Should the president be able to ratify or veto the law? Is that too much power?

2 answers:

4 0

Answer:
Yes, and no it is not too much power, because it is a long process and the president isn’t the only one involved in the decision.

Explanation:
According to the U.S constitution, article 1, section 7, clause 2. “Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law.” So as you can see it is a long process and the present her/himself is not alone in the decision.

navik [9.2K]3 years ago

3 0

Answer:

Explanation:

The president should be able to do that because if he didn't our world today would be so messed up. We wouldn't have any laws. Also that is not too much power.

You might be interested in

Interest groups (4 points)

arlik [135]

Answer:

Explanation:

5 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

Foreign policy is?

Andrew [12]

Answer:

D. Strategies and goals that guide a nation's relations with other countries

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What is an executive agreement

ahrayia [7]

Answer1:an international agreement, usually regarding routine administrative matters not warranting a formal treaty, made by the executive branch of the US government without ratification by the Senate Answer2: An executive agreement is an agreement between the heads of government of two or more nations that has not been ratified by the legislature as treaties are ratified. Executive agreements are considered politically binding to distinguish them from treaties which are legally binding

4 0

3 years ago

Do you think all criminal cases should be heard by professionals and paid judges instead? Would this be better? Why?

KIM [24]

$\large{\underline{\underline{\pmb{\sf{\color{yellow}{Answer:}}}}}}$

No criminal crime should not be heard judges other than professional and paid judges because they have a lot of experience about these kinds of cases

5 0

3 years ago

Why does Hamilton say that "all men of sense will agree in the necessity of an energetic executive," and that "the ingredients w

Harrizon [31]

Answer:

He made the statement because he believes that people need an executive who can perform and carry out the necessary actions within the government. They need an active person who is willing to participate at all times. These 'ingredients' or characteristics of an executive are the qualities Hamilton believes will make a good president to be actively involved in the growth and development of the country. In addition, Hamilton believes the most vital quality of an executive to ensure good governance is energy or drive. This is the main reason his statement was centered around the word 'energy'.

Explanation:

3 0

3 years ago

Should the president be able to ratify or veto the law? Is that too much power?​

Should the president be able to ratify or veto the law? Is that too much power?