Newsletter #1 by Denise Torres

1st Takeaway in M1 - Three Constitutional Clauses

dtorres165_1 — 2024-05-05 05:14:28 UTC

In Module 1 I learned about the three constitutional clauses and how they assisted in changing the federal government. In Module 1 video three it breaks down the necessary and proper clause, the commerce clause, and the taxing and spending clause. The necessary and proper clause also called the elastic clause states that the Congress shall have power to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States. This clause assisted in creating a structure for the federal government. The Commerce Clause gives Congress broad power to regulate interstate commerce and restricts states from impairing interstate commerce. The taxing and spending clause states that Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States. This clause allowed the federal government to access funding through its citizens, imports, businesses, etc. In learning about the three constitutional clauses it helped me better understand how government gets its funding and structure.

References: Morone, J., Kersh, R. (2018). By the people: Debating American Government. Oxford University Press, New York,

2nd Takeaway in M2 - Judicial Review

dtorres165_1 — 2024-05-05 05:14:44 UTC

In Module 2 I learned about the judicial review process. In module 2 video 2 it defines judicial review as the power of the courts to examine the actions of the legislative, executive, and administrative branches of the government. Judicial review came into place after the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803). The Marbury v. Madison's case arose because James Madison refused to deliver important documents to William Marbury. President John Adams had issued William Marbury a commission as justice of the peace and instructed Madison to deliver the document. As a result of Madison's refusals, Marbury sought to sue Madison. In court it was ruled that Madison's refusals could be deemed as unconstitutional. In hopes of preventing each branch of the federal government from obtaining to much power Judicial review was set into place. In the review process the court may determine whether such actions are consistent with the constitution. For example in the court, laws may be invalidated or be declared as unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void. The Court ultimately has the final say when a right is protected by the Constitution or when a Constitutional right is violated. In reading and watching the videos for Module 2 I learned about Judicial review and how it regulates the three branches of government.

References: Morone, J., Kersh, R. (2018). By the people: Debating American Government. Oxford University Press, New York,

3rd Takeaway in M3 - Presidents expressed powers

dtorres165_1 — 2024-05-05 05:15:21 UTC

In Module 3 I learned about the president's expressed powers and the three branches of government. In module 3 video 2 it breaks down the three branches of government : legislative, executive, and judicial. In the video and reading it explains how the three branches of government regulate the President's power. For example, the president can only pass treaties and select Supreme Court officers with the approval of two-thirds of the Senate. The president has the power to approve or veto bills and resolutions passed by Congress. The video as well states the president's expressed powers. For example the president has the power to fill vacancies that happen when the Senate is in recess that will expire at the end of the Senate's next session.The president does not have the power to declare war, set a military budget, and make rules governing the military. Congress holds the power to declare war, set a military budget, and make rules governing the military. Overall the president has limited powers and is practically monitored by the three branches of government. In watching and reading the Modules I learned that most laws and rules sent into place went under critical review.

References: Morone, J., Kersh, R. (2018). By the people: Debating American Government. Oxford University Press, New York,

The question I want to discuss with you - If the president of the United States had unlimited power would society be the same?

dtorres165_1 — 2024-05-05 05:16:16 UTC

What do you think.....?

Guess what's my answer? If the president had ultimate power, society would not be the same. I believe society would either be extremely republican or extremely democratic. There would be no division of parties; I believe the president would force his/her policies and ideals upon citizens. If this country was run by a republican president, I believe there would be poor wealth distribution. I believe there would only be an upper and lower class. If this country was run by a democratic president, I believe that there would be better wealth distribution but at a cost. I believe the upper class would be heavily taxed and that there would not really be a lower class. If the president had ultimate power too, there would definitely be wars waging. The president would no longer need the approvals to wage war on another country. Therefore if a power hungry president was to be elected into office, the chances of them issues war would be extremely predictable.

Current News -

dtorres165_1 — 2024-05-05 05:16:35 UTC

The article in U.S. News relates to the topics we are studying in class.

Citation: Press, Associated.(2024). New Rule Strengthening Federal Job Protections Could Counter Trump Promises to Remake the Government. U.S. News. https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2024-04-04/new-rule-strengthening-federal-job-protections-could-counter-trump-promises-to-remake-the-government

In the news article the author briefly discusses the new rule the government's chief human resources agency had issued and how it countered Trump's plans. This new rule had made it more difficult to fire federal employees; federal employees had more job securities protections.The author highlights how this new rule could counter Donald Trump's promises to remake the government. Initially when Trump was in office he wanted the ability to reclassify tens of thousands federal employees and reduce their job securities protections. Trump essentially wanted to remove the nonpartisan federal employees and replace them with conservatives. As a result of Trump's plans, while he was in office, the government took it upon themselves to create a rule that would purposefully ruin Trump's plan.
I picked this news article because it demonstrates how the government regulates the president's power. Donald Trump drafted Schedule F, in means to build a new government and reduce federal employees' job securities. Trump's intent was to remove nonpartisans and bring in conservatives. The idea was that if Trump brought in more conservatives, he would potentially/practically have the final say in rule making. As a result of this foreseeable event the government created a rule that would block Trump's plan for more power. The government had to set a rule into place in order to regulate Trumps power, others wise Trump would have potentially been successful in reshaping the government.
A key objective of this article would be to inform readers of Trump's plans to change the government and how the chief human resources agency was not going to let it happen. In the news article the authors stated how the new rule was intentionally made to counter Trump's plans. The government's chief human resources agency would have never had to make this new rule if it were not for Trump’s plans. The article as well mentioned that when Biden took office, he did not even entertain Trumps Schedule F. Biden himself saw through Trumps plan and knew he wanted to remove nonpartisans.
A comment that I have after reading this article would be that Trump was clever in the way he made his plans to reshape the government. Upon first glance one could say that Trump was just simply reducing federal employees job securities. Although after looking into it further, it could be seen as a scheme to remove nonpartisans and bring in republicans. Trumps intent in my opinion was to gain power over the government by bringing in like minded people. Federal employees with his same mindset would not question his judgement.