The Usurped Powers of the Senate

1906 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Maurice Low
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Constitutional Government ◽  
Legislative Authority ◽  
The People ◽  
The Federalist ◽  
The Government ◽  
As If

A century of constitutional government in the United States has served to emphasize the wisdom of Hamilton's warning of “the tendency of the legislative authority to absorb every other.” He clearly foresaw and attempted to guard against, dangers that today are only too apparent. “In governments purely republican,” he wrote, “this tendency is almost irresistible. The representatives of the people, in a popular assembly, seem sometimes to fancy that they are the people themselves, and betray strong symptoms of impatience and disgust at the least sign of opposition from any other quarter; as if the exercise of its rights, by either the executive or the judiciary, were a breach of their privilege and an outrage to their dignity. They often appear disposed to exert an imperious control over the other departments; and, as they commonly have the people on their side, they always act with such momentum as to make it very difficult for the other members of the government to maintain the balance of the Constitution.”Never did human ingenuity devise a more nicely balanced system of government than when the framers of the Constitution allocated to the executive and to the legislature the exercise of powers not to be infringed by the other; but like many things human the intent has been perverted. Every person familiar with the Constitution, the debates in the convention, and the writings of Madison, Hamilton, and Jay in The Federalist, must know that the purpose of the framers of the Constitution was to create a system of government by which the President should become neither the creature nor the controller of the legislature; and by vesting certain exclusive powers in the popular branch and certain other powers in the Senate to provide that the line of demarcation between the two houses should not be overstepped.

Explorer without a country: the question of Vilhjalmur Stefansson's citizenship

Polar Record ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 45 (3) ◽  
pp. 237-241
Author(s):  
Janice Cavell ◽  
Jeff Noakes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Canadian Arctic ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Dual Citizenship ◽  
American Citizen ◽  
American Citizenship ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Government

ABSTRACTConfusion has long existed on the subject of Vilhjalmur Stefansson's citizenship. A Canadian (that is, a British subject) by birth, Stefansson was brought up and educated in the United States. When his father became an American citizen in 1887, according to the laws of the time Stefansson too became an American. Dual citizenship was not then permitted by either the British or the American laws. Therefore, Stefansson was no longer a British subject. After he took command of the government sponsored Canadian Arctic Expedition in 1913, Stefansson was careful to give the impression that his status had never changed. Although Stefansson swore an oath of allegiance to King George V in May 1913, he did not take the other steps that would have been required to restore him to being Canadian. But, by an American act passed in 1907, this oath meant the loss of Stefansson's American citizenship. In the 1930s American officials informed Stefansson that he must apply for naturalisation in order to regain it. From 1913 until he received his American citizenship papers in 1937, Stefansson was a man without a country.

Text of Resolution Which Entered the United States into World War

1917 ◽  
Vol 85 (17) ◽  
pp. 455-456
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
World War ◽  
German Government ◽  
The People ◽  
Successful Termination ◽  
The World ◽  
The Government

The following is the text of the resolutions which officially entered the United States into the world war:— “Whereas the imperial German government has committed repeated acts of war against the government and the people of the United States of America; therefore be it “Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the imperial German government, which has thus been thrust upon the United States, is hereby formally declared; and that the President be and he is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the government to carry on war against the imperial German government; and to bring the conflict to a successful termination all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States.”

scholarly journals Book Review | George Will’s Conservatism and Democracy in Crisis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Direct Democracy ◽  
The United States ◽  
James Madison ◽  
American Government ◽  
Federalist Papers ◽  
The Federalist ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Federalist Papers

Americans typically view the United States as a democracy and are rightly proud of that. Of course, as those of a more precise nature, along with smug college students enrolled in introductory American government classes, are quick to point out, the United States is technically a republic. This is a bit too clever by half since James Madison, in The Federalist Papers, defined a republic the way most people think of a democracy—a system of representative government with elections: “[The]… difference between a Democracy and a Republic are, first the delegation of the Government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest.” What the framers thought of as democracy is today referred to as direct democracy, the belief that citizens should have more direct control over governing. The Athenian assembly was what the framers, Madison in particular, saw as the paragon of direct democracy—and as quite dangerous. While direct democracy has its champions, most Americans equate democracy with electing officials to do the business of government.

Concepts of Government

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Temin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Dark Skin ◽  
Dual Economy ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government

This chapter describes three concepts of government. Democracy is the government of, for and by the people. It provides services to all its members and insures them against a variety of risks, ranging from bankruptcy to the accident of being born poor and with a dark skin. Autarchy is government by a person or family that takes care of itself with little or no concern for the rest of the population. Oligarchy stands in between these extremes and varies by the size of the oligarchy. The United States in the 19th century was the uneasy combination of a demographic North and an oligarchic South. The country approached democracy in the 20th century, but this trajectory reversed after 1970, leading to an oligarchic dual economy.

