Representatives Books

Jones studies how democracies with a president might survive, where often these are countries with a fragile and short history of democracy. He focuses on Latin America, where in the 90s, military rule tended to be replaced by elected governments. The book goes into the interplay between a president and the parliament. In the process, Jones also investigates the difference in this relationship, when the legislature is unicameral or bicameral.

There are also differences in how the legislature is elected. By proportional representation or a winner takes all in each seat.

His book could well do with an updating of the intervening 10 years. This is about double the time of existence of several of the democracies. Which, perhaps surprisingly, have all survived the interim.

Number of times in the book information given on one page is different from information given on tha same subject later. Same with the practice exams. A lot of typos. Other than that book is easy to study and good enough to pass exam. Look for latest edition bacause NASD rull's are constantly changing

The Executive Branch has consolidated too much power. Article Two of the U.S. Constitution clearly outlines the responsibilities of the Presidency. A President selects his cabinet and grants pardons and reprieves. He is the military commander-in-chief, but may NOT (legally) declare war without congressional authorization. He may ratify treaties ONLY if two-thirds of the Senate approve. There are slightly more complicated rules regarding Presidential appointments, and aside from the various speeches and meetings, THAT IS ALL!

But that's not what happens. Presidents send troops at will and sign secret "partnerships" with foreign governments. Worst of all, we've seen more and more Executive Orders and obscene amounts of "signing statements". These are basically ways for the Executive branch to either create legislation or manipulate existing legislation. The problem with this is that the Executive branch isn't allowed to make laws, only enforce them. When one man (or woman) has the ability to tinker with the laws, they can not only shield themselves from legal accountability but also wield this incredible power against political enemies or scapegoats. That is one of the reasons the ''Separation of Powers'' exists in the United States.

Rep. Bob Barr (R-GA) recognized this problem during the Clinton administration. The item on this page is the transcript of a congressional hearing on the matter. Elsewhere, he has pointed out that not only are the Executive Orders unconstitutional, they are dangerous. As evidence he cites FDR's Executive Order 9066, which arranged for the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. While in congress, he introduced the 'Executive Order Limitation Act of 1999'. Essentially the legislation still allowed the President to submit his or her "Orders", but these could only be enacted with the approval of the congress (except in emergencies). Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) went even farther and introduced the 'Separation of Powers Restoration Act', which would return the Executive branch to it's true constitutional limit. Sadly, Mr. Barr and Dr. Paul's Act's didn't pass, but it is good to know that there are still some who recognize the problems with the poison fruit that the Executive Branch is producing.

For further reading on the issue, I recommend Reassessing the Presidency : The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom.

I will close out this review with Bob Barr's insightful opening remarks at the hearing:

''Executive orders are the primary means by which the President makes official statements concerning the function and management of the Executive branch of the Federal Government. Executive orders have been used by every President since George Washington.

The President's authority to issue executive orders derives from powers both enumerated, implied and inferred by the Constitution, as well as from authority delegated to the President by Federal statute.

In the overwhelming majority of cases, executive orders and proclamations are an appropriate public way of guiding the actions of numerous Federal agencies and other components of the Executive branch. While thousands of executive orders have been issued over the last two centuries, Federal courts have been extremely reluctant to challenge executive authority. When executive orders are issued without a constitutional or legal basis, they implicate the Separation of Powers Doctrine that underpins divided government. The Separation of Powers Doctrine allocates responsibility to each branch to energetically exercise and zealously defend its constitutional prerogatives.

In the proper exercise of its authority, Congress has an ongoing responsibility to affirm its lawmaking primacy and to closely monitor executive action that might usurp its exclusive legislative mandate.

Advocates of an assertive executive have contended a President should be accorded broad deference to issue executive orders, even in the absence of clear legal authority. They have argued the President is uniquely capable of formulating national policy and that executive orders are an efficacious way of circumventing the parochial institutional intransigence of Congress.

This attitude was all too prevalent during the Clinton administration. Former President Clinton's senior domestic policy advisor, Paul Begalla, summed it all up when he remarked, ''Stroke of a pen, law of the land, kind of cool.''

Well, it's not kind of cool. Fidelity to constitutional self-government requires adherence to the formal legislative process the framers skillfully drafted into our founding document. When Congress yields its delegated powers to the President, or fails to check executive overreach, it not only undermines its own power, but mars the constitutional fabric carefully tailored by the Founders to preserve and protect our individual liberties.

