. Why does control of the federal bureaucracy raise so many challenges?

Controlling the bureaucracy can be difficult for the following reasons: ... Civil service laws: Firing bureaucrats, even for incompetence, is very difficult. Clientele groups: Many federal agencies provide services to thousands of people, and those people sometimes rally to defend the agency.

Explanation:

I hope it helped brilliant plz

president of india

the oath of office for the president of india is as follows:

i, (name), do swear in the name of god (or solemnly affirm) that i will faithfully execute the office of president (or discharge the functions of the president) of india, and will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the constitution and the law, and that i will devote myself to the service and well-being of the people of republic of india.

— article 60, constitution of india

मैं, अमुक ईश्वर की शपथ लेता हूँ (सत्य निष्ठा से प्रतिज्ञाण करता हूँ) कि मैं श्रद्धापूर्वक भारत के राष्ट्रपति के पद का कार्यपालन (अथवा राष्ट्रपति के कृत्यों का निर्वहन) करूँगा तथा अपनी पूरी योग्यता से संविधान और विधि का परिरक्षण, संरक्षण और प्रतिरक्षण करूँगा और मैं भारत की जनता की सेवा और कल्याण में निरत रहूँगा।

— अनुच्‍छेद 60, भारत का संविधान

vice-president of india

the oath of office for the vice-president of india is as follows:

i, (name), do swear in the name of god (or solemnly affirm) that i will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of india as by law established, and that i will faithfully discharge the duty upon which i am about to enter.

— article 69, constitution of india

मैं, (अमुक) ईश्वर की शपथ लेता हूं(सत्यनिष्ठा से प्रतिज्ञान करता हूं) कि मैं विधि द्वारा स्थापित भारत के संविधान के प्रति सच्ची श्रद्धा और निष्ठा रखूंगा तथा जिस पद को मैं ग्रहण करने वाला हूं उसके कर्तव्यों का श्रद्धापूर्वक निर्वहन करूँगा।

— अनुच्‍छेद 60, भारत का संविधान

union council of ministers of india

edit

the oath of office for prime minister and other members of the union council of ministers:

the oath of office is as follows:

i, (name), do swear in the name of god (or, solemnly affirm) that i will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of india as by law established, that i will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of india, that i will faithfully and conscientiously discharge my duties as a minister for the union and that i will do right to all manner of people in accordance with the constitution and the law, without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.

— schedule iii, constitution of india

मैं, (अमुक), ईश्वर की शपथ लेता हूँ/सत्यनिष्ठा से प्रतिज्ञान करता हूँ कि मैं विधि द्वारा स्थापित भारत के संविधान के प्रति सच्ची श्रद्धा और निष्ठा रखूँगा, मैं भारत की प्रभुता और अखंडता अक्षुण्ण रखूँगा, मैं संघ के प्रधानमंत्री/मंत्री के रूप में अपने कर्तव्यों का श्रद्धापूर्वक और शुद्ध अंतःकरण से निर्वहन करूँगा तथा मैं भय या पक्षपात, अनुराग या द्वेष के बिना, सभी प्रकार के लोगों के प्रति संविधान और विधि के अनुसार न्याय करूँगा।

— तीसरी अनुसूची, भारत का संविधान

the oath of secrecy is as follows:

i, (name), do swear in the name of god (or, solemnly affirm) that i will not directly or indirectly communicate or reveal to any person or persons any matter which shall be brought under my consideration or shall become known to me as a minister for the union except as may be required for the due discharge of my duties as such minister.

— schedule iii, constitution of india

मैं, (अमुक), ईश्वर की शपथ लेता हूँ/सत्यनिष्ठा से प्रतिज्ञान करता हूँ कि जो विषय संघ के मंत्री के रूप में मेरे विचार के लिए लाया जाएगा अथवा मुझे ज्ञात होगा उसे किसी व्यक्ति या व्यक्तियों को, तब के सिवाय जबकि ऐसे मंत्री के रूप में अपने कर्तव्यों के सम्यक्‌ निर्वहन के लिए ऐसा करना अपेक्षित हो, मैं प्रत्यक्ष अथवा अप्रत्यक्ष रूप से संसूचित या प्रकट नहीं करूँगा।

— तीसरी अनुसूची, भारत का संविधान

chief justice of the supreme court or high court

edit

the oath of office for chief justice of supreme court or high court is as follows:

i, (name), having been appointed chief justice (or a judge) of the supreme court of india, do swear in the name of god (or affirm) that i will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of india as by law established, that i will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of india, that i will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and that i will uphold the constitution and the laws.

— schedule iii, constitution of india

मैं, (अमुक), जो भारत के उच्चतम न्यायालय का मुख्य न्यायमूर्ति (या न्यायाधीश) (या भारत का नियंत्रक-महालेखापरीक्षक) नियुक्त हुआ हूँ, ईश्वर की शपथ लेता हूँ/सत्यनिष्ठा से प्रतिज्ञान करता हूँ कि मैं विधि द्वारा स्थापित भारत के संविधान के प्रति सच्ची श्रद्धा और निष्ठा रखूँगा, मैं भारत की प्रभुता और अखंडता अक्षुण्ण रखूँगा तथा मैं सम्यक्‌ प्रकार से और श्रद्धापूर्वक तथा अपनी पूरी योग्यता, ज्ञान और विवेक से अपने पद के कर्तव्यों का भय या पक्षपात, अनुराग या द्वेष के बिना पालन करूँगा तथा मैं संविधान और विधियों की मर्यादा बनाए रखूँगा।

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is