American Democracy Reconsidered: Part I

1973 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. J. Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Government ◽  
The State ◽  
City Government ◽  
State Governments ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
The One

In his celebrated study of American democracy written in 1888, Lord Bryce reserved his most condemnatory reflections for city government and in a muchquoted passage asserted: ‘There is no denying that the government of cities is the one conspicuous failure of the United States. The deficiencies of the National government tell but little for evil on the welfare of the people. The faults of the State governments are insignificant compared with the extravagance, corruption and mismanagement which mark the administration of most of the great cities'sangeetha.

Basic U. S. Sources For Current Research In International Law: An Elementary Vade-Mecum

1977 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adolf Sprudzs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Intergovernmental Organizations ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Many ◽  
The U.S

Among the many old and new actors on the international stage of nations the United States is one of the most active and most important. The U.S. is a member of most existing intergovernmental organizations, participates in hundreds upon hundreds of international conferences and meetings every year and, in conducting her bilateral and multilateral relations with the other members of the community of nations, contributes very substantially to the development of contemporary international law. The Government of the United States has a policy of promptly informing the public about developments in its relations with other countries through a number of documentary publication, issued by the Department of State

Allied Commission for Austria

1948 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 387-388
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Electric Power ◽  
Educational System ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Civil Aviation ◽  
System Control ◽  
Government Functions ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Government

On January 16,1948, the United States High Commissioner for Austria (Keyes) proposed to the other members of the Allied Commission the restoration to the Austrian Government of numerous controls previously exercised by the Commission. To assist the Austrian Government in assuming such controls as soon as possible, the United States suggested that the Directorates of the Commission examine the controls within their spheres of authority and decide which might be passed to the government. Functions suggested for transfer under the United States proposal included: civil aviation; allocation of food and electric power; control of the movement and distribution of indigenous food supplies; control over travel into and out of Austria; administration of the educational system; control of the operation, arming and equipping of Austrian police and frontier control agencies; and internal and international communications. The United States also proposed a reduction of occupation costs and occupation forces and the abolition of censorship.

Permanent Officials in the National Administration of the United States

1927 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 529-536
Author(s):  
Frank O. Lowden
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Other ◽  
Government Official ◽  
Business Organization ◽  
Constant Friction ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Serious Injury ◽  
The Government

The tendency of all government is toward bureaucracy. The government official is inclined to exaggerate the importance of his office. He is constantly tempted to expand its scope. He is properly jealous of his authority. He looks askance upon the activities of other officials who seem to be trespassing upon his ground. In his construction of the law he is prone to insist upon the letter which killeth but to overlook the spirit which giveth life.I think that this tendency is inevitable. It is inseparable from zeal and pride, and these qualities are essential to successful administration. Where, however, the enterprise is a vast one, as in government, or as in a great business organization, these tendencies, if left uncontrolled, are likely to inflict serious injury upon the service. There will be constant friction among the various subdivisions of the particular department. At times the activities of one will neutralize the activities of the other. A set of arbitrary rules is likely to be evolved which will vex everyone who comes in contact with the particular bureau. The original purpose of the creation of the bureau is finally lost sight of, and it is likely to seem to those who direct it an end and not a means.

The Special Diplomatic Mission of the United States to the Provisional Government of Russia

1917 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 757-762
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Chief Executive ◽  
The United States ◽  
The People ◽  
The Government ◽  
Free People

The mission for which I have the honor to speak is charged by the Government and the people of the United States of America with a message to the Government and the people of Russia.The mission comes from a democratic republic. Its members are commissioned and instructed by a President who holds his high office as Chief Executive of more than one hundred million free people, by virtue of a popular election in which more than eighteen million votes were freely cast and fairly counted, pursuant to law, by universal, equal, direct and secret suffrage.

Security Council

1957 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 497-504
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Security Council ◽  
The United States ◽  
Suez Canal ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Government ◽  
Egyptian Government

At the request of the United States, the Council met on April 26 to resume consideration of the Suez question. The Council had before it an Egyptian declaration on the Suez Canal and the arrangements for its operation, dated April 24, in which the government of Egypt announced that the Canal was again open for normal traffic. The declaration on arrangements for its operation comprised the following ten points: 1) The terms and the spirit of the Constantinople Convention of 1888 were reaffirmed, the Egyptian government declaring its intention to respect, observe and implement them; 2) While reaffirming its determination to respect the terms and spirit of the 1888 Convention and to abide by the Charter and the principles and purposes of the UN, the government of Egypt was confident that the other signatories of the said Convention and all others concerned would be guided by the same resolve; 3) The government of Egypt was more particularly determined a) to afford and maintain free and uninterrupted navigation for all nations within the limits of and in accordance with the provisions of the 1888 Convention; b) that tolls should continue to be levied in accordance with the last agreement, concluded on April 28, 1956, between Egypt and the Suez Canal Maritime Company, and that any increase in the current rate of tolls within any twelve months, if it took place, should be limited to 1 percent, any increase beyond that level to be the result of negotiations, and, failing agreement, to be settled by arbitration according to the procedure set forth in paragraph 7(b) of the declaration; and c) that the Canal would be maintained and developed in accordance with the progressive requirements of modern navigation and that such maintenance and development should include the eighth and ninth programs of the Suez Canal Maritime Company, with such improvements to them as were considered necessary

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document