Separation of Powers and the System of Checks and Balances
Separation of Powers and the System of Checks and Balances
A significant aspect of the American Political System, and one I consider the most important, is the system of checks and balances. This concept is rooted in the classical theory of separation of powers, by which the legislative, executive, and judicial powers of government were vested in three different units. The purpose of this, and of the later development of checks and balances, was to ensure that governmental power would not be used in an abusive manner.
Classical political philosophers from Aristotle onward favored a "mixed" government combining the elements of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. The English theorist James Harrington in his “Oceana” (1656) derived a theory akin to separation of powers from the old idea of mixed government. Later, John Locke, in his second treatise “Of Civil Government” (1690), urged that the best way to avoid a perverted government was to provide constitutionally for separation of the legislative and executive powers. Montesquieu, in his “Spirit of the Laws” (1748), added the third power of the judiciary to this concept, and the modern expression of separation of powers came into being.
The framers of the U.S. Constitution were strongly influenced by the advantages of separation of powers and of checks and balances. These theories had been in practice in the governments of the American colonies, and they underlie the fundamental laws of the United States. The Constitution distinctly separates the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. The federal system adds to the checking because power is divided constitutionally between the central government and the states. Further, the constitutional provisions for direct election of members of both houses of Congress and virtually direct election of the president puts two branches of the government under check of the electorate.
However, procedural requirements in the Constitution ensure that even measures popular with the voters cannot be adopted without presumably adequate consideration. The operation of checks and balances in the federal government is spelled out in the Constitution. The two houses of Congress legislate separately, and this legislation is subject to presidential veto; however, Congress, by a two thirds vote of each house, can override a presidential veto. The judicial branch, in determining cases, may declare legislation unconstitutional, but the judiciary itself is subject to executive and legislative checking through the appointment of judges and the passage of legislation...