In evaluating the Grunwald article’s discussion on economic policies, which of the following is an accurate example of checks and balances that relates most closely to the Framers’ intention of consensus?(1 point)
Responses
The president and Congress worked together to create a compromise.
The president and Congress worked together to create a compromise.
President Obama advanced his policy agenda without the support of Congress.
President Obama advanced his policy agenda without the support of Congress.
The Senate threatened a filibuster.
The Senate threatened a filibuster.
The Speaker of the House blocked the president’s economic agenda.
The Speaker of the House blocked the president’s economic agenda.
The correct answer is:
The president and Congress worked together to create a compromise.
The correct answer is: The Speaker of the House blocked the president's economic agenda.
To evaluate which response is an accurate example of checks and balances that relates most closely to the Framers' intention of consensus in the context of the Grunwald article's discussion on economic policies, we need to consider the principle of separation of powers and the system of checks and balances established by the Framers of the U.S. Constitution.
The principle of checks and balances refers to the distribution of powers among the three branches of government (the executive, legislative, and judicial branches) in a way that allows each branch to limit the powers of the other branches. This system was intended to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful and to ensure consensus and cooperation in decision-making.
Looking at the provided responses:
1. The president and Congress worked together to create a compromise.
This response indicates a collaborative approach between the executive and legislative branches, where they work together to reach a compromise. This aligns with the Framers' intention of consensus, as it reflects the idea that decisions should be made through cooperation and agreement.
2. President Obama advanced his policy agenda without the support of Congress.
This response suggests that the president advanced his policy agenda without the support of the legislative branch (Congress). This scenario does not necessarily reflect the Framers' intention of consensus, as it suggests a lack of cooperation and agreement between the two branches.
3. The Senate threatened a filibuster.
This response refers to a tactic used by the Senate to delay or block legislation by engaging in lengthy speeches. While a filibuster can be seen as a mechanism for checks and balances, it does not directly relate to the Framers' intention of consensus. It rather reflects the concept of minority rights and the ability of a minority to obstruct the actions of the majority.
4. The Speaker of the House blocked the president's economic agenda.
This response suggests that the Speaker of the House, as a member of the legislative branch, obstructed the president's economic agenda. Similar to response 2, this scenario does not necessarily reflect the Framers' intention of consensus, as it highlights a lack of cooperation and agreement between the branches.
Considering the context of achieving consensus and the Framers' intention, response 1 - "The president and Congress worked together to create a compromise" - is the most accurate example of checks and balances. This scenario aligns with the notion of cooperation and agreement between the branches, which reflects the Framers' intention of consensus and the system of checks and balances established in the Constitution.