Former President Clinton's designation of millions of acres of Federal land as so-called ''national monuments'', under the purported authority of the Antiquities Act of 1906, raises a host of legal questions that Congress has a responsibility to address. First, were these designations consistent with the Antiquities Act and Federal statutes governing Federal land management generally? Second, are there steps Congress can take to address potential abuses of the authority granted to the President under the Antiquities Act? And, how can Congress reassert its constitutional responsibility to manage Federal lands?

We examine these issues today not to embarrass or impugn the motives of any former President, but to keep faith with the solemn responsibility the Founders entrusted to each of us in Congress; that is, to vigorously assert our legislative authority and to closely monitor activities of the Executive branch which might threaten it.''

Frank Blair was one of the more significant figures of the Civil War era, helping keep his home state of Missouri within the Union. Blair, who was a son and brother of equally famous politicians, served as a state politician, congressman, senator, and was the Democratic nominee for Vice President in 1868. Blair also achieved a solid record as a political general during the Civil War serving in the Vicksburg, Chattanooga, Atlanta, and Carolina Campaigns. Blair was one of the founders of the Republican party in Missouri, although he held conservative views and switched to the Democratic party after the conclusion of the war. Blair was virulent racist who opposed political rights for blacks. He died at a relatively young age, worn out by a stressful life and abuse of alcohol and tobacco.
Parrish is the leading historian of Civil War-era Missouri. His work focuses heavily on Blair's political life, but also provides details on his subject's family life. Due to the subjects' relative obscurity and the heavy concentration on politics, this work will appeal to Civil War specialists only.

Students of theatre production and theory will find this book particularly helpful. While many texts dealing with the work of Stanislavsky, Meyerhold, Reinhardt, Brecht, and others focus on their theoretical contributions, Leiter spends a great deal of time exploring these men as directors. He includes a comprehensive commentary on their professional directing careers, rehearsal processes, relationships with collegues, and in-depth analyses of their trademark production elements. This book is a great resource to anyone interested in the practical manifestations of the theatre theories of the modern stage.

When people here someone say they are from Washington, they think D.C. or the other Washington "the state" which is associated with Seattle, rain, goatee's, Starbucks, Cobain, etc. Well this book talks of a quiet man from the other, other Washington (Eastside or Inland Empire) who rose through the political ranks to become a 20 plus year democrat from a conservative district to the 3rd most powerful man in America, Speaker of the House. Growing up in Eastern Washington, Foley was a familiar name but now I know why. Great story of his life. Mr. Biggs tells his tale, plus educates about the House of Representatives and the internal structure and processes. Along the way are stories and brief interjections by Speaker Foley. I learned a lot about Tom Foley, the House of Representatives and the process of legislation from this book. Sometimes it is tough to get through parts because there is so much political process and information to digest but I enjoyed it. Worth the read.

This book does a great justice for anyone who uses the internet, and keeps up with International issues. It would be fair to say that 90% of the Names,Titles,Address,Phone and Fax Numbers are current.

I originally purchased this book to study for the Series 6 exam. I found it very helpful since it covered all the topics I wanted to review. Equities, bonds, economic policy, mutual funds, and even retirement planning were all covered in great detail. It's a good study guide too, because it has questions at the end of each section. If your taking the Series 6, I would like to recommend this book, and wish you good luck!

Almost everyone will find some part of this book interesting. Even if you weren't a straight A student in science class back in high school or college, the bits of science you do know are probably woven into the grander tapestry of science and time in a way you'll appreciate.

Just Trust Us is a slender book that packs a painful punch. Boyer has summarized the growing malaise of impotence and, worse, disinterest that is speading throughout the Canadian populace. "Accountability" is a word that our politicians spout with great regularity and yet examples of it can seldom be found in the halls of government. We, as Canadians, shrug and become increasingly cynical - we ignore scandal and by-pass the polling booths on our way to pay our taxes. The result, as Boyer states, is "government of the government, by the government, for the government".
Just Trust Us is written in a casual, conversational style and the author refrains from tendacious diatribes; a rarity in any political tome. This is a "must-read" for Canadian citizens of all political persuasions.