DOCSLIB.ORG

Organizational Chart of North Carolina State Government VOTERS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Organizational Chart of North Carolina State Government VOTERS Organizational Chart of North Carolina State Government VOTERS Executive Branch Legislative Branch 4 Judicial Branch 1 Governor Lieutenant General Assembly Governor Supreme Court 8 Court of Appeals Office of the Office of the Senate House of Representatives Chief Justice Chief Judge Governor Lt. Governor President Associate Associate Speaker Justices (6) Judges (14) Pro Tem Secretary of State State Attorney Senators Representatives State Auditor Treasurer General Dept. of Dept. of State Dept. of State Dept. of 2 Standing Standing Secretary of State Auditor Treasurer Justice 9 Committees Committees Director Director 5 Legislative 3 Legislative State Board Superintendent of Commissioner of Commissioner of Commissioner of Administrative Office of Services Research of Education Public Instruction Agriculture Labor Insurance Office of the Administrative Commission Commission Courts Hearings Dept. of Dept. of Agriculture & Dept. of Dept. of Public Instruction Consumer Services Labor Insurance Legislative Study Superior Court Division Administrative Committees Officer Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Superior Court Judges (50 Districts) Administrative Division 12 Dept. of Dept. of 10 Dept. of Dept. of Dept. of Natural & Environmental Health & Human UNC Board of Administration Commerce Cultural Resources Quality Services District Attorneys Program Evaluation Governors Division System Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Secretary Clerk of Court Legislative President Drafting Division Dept. of Public Dept. of Dept. of Dept. of Military & Dept. of Information District Court Division University of NC Safety Revenue Transportation Veterans Affairs Technology Fiscal Research System District Court Judges Division 6 (43 Districts) 7 State State Board of Legislative State Board of Elections Human Resources Controller Community 11 Analysis Division Commission Colleges Magistrates Office of the State State Elections Controller Office Human Resources System Director President Legend Office of State Dept. of Human Resources Community Elected to 2 year term Elected to 4 year term Colleges Elected to 8 year term Appointed by the Governor Auxiliary lines of authority Administrative control Lines of appointment authority Issued by: Elaine F. Marshall, NC Secretary of State Notes of Explanation Organizational Chart of North Carolina State Government 7 The State Board of Elections is an autonomous agency in charge of the administration of elections, and campaign finance. 1 The North Carolina General Assembly is divided into two chambers 8 The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court designates one of the Judges of the - the Senate with 50 members and the House of Representatives with 120. Court of Appeals as Chief Judge. The Chief Justice also designates one of the The Lieutenant Governor is presiding officer of the Senate. District Court Judges in each district as Chief District Court Judge. 2 Legislators are appointed to one or more committees within their 9 The Administrative Office of the Courts provides administrative and respective chambers by the presiding officers of their chambers. research assistance to all levels of the Judicial System. The Director of the Administrative Office of the Courts is appointed by the Chief Justice of the The President Pro Tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House 3 Supreme Court. serve on the Legislative Services and Legislative Research Commission. They also appoint five members each from their respective chambers to serve on the 10 District Attorneys serve as prosecuting officers at both the Superior and Legislative Research Commission and four each to serve on the Legislative District Court levels. The Clerks of Court in each county also serve both Services Commission. The Legislative Services Officer is appointed by the courts. Legislative Services Commission and provides administrative support to the legislators. 11 Magistrates, one or more in each county, are appointed for two-year terms by the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge in each district and 4 The Governor and the other nine elected officials of the Executive Branch serve under the Supervision of the Chief District Court Judge in their form the Council of State. The heads of other executive departments, respective districts. “secretaries,” are appointed by the Governor and serve at the pleasure of the Governor. 12 While not a part of the Legislative Branch, for purposes of this chart the UNC System Board of Governors is listed under the legislative section because 5 The State Board of Education has 13 members, with 11 of those members it consists of 32 members elected by the General Assembly. The Board of being appointed by the Governor, subject to confirmation by the General Governors also includes special members, including the president of the UNC Assembly in joint session. The Lieutenant Governor and State Treasurer are ex Association of Student Governments, former board chairs and former state officio members. The Superintendent of Public Instruction is the head of the governors. Department of Public Instruction and is elected by the citizens of North Carolina. 5,000 copies of this public document were printed at a cost of $528 or $0.105 per copy. 6 The State Board of Community Colleges is not part of the Governor's Cabinet, but ten members of the State Board are appointed by the Governor, and the NC House and Senate each appoint four members. The Lieutenant Governor and State Treasurer are ex officio members. The State President of the Community College System is elected by the State Board and serves as the head of the department. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Federal Systems and Accommodation of Distinct Groups: a Comparative Survey of Institutional Arrangements for Aboriginal Peoples
