprive from the opportunity of using the laws to its advantage and impose its will on the people. In addition, although the Executive Department holds the revenues and spends them to maintain the nation, its disbursement of funds is subject to the approval of the Legislature, which must pass the general appropriations bill or the budget of the government every year. The Legislature, on the other hand, has the power to pass laws, but the members of the Senate and the House of Representatives cannot do this so that they can take advantage of the laws they pass because they cannot enforce the laws nor decide on their constitutionality. As a matter of fact, the President can veto the law that they pass and the Judiciary can strike down such law as a violation of the Constitution. Similarly, the Judiciary is prevented from holding too much power against all the other branches of the government, as it cannot initiate actions on governmental matters its own, but can subject them only to a review to determine their Constitutionality, but only if a complaint is filed against such actions.
FEDERALISM
While separation of powers refer to the power relations between and among the three main branches of the federal government – the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary – the principle of federalism, on the other hand, refers to the sharing of powers between the federal government, on one hand, and the states on the other. Just like the principle of separation of powers, federalism as a concept became an issue in the drafting of the Constitution because the American experience showed that leaving the states to be completely autonomous was disastrous as was illustrated in several incidents, such as Shay’s Rebellion and Rhode Islands’ radicalism. Federalism allows the centralization of pertinent powers that would keep the states in harmony at the same time limiting such powers to a certain point preventing the national government from abusing it and imposing a tyrannical rule. The principle of federalism, thus, takes into account two sovereigns: the federal government, on one hand, and the states, on the other. The result is that although the federal government is given enough powers, which all states must comply with, the states also retain powers necessary to make them autonomous from the federal government.
In drafting the Constitution, there were issues that became contentious relative to federalism. These issues include representation, the threat of tyranny and governmental power. Representation became an issue because in a federalist government, true representation is not achievable. On the other hand, the threat of tyranny became an issue because of the argument that placing the powers in the hands of the few could lead to abuse of power. Finally, the issue of governmental powers was about the extent of power that should be given to the federal government. In the end, however, the framers overcame their differences and decided that the principle of federalism should be an important aspect of the US Constitution.
CONCLUSION
The principles of separation of powers and checks and balances are two important aspects of the US Constitution. These principles ensure that US lives under a fully functional democratic system of government ensuring that no branch of the government has too much power and impose tyranny and that the federal government has enough power to secure the compliance and the unity of the states without depriving the latter of their autonomy.
Reference
Lowi, T., Ginsberg, B., Shepsle, K. and Ansolabehere, S. (2015). American Government: Power and Purpose, Core 13 Ed. with 2014 Election Update. New York, NY: W.W. Norton Press.
