Checks and balances (US government)
Checks and balances are a foundational principle of the U.S. government, designed to prevent the concentration of power in any one branch. This system emerged from the Founders' desire to create a government that safeguards against tyranny, ensuring that the legislative, executive, and judicial branches operate independently yet interdependently. Each branch has specific powers that allow it to check the others; for instance, Congress can override presidential vetoes, approve appointments, and refuse to fund presidential initiatives, while the judiciary interprets laws and can declare actions unconstitutional.
The concept is deeply rooted in Enlightenment thought, particularly the works of philosophers like Montesquieu, who emphasized the need for checks on political power due to humanity's propensity to abuse it. Since its establishment, the system has adapted to changing political landscapes, though it can sometimes result in gridlock when different branches are controlled by opposing parties. Despite these challenges, checks and balances remain essential to maintaining democratic governance and accountability in the United States. Ultimately, the electorate serves as the ultimate check through the power of voting.
Checks and balances (US government)
The Founders of the American political system, well aware of the dangers of concentrating political power in the hands of a single leader or small group that is not answerable to the governed, created a system of checks and balances that work together through separation of powers. The Founders created three autonomous branches of government and gave each branch specific powers, including the authority to act to prevent the concentration of immense power in any other branch. In the United States, separation of power means that power is divided among an executive, a legislature, and a judiciary. Since it is much easier for the executive to act unilaterally than it is for a legislature that operates on the concept of compromise or for a judiciary that is reactive by its very nature, unchecked executives are generally seen as the greatest threat to the exercise of political power.
Background
Within a few years of breaking away from Great Britain in 1776, it became clear to many Americans that the United States needed a new system that gave power to a central government, unlike the weak national government that operated under the Articles of Confederation. When the Founders met at the Constitutional Convention in 1787 to write a new constitution, they were heavily influenced by British and French political thinkers. The British political system served as a model, with the Founders adopting only what they saw as right. Unlike the British system in which the prime minister holds office by virtue of serving as leader of the majority power, the Founders opted for government divided among three independent branches that checked one another’s powers.
The concept of separation of powers was derived in large part from the writings of French philosopher Charles de Secondat, baron de Montesquieu (1689–1755), who wrote in 1748 in De l’ésprit des loix (The Spirit of the Laws, 1750) that checks on political power are necessary because of the innate tendency of humans to abuse power. English political thinkers Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679) and John Locke (1632–1704) significantly influenced the structure of the American political system, which was based on the concept of classical liberalism and government by contract. Locke’s “inalienable” rights to life, liberty, and property were claimed for Americans in the Declaration of Independence and woven into the Constitution.
While promoting ratification of the new constitution in 1788, James Madison (1751–1836) argued in Federalist Paper No. 51 that it was essential to enable the government to control both the governed and itself. In order to check the ambition that was believed to be inherent in politicians, the Founders determined that democracy was best served by creating autonomous branches that balanced each other’s powers and kept them in check.
In the US Constitution, the concept of checks and balances is integral to the responsibilities assigned to the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. Article 1 grants legislative power to the two houses of Congress. The Senate provides equal representation to the states, with two senators for each state. The House of Representatives represents the people, with the number of representatives from each state is determined by population. Article 2 lays out the responsibilities of the president and the executive branch, and article 3 states that judicial power is lodged in the Supreme Court and in other federal courts to be created by Congress.
Checks and Balances Today
The Framers believed that political power was safest in the hands of a legislature made up representatives from the various states and answerable to the electorate. The Congress they envisioned is significantly different from the Congress that evolved over the next centuries. Despite those changes, checks and balances continue to limit abuses of power. Congress has the authority to check the executive branch by refusing to appropriate funds for presidential initiatives or failing to pass laws recommended by presidents. Congress can also override a presidential veto by a two-thirds vote. Powers of the Supreme Court may be checked through enacting new laws or approving constitutional amendments. The Senate alone has the authority to approve or disapprove of presidential appointments and to give “advice and consent” on treaties. The Supreme Court has the sole power to interpret the Constitution and can determine whether acts of Congress and presidential actions are constitutional or not.
Staggered terms of office also serve as a check on abuses of power, with the president serving four-year terms; senators, six-year terms; representatives, two-year terms; and Supreme Court justices, life terms. Both the president and Supreme Court justices can be removed from office through impeachment by the House and a vote to remove from office by the Senate. Independent bodies, such as regulatory agencies and electoral commissions, also serve as checks on governmental power. Unlike the governments of many states, voters have no direct means of checking national political actors through recalls or referendums. Voters do, however, possess the ultimate check on power on Election Day.
An executive without the power to act unilaterally in an emergency would endanger national security; consequently, the powers of American presidents have expanded significantly in times of crises such as wars, depressions, and other national emergencies. The president serves as head of state and can act unilaterally in foreign affairs. They can bypass Congress by issuing executive orders or by vetoing acts of Congress. The president also serves as commander in chief of all armed forces and has the sole power to grant pardons at the national level. Additionally, they can shape the country for decades after leaving office through appointments to the Supreme Court.
One challenge of the system of checks and balances is that it can lead to political gridlock when the branches of government are controlled by opposing political parties. For example, a president facing a hostile Congress may be unable to fully implement their policies, while a divided Congress or one at odds with the executive or judiciary may struggle to pass legislation. This stagnation can lead to public dissatisfaction with the government as a whole, or lead one branch to attempt to consolidate power. Many observers suggested that such a situation was seen amid the hyperpartisan American political atmosphere of the early twenty-first century.
Bibliography
Beers, Brian. "Checks and Balances: Definition, Examples, and How They Work." Investopedia, 6 June 2024, www.investopedia.com/terms/c/checks-and-balances.asp. Accessed 14 Aug. 2024.
"Branches of the US Government." USA.gov, 6 Dec. 2023, www.usa.gov/branches-of-government. Accessed 14 Aug. 2024.
Calabresi, Steven G., Mark E. Berghausen, and Skylar Albertson. “The Rise and Fall of the Separation of Powers.” Northwestern University Law Review 106.2 (2012): 527–49.
Corbett, Ross J. “Suspension of Law during Crisis.” Political Science Quarterly 127.4 (2012): 627–57.
Leib, Ethan J. Deliberative Democracy in America: A Proposal for a Popular Branch of Government. Pennsylvania State UP, 2004.
Longley, Robert. "Separation of Powers: A System of Checks and Balances." ThoughtCo., 16 May 2022, www.thoughtco.com/separation-of-powers-3322394. Accessed 14 Aug. 2024.
Love, Jeffrey A., and Arpit K. Garg. “Presidential Inaction and the Separation of Powers.” Michigan Law Review 112.7 (2014): 1195–1250.
Pandich, Scott C. “Six out of Seven: The Missing Sin of Federalist 51.” Perspectives on Political Science 36.3 (2007): 148–52.
"Separation of Powers: An Overview." NCSL, 1 May 2021, www.ncsl.org/about-state-legislatures/separation-of-powers-an-overview. Accessed 14 Aug. 2024.
Shane, Peter M. Madison’s Nightmare: How Executive Power Threatens American Democracy. U of Chicago P, 2009.