Cathy James Madison in Federalist 51 makes a stark statement about human beings “If men were angels, there would be no need for government….’ This is precisely why there was such a focus on establishing checks and balances (Executive/Legislature/Judiciary) in the Constitution.)
There were no ‘political parties’ when Washington was elected…
Cathy James Madison in Federalist 51 makes a stark statement about human beings “If men were angels, there would be no need for government….’ This is precisely why there was such a focus on establishing checks and balances (Executive/Legislature/Judiciary) in the Constitution.)
There were no ‘political parties’ when Washington was elected president. Washington, in dealing with Hamilton/Jefferson food fights, expressed great fear of political factions. Gradually political parties evolved, at times splitting [the Republican Party was created from remnants of the Whig and American Party in the 1850s.]
Historically, checks-and-balances has been a teeter board, at times with the legislature dominant and, more frequently with a president pushing the constitutional envelope. On occasion, the Supreme Court upsets the ‘constitutional balance.’ The current Supreme Court majority seems as historically out of step as the “Dred Scott’ SC of the 1850s and the SC that FDR inherited in 1933.
Cathy James Madison in Federalist 51 makes a stark statement about human beings “If men were angels, there would be no need for government….’ This is precisely why there was such a focus on establishing checks and balances (Executive/Legislature/Judiciary) in the Constitution.)
There were no ‘political parties’ when Washington was elected president. Washington, in dealing with Hamilton/Jefferson food fights, expressed great fear of political factions. Gradually political parties evolved, at times splitting [the Republican Party was created from remnants of the Whig and American Party in the 1850s.]
Historically, checks-and-balances has been a teeter board, at times with the legislature dominant and, more frequently with a president pushing the constitutional envelope. On occasion, the Supreme Court upsets the ‘constitutional balance.’ The current Supreme Court majority seems as historically out of step as the “Dred Scott’ SC of the 1850s and the SC that FDR inherited in 1933.