What would happen if a political party controlled both the legislative and executive branches?
928579
As it happens, the question you pose happens to be the case right now.  The Republicans currently control both of those Branches (some would argue that they control all three).  In the current case, it appears that a weak legislature of the same Party as the President tends to act as rubber stamp for the Executive.  In times past,  the Congress has taken its role in the scheme of "Checks and Balances" more seriously.  Part of the answer to this question depends on your view of the performance of the party in power. Personally, I don't think things are going particularly well - you may have another view.
953101
I think it it would force the parties to understand they have to start working together.\nCurrently both parties are focused on what is best for the party, NOT what is best for the people, a third party would force an end to this abomination.
1028285
In a Parliamentary government the Executive (President or Prime Minister) more directly depends on the legislature for power. There is usually more direct control over government  by the people in this form, but it is also more inherently unstable and offers less checks and balances.
560111
The legislative branch writes bills and presents them to the President.  If the President signs them, they become law.  If the President does not sign them or vetos them, but 2/3 of Congress or a supermajority then votes for them, they an overturn the veto and the bill becomes a law.
954783
The legislative branch of the government was given several powers under the Constitution. The may lay and collect taxes,regulate commerce with other nations and among the states,declare war,raise an army and navy,coin money. They may also impeach the president and members of the federal judiciary. Another big power of the legislative branch is to make laws that are necessary and proper to carry out it's enumerated powers(the ones listed above). This power is found in the necessary and proper clause.
937255
No one party "controls" the U.S. Senate. There are more Republicans sitting in the U.S. Senate right now than Democrats. But each of those Republicans are free agents and capable of voting against the wishes of their party leaders. Also, just because there are fewer Democrats in the Senate right now than Republicans, that doesn't mean that they have no influence over what the Senate produces.
457674
The executive is in charge of the government proper.\nthe legislative is charge of the financing and the laws.\nThe Judicary interprets the law according to precident and the constituion.\nStates are seperated along the same lines. Each is responsible for conducting business in a certain way.
851714
both parties have moved in different directions. The extremists have taken over.\n\nSooner or later, a 3rd party may emerge for the middle.
649083
Yes, but it might depend on type of government
714833
The problem is systemic and it really doesn't matter which party is in charge.  Suppose you had a Republican alcoholic and a Demorat alcoholic.  Regardless of their political philosophy, each cannot control his intake of alcohol.  Analalgously, our fiscal system is like a liquor store; politicians of whichever party cannot control themselves when they get to spend other people's money.
93461
It refers to the splitting of government power so that the government doesn't become too powerful.\n\nThe US government is split into three branches- judicial, legislative, and executive. The Judicial branch reviews laws and hears high court cases. The legislative branch passes new laws. The executive branch carries out laws.\n\nChecks and balences is a related concept that means that the seperated powers have similar amounts of power, so that no one group gains undue influence over the others. \n\nIn the US, the legislative branch can pass laws, but the executive branch (Mr. President) can veto them. In turn, the legislative branch can override the veto, and the judicial branch can declare the law unconstitutional.\n\nThe President can be impeached by the Congress, as can judicial court members.\n\nEtc. etc.
1057991
it will unless we the people start voting for the right people. also there has to be balance in washington. one party has to balance the other. when one party controls everything-the house, senate, and presidency that is not good. we the voters use to elect democrats and republicans equally. we need checks and balances.
552770
You mean checks and balances?  The government is divided into three branches: legislative (the congress; they make the laws), executive (president, governors, mayors, etc, they enact the laws), and judicial (the courts; interpret and enforce the laws).  They keep each other in line through the systems of checks and balances because each branch can make any actions of the other two null and void.\n\nFor instance, let's say Congress passes a law, but the President doesn't like it, so he vetos it.  The Congress can still have the law enacted by passing the law again with a higher vote count (I think it has to be 2/3 majority).  But the courts can find the law to be unconstitutional, and throw it out.  Congress can then amend the Constitution to make the law constitutional, and on and on and round and round....\n\nThat's a brief description of how our government keeps any one person or body from getting too much power.
374474
Probably nothing, unless there's a big push in Congress, or you become the president of Diebold.
1009835
Answer to subquestion 1. Yes\nAnswer to subquestion 2. No.  The executive branch cannot assume powers that are not vested in it except by Congressional authority and cannot assume powers that Congress does not have within the Constitution.  Anything that the president does is subject to review by the Judicial Branch and can be found to be unconstitutional.  Presidents can only use powers granted by Congress.\n\nMy answer to your overall question:  Vote out the current career politicians and replace them with regular Americans like you and me.  That's what the Constitution was set up for.  Representation by the people in the House, and representation of the states in the Senate.  There should be no federal government except to the extent necessary to provide for basic needs of the people and protection from our enemies.  States should actually be in control of the direction of the "ship" and held in check by the appointed representatives of the people.  Don't vote for a Democrat or a Republican.  Vote for a candidate that represents what you believe is in the best interest of the country, not the best interest of a social group, an economic group, or any other wannabe majority.  Hell, vote for me!  I'm a Libertarian.
278532
Depends on their political party
243619
Honestly, the two party system is archaic and BS, they all "sleep in the same bed". Career politicians conflict with an American's interest... keep giving yourselves raises, dudes.  And if they continue to create contradicting laws, e.g., abortion is legal, yet prostitution is illegal [conflict of freedom of choice for women], and stray from the Constitution and Bill of Rights; then a modern revolution will happen within the next 50 years.