Probably..the whole country is going to suffer.
because checks and balance system is kind of holding our government
and if that doesnt exist.
everything is going to fall down. hmm. i dont exactly know how to explain it
but like this system that is holding the government is going to crush
and the whole country is going to suffer from it.
source:common sense..i guses? xD
Checks and balances allow the branches of government to equalize power. Without checks and balances, one branch of government could become too powerful.
checks and balancesIt is a system of checks and balances.
The checks and balances could increase the public confidence in the goverment, because they could believe due process was happening. However, if any portion decided to, they could all but completely halt any actions the government could take.
The system of checks and balances within the government keeps one branch from gaining power over another, thus reducing the risk that anyone branch (presidential/ legislative/ judicial) could gain power and create a dictatorship.
Popular sovereignty, limited government, separation of powers, checks and balances, judicial review, and federalism hope i could help
Checks and balances allow the branches of government to equalize power. Without checks and balances, one branch of government could become too powerful.
checks and balancesIt is a system of checks and balances.
Checks and balances were set up by the American constitution to ensure no one branch of government could become too powerful.
The delegates created a checks and balances system within the federal government so no one branch could become extremely powerful. Checks and balances is apart of the separation of powers of the federal government.
So that no portion of government could become to powerful and overthrow other portions of the government and to guard against any one branch becoming too powerful, the Constitution provides a system of checks and balances.
It would disrupt the checks and balances of the government's branches.
So that no portion of government could become to powerful and overthrow other portions of the government and to guard against any one branch becoming too powerful, the Constitution provides a system of checks and balances.
Only the government of the Roman Republic (509-27 B.C.) had checks and balances. The government of the monarchy (753-509 B.C.) and of rule by emperors (27 B.C.-476 B.C.) did not. During the Roma republic officer of state of the same rank could veto each other and higher officers could veto the lower officers. This was to avoid abuse of power.
The Founding Fathers wanted to establish a system of checks and balances. They created the three branches so that a single branch could not take over the government.
Only the government of the Roman Republic (509-27 B.C.) had checks and balances. The government of the monarchy (753-509 B.C.) and of rule by emperors (27 B.C.-476 B.C.) did not. During the Roma republic officer of state of the same rank could veto each other and higher officers could veto the lower officers. This was to avoid abuse of power.
A Actually, it is true that the framers made the system of checks and balane as to make sure no branch of govenment succeded the other branches. Then with no one to look after one central ruler, it will turn out to be just like the British Empire that the U.S. tried to get away from.
The United States government uses a system of checks and balances to ensure that no single branch or person has more control. The government uses checks and balances to separate other branches. Our government maintains order through a system of checks and balances.