    1 arrangements within other federations will focus FEDERAL SYSTEMS AND on provisions for constitutional recognition of ACCOMMODATION OF DISTINCT Aboriginal Peoples, arrangements for Aboriginal GROUPS: A COMPARATIVE SURVEY self-government (including whether these take OF INSTITUTIONAL the form of a constitutional order of government ARRANGEMENTS FOR ABORIGINAL or embody other institutionalized arrangements), the responsibilities assigned to federal and state PEOPLES1 or provincial governments for Aboriginal peoples, and special arrangements for Ronald L. Watts representation of Aboriginal peoples in federal Institute of Intergovernmental Relations and state or provincial institutions if any. Queen's University Kingston, Ontario The paper is therefore divided into five parts: (1) the introduction setting out the scope of the paper, the value of comparative analysis, and the 1. INTRODUCTION basic concepts that will be used; (2) an examination of the utility of the federal concept (1) Purpose, relevance and scope of this for accommodating distinct groups and hence the study particular interests and concerns of Aboriginal peoples; (3) the range of variations among federal The objective of this study is to survey the systems which may facilitate the accommodation applicability of federal theory and practice for of distinct groups and hence Aboriginal peoples; accommodating the interests and concerns of (4) an overview of the actual arrangements for distinct groups within a political system, and Aboriginal populations existing in federations
    [Show full text]
  • Secretary of State for Integration and Migration of the Portuguese Government
    Secretary of State for Integration and Migration of the Portuguese Government Regional Review of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration in the UNECE region (12 and 13 November 2020) Roundtable 1 – GCM Objectives 14, 15, 16, 19, 20 and 22 Statement “From the Floor” Portugal has worked in the field of migration for more than 20 years, developing public policies to better integrate migrants in our society, as recognized in the most recent OECD International Migration Outlook 20. Portugal stands out in the development of a whole of society approach, evolving not only the Central administration, but also the local level as well as civil society in the development of integration policies. Integration is a two-way process, where both the hosting society and migrants benefit from each other, in each territory and specific reality. The Portuguese long tradition on welcoming migrants is anchored in a policy of integration of proximity. Since 2003, with the creation of the local centres for the support of the integration of migrants, we developed a proximity service that improves the local participation and integration, allowing migrants to be part of their integration process. Today, we count with 3 national support centres and 109 local support centres spread across the country. These proximity services provide support for migrants in their integration process, namely regarding documentation, access to Portuguese language courses, housing and education. This focus on our main objective: we want to develop structural policies to reduce inequalities between migrants and nationals and to provide equal rights for every citizen that seeks our country to live and contribute, now and for the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy in the United States
    Democracy in the United States The United States is a representative democracy. This means that our government is elected by citizens. Here, citizens vote for their government officials. These officials represent the citizens’ ideas and concerns in government. Voting is one way to participate in our democracy. Citizens can also contact their officials when they want to support or change a law. Voting in an election and contacting our elected officials are two ways that Americans can participate in their democracy. Voting booth in Atascadero, California, in 2008. Photo by Ace Armstrong. Courtesy of the Polling Place Photo Project. Your Government and You H www.uscis.gov/citizenship 1 Becoming a U.S. Citizen Taking the Oath of Allegiance at a naturalization ceremony in Washington, D.C. Courtesy of USCIS. The process required to become a citizen is called naturalization. To become a U.S. citizen, you must meet legal requirements. You must complete an interview with a USCIS officer. You must also pass an English and Civics test. Then, you take the Oath of Allegiance. This means that you promise loyalty to the United States. When you become a U.S. citizen, you also make these promises: ★ give up loyalty to other countries ★ defend the Constitution and laws of the United States ★ obey the laws of the United States ★ serve in the U.S. military (if needed) ★ do important work for the nation (if needed) After you take the Oath of Allegiance, you are a U.S. citizen. 2 Your Government and You H www.uscis.gov/citizenship Rights and Responsibilities of Citizens Voting is one important right and responsibility of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • The Governor Genera. and the Head of State Functions
    The Governor Genera. and the Head of State Functions THOMAS FRANCK* Lincoln, Nebraska In most, though by no means all democratic states,' the "Head o£ State" is a convenient legal and political fiction the purpose of which is to personify the complex political functions of govern- ment. What distinguishes the operations of this fiction in Canada is the fact that the functions of head of state are not discharged by any one person. Some, by legislative enactment, are vested in the Governor General. Others are delegated to the Governor General by the Crown. Still others are exercised by the Queen in person. A survey of these functions will reveal, however, that many more of the duties of the Canadian head of state are to-day dis- charged by the Governor General than are performed by the Queen. Indeed, it will reveal that some of the functions cannot be dis- charged by anyone else. It is essential that we become aware of this development in Canadian constitutional practice and take legal cognizance of the consequently increasing stature and importance of the Queen's representative in Canada. Formal Vesting of Head of State Functions in Constitutional Governments ofthe Commonnealth Reahns In most of the realms of the Commonwealth, the basic constitut- ional documents formally vest executive power in the Queen. Section 9 of the British North America Act, 1867,2 states: "The Executive Government and authority of and over Canada is hereby declared to continue and be vested in the Queen", while section 17 establishes that "There shall be one Parliament for Canada, consist- ing of the Queen, an Upper House, styled the Senate, and the *Thomas Franck, B.A., LL.B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relevance of Federal Norms for State Separation of Powers Michael C
    Roger Williams University Law Review Volume 4 | Issue 1 Article 3 Fall 1998 The Relevance of Federal Norms for State Separation of Powers Michael C. Dorf Columbia University Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR Recommended Citation Dorf, Michael C. (1998) "The Relevance of Federal Norms for State Separation of Powers," Roger Williams University Law Review: Vol. 4: Iss. 1, Article 3. Available at: http://docs.rwu.edu/rwu_LR/vol4/iss1/3 This Symposia is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Roger Williams University Law Review by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Relevance of Federal Norms for State Separation of Powers Michael C. Dorf* INTRODUCTION Of the American Constitution's three most distinctive fea- tures-federalism, judicial protection of individual rights and sep- aration of powers'-only the last has been held inapplicable to the states. First, federalism is, by its terms, a doctrine of power-shar- ing between the national and state governments. The distribution of authority between nation and states was the chief point of con- tention during the period of the Constitution's framing and ratifi- cation, and in recent years, the United States Supreme Court has vigorously enforced federalism norms. 2 Second, although the origi- nal Constitution contained relatively few individual rights provi- sions applicable to the states,3 during the last half-century, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Due Process and Equal Protec- tion Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendments as providing exten- sive protection for individual rights against state interference.
    [Show full text]
  • THE RISE of COMPETITIVE AUTHORITARIANISM Steven Levitsky and Lucan A
    Elections Without Democracy THE RISE OF COMPETITIVE AUTHORITARIANISM Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way Steven Levitsky is assistant professor of government and social studies at Harvard University. His Transforming Labor-Based Parties in Latin America is forthcoming from Cambridge University Press. Lucan A. Way is assistant professor of political science at Temple University and an academy scholar at the Academy for International and Area Studies at Harvard University. He is currently writing a book on the obstacles to authoritarian consolidation in the former Soviet Union. The post–Cold War world has been marked by the proliferation of hy- brid political regimes. In different ways, and to varying degrees, polities across much of Africa (Ghana, Kenya, Mozambique, Zambia, Zimbab- we), postcommunist Eurasia (Albania, Croatia, Russia, Serbia, Ukraine), Asia (Malaysia, Taiwan), and Latin America (Haiti, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru) combined democratic rules with authoritarian governance during the 1990s. Scholars often treated these regimes as incomplete or transi- tional forms of democracy. Yet in many cases these expectations (or hopes) proved overly optimistic. Particularly in Africa and the former Soviet Union, many regimes have either remained hybrid or moved in an authoritarian direction. It may therefore be time to stop thinking of these cases in terms of transitions to democracy and to begin thinking about the specific types of regimes they actually are. In recent years, many scholars have pointed to the importance of hybrid regimes. Indeed, recent academic writings have produced a vari- ety of labels for mixed cases, including not only “hybrid regime” but also “semidemocracy,” “virtual democracy,” “electoral democracy,” “pseudodemocracy,” “illiberal democracy,” “semi-authoritarianism,” “soft authoritarianism,” “electoral authoritarianism,” and Freedom House’s “Partly Free.”1 Yet much of this literature suffers from two important weaknesses.
    [Show full text]
  • The Democracy Principle in State Constitutions
    Columbia Law School Scholarship Archive Faculty Scholarship Faculty Publications 2021 The Democracy Principle in State Constitutions Jessica Bulman-Pozen Columbia Law School, [email protected] Miriam Seifter University of Wisconsin Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Election Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Legislation Commons, and the State and Local Government Law Commons Recommended Citation Jessica Bulman-Pozen & Miriam Seifter, The Democracy Principle in State Constitutions, 119 MICH. L. REV. 859 (2021). Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/faculty_scholarship/2654 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Publications at Scholarship Archive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of Scholarship Archive. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE DEMOCRACY PRINCIPLE IN STATE CONSTITUTIONS Jessica Bulman-Pozen*& Miriam Seifter** In recent years, antidemocratic behavior has rippled across the nation. Lame- duck state legislatures have stripped popularly elected governors of their pow- ers; extreme partisan gerrymanders have warped representative institutions; state officials have nullified popularly adopted initiatives. The federal Consti- tution offers few resources to address these problems, and ballot-box solutions cannot work when antidemocratic actions undermine elections themselves. Commentators increasingly decry the rule of the many by the few. This Article argues that a vital response has been neglected. State constitu- tions embody a deep commitment to democracy. Unlike the federal Constitu- tion, they were drafted—and have been repeatedly rewritten and amended— to empower popular majorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Office of the Governor
    SUBJECT: POLITICAL SCIENCE IV TEACHER: MS. DEEPIKA GAHATRAJ MODULE: XI, GOVERNOR: POWERS, FUNCTIONS AND POSITION Topic: Office of the Governor GOVERNOR The Constitution of India envisages the same pattern of government in the states as that for the Centre, that is, a parliamentary system. Part VI of the Constitution, which deals with the government in the states. Articles 153 to 167 in Part VI of the Constitution deal with the state executive. The state executive consists of the governor, the chief minister, the council of ministers and the advocate general of the state. Thus, there is no office of vice-governor (in the state) like that of Vice-President at the Centre. The governor is the chief executive head of the state. But, like the president, he is a nominal executive head (titular or constitutional head). The governor also acts as an agent of the central government. Therefore, the office of governor has a dual role. Usually, there is a governor for each state, but the 7th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1956 facilitated the appointment of the same person as a governor for two or more states. APPOINTMENT OF GOVERNOR The governor is neither directly elected by the people nor indirectly elected by a specially constituted electoral college as is the case with the president. He is appointed by the president by warrant under his hand and seal. In a way, he is a nominee of the Central government. But, as held by the Supreme Court in 1979, the office of governor of a state is not an employment under the Central government.
    [Show full text]
  • Gubernatorial Appointment Process
    GUBERNATORIAL APPOINTMENT PROCESS The selection of qualified individuals to serve in state governmental positions excepted or exempted from state civil service is a responsibility shared by the executive and the legislative branches of government. This joint participation in the appointment process is mandated by the Constitution of the State of Michigan of 1963, which accords the governor certain powers to appoint officials subject to the advice and consent of the Michigan Senate. Historical Developments To gain a broader perspective of the governor’s appointment powers and the use of advice and consent, it is useful to trace the historical development of the executive/legislative relationship regarding appointments. Due to the deep-seated distrust of, and contempt for, British-imposed colonial governors, many early state constitutions greatly limited the power of the office of the governor. Michigan’s first constitution (1835), however, did not follow that pattern — it gave the governor substantial power. The governor had the power to appoint the secretary of state, judges of the supreme court, the auditor general, the attorney general, and prosecuting attorneys for each county. These appointments were subject to Senate confirmation. The only state officers popularly elected were the governor, lieutenant governor, and state legislators. In contrast, the 1850 constitution reflected the influence of “Jacksonian democracy,” ultimately producing the so-called “long ballot.” Among the principles of Jacksonian democracy was the belief that public officials should be chosen by election rather than by appointment. The 1850 con- sti tution provided for the election of all principal state officials, including the secretary of state, state treasurer, attorney general, auditor general, superintendent of public instruction, regents of the University of Michigan, state board of education, and supreme court justices.
    [Show full text]
  • State Revival the Role of the States in Australia’S COVID-19 Response and Beyond
    State revival The role of the states in Australia’s COVID-19 response and beyond Australia’s states and territories have taken the lead in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic, supported by constitutional powers and popular mandates. With the states newly emboldened, further action on climate change, changes to federal–state financial arrangements and reform of National Cabinet could all be on the agenda. Discussion paper Bill Browne July 2021 ABOUT THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE The Australia Institute is an independent public policy think tank based in Canberra. It is funded by donations from philanthropic trusts and individuals and commissioned research. We barrack for ideas, not political parties or candidates. Since its launch in 1994, the Institute has carried out highly influential research on a broad range of economic, social and environmental issues. OUR PHILOSOPHY As we begin the 21st century, new dilemmas confront our society and our planet. Unprecedented levels of consumption co-exist with extreme poverty. Through new technology we are more connected than we have ever been, yet civic engagement is declining. Environmental neglect continues despite heightened ecological awareness. A better balance is urgently needed. The Australia Institute’s directors, staff and supporters represent a broad range of views and priorities. What unites us is a belief that through a combination of research and creativity we can promote new solutions and ways of thinking. OUR PURPOSE – ‘RESEARCH THAT MATTERS’ The Institute publishes research that contributes to a more just, sustainable and peaceful society. Our goal is to gather, interpret and communicate evidence in order to both diagnose the problems we face and propose new solutions to tackle them.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Anarchy and the State in IR Theory: the Contributions of Classical Anarchism*
    Rethinking Anarchy and the State in IR Theory: The Contributions of Classical Anarchism* Alex Prichard University of Bristol © Alex Prichard School of Sociology, Politics, and International Studies, University of Bristol Working Paper No. 03-10 Dr Alex Prichard gained his PhD from Loughborough University in 2008. His research brings to light the international political theory of the anarchist Pierre- Joseph Proudhon, and will be published by Routledge in 2011 in the 'New International Relations' series as The International Political Theory of Pierre- Joseph Proudhon: A World Without Sovereigns. He is founder and convenor of the PSA Anarchist Studies Network and is co-editor of 'Contemporary Anarchist Studies', a new book series to be published by Continuum from 2010. Dr Prichard was a teaching fellow and research officer at the University of Bath (2008-2009) and is currently an ESRC Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Bristol. He will be a teaching fellow in International Political Theory at the LSE from September 2010. *Please do not cite without the author’s permission. Comments welcome to [email protected] Rethinking Anarchy and the State in IR Theory: The Contributions of Classical Anarchism Abstract: In this paper I intervene in an ongoing debate between Colin Wight and Alex Wendt regarding the nature of the state. The current debate revolves around whether the state is an agent or a structure and seems to have become stuck as regards to the ontological status of groups. For Wendt the state is a person; for Wight the state is a structure that constrains and enables individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Ch. 3 Section 4: Life in the English Colonies Colonial Governments the English Colonies in North America All Had Their Own Governments
    Ch. 3 Section 4: Life in the English Colonies Colonial Governments The English colonies in North America all had their own governments. Each government was given power by a charter. The English monarch had ultimate authority over all of the colonies. A group of royal advisers called the Privy Council set English ​ ​ colonial policies. Colonial Governors and Legislatures Each colony had a governor who served as head of the government. Most governors were assisted by an advisory council. In royal colonies the English king or queen selected the governor and the council members. In proprietary colonies, the ​ ​ proprietors chose all of these officials. In a few colonies, such as Connecticut, the ​ ​ people elected the governor. In some colonies the people also elected representatives to help make laws and ​ ​ set policy. These officials served on assemblies. Each colonial assembly passed laws ​ ​ that had to be approved first by the advisory council and then by the governor. Established in 1619, Virginia's assembly was the first colonial legislature in ​ ​ ​ ​ North America. At first it met as a single body, but was later split into two houses. The first house was known as the Council of State. The governor's advisory council and the ​ ​ London Company selected its members. The House of Burgesses was the assembly's ​ ​ second house. The members were elected by colonists. It was the first democratically elected body in the English colonies. In New England the center of politics was the town meeting. In town meetings ​ ​ people talked about and decided on issues of local interest, such as paying for schools.
    [Show full text]