Final answer:
Typically, a cabinet function includes enacting regulations. An example of an executive agreement is when the president enters into legally binding international agreements without requiring immediate congressional approval. Legislative checks over courts include the Senate’s approval of justices and measures such as rewriting laws and withholding court funding.
Step-by-step explanation:
The function typically performed by a cabinet is enacting regulations. Cabinets in different political systems, whether presidential or parliamentary, have roles that may include crafting legislation, managing specific areas of government operations, and advising heads of state. In the context of the United States, cabinet members are appointed by the president, and their roles are defined accordingly. This process is different from, for example, approval of statutes, which is generally the role of the legislative body, or providing an independent overview of commercial disputes, which might be the role of the judiciary or specific regulatory agencies.
An example of an executive agreement is when the president signs legally binding nuclear arms terms with Iran without seeking congressional approval. This demonstrates the president's capability to engage in foreign relations and make binding agreements without the immediate need for ratification by other branches, although political and legal controversies may arise from such actions.
One of the checks the legislative branch has over the courts includes Senate approval for the appointment of justices and federal judges. Congress also has other checks on the judiciary, such as the ability to rewrite laws or withhold funding for implementing court decisions.
Regarding functionalism's purposes of government, equally distributing resources is not a main purpose as defined by functionalism. This approach to governance is more commonly associated with social equity or distributive policies, which are not necessarily a core function of government as per the theory of functionalism.
Bureaucratic privatization refers to various processes of transferring government services or functions to the private sector. However, this term does not include forcing agencies to hold public meetings; such transparency measures are not part of privatization efforts.
In foreign policy, bureaucratic oversight is not typically classed as a foreign policy type. Foreign policy generally includes areas such as trade policy, intelligence gathering, and the authorization and conduct of war.
The government might create a government corporation to effectively manage and deliver services that are commercial in nature but serve a public interest, for instance, the United States Postal Service (USPS).
The Freedom of Information Act of 1966 enhances citizens' oversight over the bureaucracy by opening government records to citizen scrutiny, ensuring transparency and accountability.