By laws
By laws
The executive branch has very limited powers to make what might be considered laws, usually in the form of executive orders or by means specifically delegated by other laws passed by Congress, and the President may veto laws passed by Congress.
Executive Branch. If you get all of the Agriculture, EPA, IRS, and other agencies that is controlled under the executive branch, then you might now how many people are employed compared to legislative that holds about 500 officials.
oh my gawd my but hurts
The Executive Branch and the Judicial Branch can grant pardons in the United States. It is usually a governor of a state who will grant a pardon for a person who is incarcerated. The President of the United States might also grant pardons.
Both the executive and the judicial branches. But at least there was what you might call an executive branch - although it worked very differently from the way the US Presidency functions - but the Romans did not have a separate, independently functioning Judicial branch. So that is very probably the one you are looking for.
Some checks and balances the Executive branch has on the other branches are: Over the Legislative branch: The President must approve of legislation the Legislative Branch has passed before that legislation becomes effective. If the President vetoes that legislation, the Legislative Branch may still pass the legislation, but it now must be by a majority of 2/3 of each house of Congress, instead of the usual simple majority. Another is that while Congress passes the laws, it is the Executive Branch that carries them out. Without the Executive branch's co-operation, the actions of the Legislative branch might not have any effect. Over the Judicial Branch: The President is the one who chooses the people who are to be the judges and justices of the Judicial Branch. In addition, the Executive Branch through its police power is the branch which enforces the judgments of the Judicial branch. Again, without the co-operation of the Executive Branch, the actions of the Judicial Branch might have no effect.
Because one might be stronger than the others :) i got this answer right so i know u will to
The Framers seemed to believe that the person elected to the presidency would have the ability to set up an organization that would work for the benefit of both the President and the country. They also seemed to recognize that the needs of the executive branch would change, and that overly descriptive rules in the Constitution might hinder flexibility later on.
A federalist was a person who want power removed from the states to the national government, wanted the three branch government style that we use today, wanted a single person to head the the executive branch, and also wanted the US Constitution to pass and go into effect, an anti-federalist was a person who wanted political powers to stay within the states, wanted the legislature to have more power than the executive branch, feared of one leader for the executive branch, because he might try to become a king or tyrant, wanted a Bill of Rights to be added to the constitution, this did happen, and wanted the constitution changed before it passed; these views were argued over from about 1787-1790.
They prepare reports for the president on special topics, such as new taxes that might be needed. They help write bills for the president to send to Congress. They check on the work of the many different agencies of the executive branch.
Most executive jobs require an advanced degree, usually in a business field but not necessarily. An executive with a marketing company might have a marketing degree or an executive with a computer software company might have a degree in computer science. MBA degrees are fairly common.