Majority floor leader decides when the whole senate

This preview shows page 15 - 17 out of 17 pages.

majority floor leader decides when the whole Senate will consider the bill. Floor action, the Bill is debated, and amendments may be added. If a majority votes in favor of the bill, it is returned to the House. Conference Committee, If the House rejects any of the changes, the bill goes to a conference committee of members from both houses. It works out a compromise. Vote on Compromise, both houses must approve changes made by the conference committee. If approved, the bill goes to the President. Presidential action the president may sign (approve) the bill or (reject) it. If approved, it becomes law. Vote to override, if the president vetoes the bill, it can still become law if two thirds of both houses vote to override the veto. The legislative process needs to be reformed. Thousands of bills are introduced every session and most of them die at any one of eleven points. As a result, many good bills
never reach the floor for a full debate and bad legislation can surface without public knowledge or input. Only insiders and those paid to work the system really understand the legislative process. As a result, these legislators and lobbyists can easily manipulate it to their advantage. Citizens are often left out or have minimal impact on the legislative process. While some legislators and political pundits may argue that our current system works well, I believe that it results in, A gap between policy makers and citizens; A tendency to cater to special interests, rather than the public good; and Increased cynicism towards government and a distrust of public officials. There is a better way to do the people's business. I strongly believe that public policy should be grounded in principles, not politics. Question 32 Not yet graded / 20 pts Some people argue that the Supreme Court should pursue the doctrine of "original intent" (strict constructionist) while some contend that the Court must look at the Constitution in terms of the twenty-first century and the conditions of the modern world.Write an essay on the topic of original intent versus judicial activism and the influence of moral views in rulings. Include in your essay the definition of each term, examples of each in court decisions, and conclude with your views on the issue. Your Answer: Yet, in the broader context of American history, the attitudes of the court deserve more sympathy, even from those of us who disagree with many of its rulings. This context revolves around both the issue of race, the great stain on American history, and the specific genesis of the recent spate of judicial activism. As recently as the mid-20th century, a hundred years after the war to eradicate the stain, an American black coming of age could by no means expect to be judged by individual merit; exceptional individuals aside, his race would be a handicap. Although society had by then made crucial efforts to curtail discrimination, those efforts had been frustrated by abuse of one of our institutions, the right of unlimited debate in the U.S. Senate. There, the filibuster had become not a right of debate but a legislative veto.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture