Talk:Fourth branch of government

[Untitled]

The main definition is vague: "some say" -- who exactly? Can this view be attributed to any specific individual or group? Why the fourth branch of government? No matter what one believes about the US mass media, it is a fact that they are not a de iure part of the government. The traditional term is fourth estate, maybe that is what was meant here? --MarkSweep 15:48, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

...the 'fourth estate' is the French term for the same concept. Back in ye olde dayes, the French government was composed of the First, Second, and Third Estates, and some referred to the media of the day as the Fourth Estate (and it was no more a de jure part of government there than it is in the US).

However, the US government does not have Estates, it has Branches, so the local version is the "Fourth branch of government".

Independent U.S. government agencies

I made a few clarifying edits regarding independent U.S. government agencies. Colloquially referring to an independent agency such as the Federal Communications Commission as part of the "fourth branch" of government is at least arguably "correct" in some sense. We should remember, however, that nearly all "independent" agencies of the U.S. government are technically part of the executive branch. A few are part of the legislative branch (under Congress) -- for example, the Government Accountability Office and the Government Printing Office. There really is no U.S. government agency of which I am aware that could be said to be outside one of the three branches of government. Even the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is, by law, under the control of the executive branch of government (if push comes to shove), and could be abolished in any case by Congress.

Does anyone have any information about a U.S. government agency that could be said to be "outside" the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government from a technical (legal) standpoint? Yours, Famspear 16:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cheney

No one is going to add VP Cheney's fourth-branchness claims? He got a whole article for his hunting accident. —Dmbrown00 02:17, 28 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, something should be added about this. Lieftastic 04:17, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

indeed, in fact, i was surprised that it wasnt already here. --202.161.21.22 14:33, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I came here looking for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.162.0.42 (talk) 20:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Council of Censors as fourth branch

"In the 1790s the Vermont Legislature tried to outlaw inmate voting, but it was overruled in 1799 by the Council of Censors, a now-defunct fourth branch of government that met every seven years to decide constitutional questions, said Montpelier attorney Paul Gillies." http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081022/ap_on_el_ge/prison_voting I'd like to know more about that. Шизомби (talk) 15:36, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

§ The People

Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the majority opinion but did not say "The People are the fourth branch via grand juries". I traced that to a backup slide from https://famguardian.org/Subjects/Freedom/SelfGovernment/Foundations_of_Freedom.pdf. Does anyone think that is an RS? Should this § be retained? Humanengr (talk) 23:20, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Humanengr (talk) 01:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

§ The press

Given the lede's focus on 'fourth branch' as "a group that allegedly influences", the sentence order in this § seems reversed. Also, the first cite is an archived page from http://eatthestate.org. Does that qualify as RS? Should we pull more from the 1st para there (or from a better RS similarly), as its last sentence is more in the spirit of the lede:

Many people have stated that the Media are the "fourth branch of government." What we are supposed to infer from this sentiment is that the media's responsibility to inform the populace is essential to the healthy functioning of the democracy. However, the old adage takes on a new meaning in light of the corporate media's invisible role in facilitating police brutality against protestors in Miami, the war of conquest in Iraq, and other crimes committed by the government, or by the corporations the government serves.

Does that make sense? Thoughts?

Also, does anyone have the 2nd cite (Lee and Solomon) to check the 2nd sentence and see if there is more to garner from that? Humanengr (talk) 23:35, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I reworked a bit and folded in some other cites.Humanengr (talk) 00:59, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]