All seems good, compatriot Kifeas but still I found no answer for what type of checks and balances we need. What powers will the President and vice-President vested. Lately, in hope of finding some useful info I'm reading about the mechanisms of checks and balances of various countries. Here's some of them I found interesting...
Checks and Balances?
Nope, Runaway Capitalism!
American capitalism has developed into a monster where even the president can be bought by rich corporations and an administration can have such close and lucrative ties to business that had the same occurred anywhere else, the government would long ago have been dragged to court on charges of corruption. The president's family ties to oil/armament companies and the vice president's ties to oil/construction business are such that they are in no position to make any decisions involving those companies. They are disqualified! Yet they award them government contracts worth billions. The amazing thing is that the citizens of the country don't scream in outrage. In Iran the leaders would be behind bars for corruption. In Libya, Denmark, Switzerland, Namibia, China and Chile too. In the USA they sign laws and order invasions. Those checks and balances that are supposed to stop government corruption seem these days to be bank checks and company balance sheets and nothing else. In the country that plans to force capitalism on the world under the name "democracy", there's few members of the administration who are not at least halfway into the pockets of private business.
http://www.skog.de/enchecks.htmProtect Your Rights: Support Our System of Checks and Balances
You know that Senate Democrats are the last line of defense against Republican efforts to pack our federal courts with reactionary judges who threaten to turn back the clock on decades of progress in communities across our nation.
Now, however, the system of checks and balances that gives Democrats the ability to provide balance to the Republican agenda is under attack. We must defend it.
By signing the statement below, you'll be telling George Bush that you are part of this all-important battle against his most extreme judicial nominations. You are also telling Senate Republicans that they can't make up new Senate rules because they don't like the way the current rules apply to their judicial nominations.
We know what's at stake and we're not willing to allow extreme judicial nominees to roll back all of our hard-won advances on basic constitutional rights.
http://action.dscc.org/campaign/balanceThe main strength of the system of representative democracy is that it makes provision, through the Constitution, law and political institutions, for limitations on the powers which are exercised by governmental authorities as well as by private associations and groups. It provides institutional checks and balances.
The essence of the system is not democracy but representative democracy and a system of checks and balances on those exercising power. "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." The incidence of the abuse of power cannot be eliminated but an attempt is made through the representative democratic system and its institutions to reduce the extent of the abuse of power. This is done through a number of devices and in various ways.
The existence of a system of fair elections which are not manipulated by the party in power, held periodically in an atmosphere of free speech, is the first factor. It is important that governments, when voted out, hand over power willingly and peacefully. Periodic elections ensure that members of government, knowing that they must face the people in the future, must be more responsive to the people's will, than in a system where they do not have to face elections.
An elected government should be restricted by the constitution and the law. It must function within the constitution and the law. An independent judiciary is vital in this context to ensure that government operates in accordance with the law and not in accordance with the arbitrary whims and fancies of those exercising power.
Government operates at many levels. Power is not centralised but distributed. An elected President or Prime Minister is at the apex, followed by ministers, members of parliament, civil servants, state governments and parliaments (in the case of federations), local government officials and so on. This operates as a restraint on the abuse of power. This is the theory of checks and balances, which was first given a strong theoretical base by Montesquieu and Hume.
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/cooray/btof/chap4iv.htmPolitical constitutions are incomplete contracts and, therefore, leave room for abuse of power. In democracies, elections are the primary mechanism for disciplining public officials, but they are not sufficient. Separation of powers between executive and legislative bodies also helps to prevent the abuse of power, but only with appropriate checks and balances. Checks and balances work by creating a conflict of interest between the executive and the legislature, yet requiring both bodies to agree on public policy. In this way, the two bodies discipline each other to the voters' advantage. Under appropriate checks and balances, separation of power helps the voters elicit information. Copyright 1997, the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/qjecon/v11 ... -1202.html
) and also once the economical level will rise higher than it is currently, more TCs who emigrated in the past, will begin returning back. That means that the TC population within the TCCS will keep increasing.
)
