Introduction The Founders established a government designed to prevent a monarch from arising. They were so afraid of an overpowering ruler that they generated a system in which the chief purpose was to limit the authority of elected officials and maintain a sense of democracy. This system would require a delicate balance of power and one of many checks and balances to prevent each branch of government from acquiring too much power. Each branch had designated powers, but Congress was arguably the most powerful as it was granted the legislative powers in addition to the valuable powers of the purse. As the other branches of grown and Congress has become increasingly polarized, the Presidency has raised up fill some of the legislative voids left by Congress (Pika & Maltese, 2013). While the President taking a more active role in policy has been beneficial in many ways, Congress has posed a threat to Presidential involvement in these activities. Congress’s power of the purse, divided tendencies, legislative blocking maneuvers, and ability to override vetoes has given them the ability to obstruct Presidential goals and policies (Pika & Maltese, 2013). Our system was not designed for Presidents to take such an active role in policy making; however, it has evolved to accommodate this expansion of power. Tools such as the veto, signing statement, and executive orders give the President enough power to affect policy in addition to introducing policy, working with (and sometimes against) Congress, and having a larger impact on the legislative agenda and process (Lecture: Executive Orders, 2013; Lecture: Signing Statements, 2013). The Power of the Purse In a very large and expensive government such as the United States, money and funding f... ... middle of paper ... ... partisan policies through to legislation. This has created an environment where Congress often works to hinder the President’s policy agendas, and they often pose the largest threat to the President accomplishing his legislative goals while in office. Bibliography Danley-Scott, J. (2013, November 16). Lecture: Executive Orders. Denton, Tx, United States. Retrieved December 5, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCzhoYUlzTU Danley-Scott, J. (2013, November 16). Lecture: Signing statements. Denton, Tx, United States. Retrieved December 5, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LkBajjIWV4o Estrin, D. E. (2011, April 1). Clean Water Act 101—A bit of legislative history. Retrieved from Green Law: Pace Law School: http://greenlaw.blogs.law.pace.edu/2011/04/01/cwa101/ Pika, J. A., & Maltese, J. A. (2013). The Politics of the Presidency. Los Angeles: Sage.
Stephen Skowronek writes about political time and how one can determine the legacy a president will leave behind at the time their presidency is done. The president has immense powers when he comes to office, but the challenges they each face vary depending on the time they take office. Skowronek analyzes and demonstrates that the most essential factor for a president to attempt to legitimize his actions and orders will be the actions of the president before him. Following the actions of George W. Bush is how we can determine where Barack Obama falls under and follow the chain to the next president. If Hillary Clinton were to win the 2016 election, she would fall under the politics of articulation and Barack Obama would fall under the politics of pre-emption.
Examining the conceptualizations and theories of Neustadt and Skowronek’s in comparative perspective, this essay makes the principal argument that both of these theories only represent partial explanations of how success and efficiency is achieved in the context of the Presidency. With Neustadt focusing saliently on the President’s micro-level elite interactions and with Skowronek adopting a far more populist and public opinion-based framework, both only serve to explain some atomistic facets of the Presidency. As such, neither is truly collectively exhaustive, or mutually exclusive of the other, in accounting for the facets of the Presidency in either a modern day or historical analytical framework. Rather, they can best be viewed as complementary theories germane to explaining different facets of the Presidency, and the different strengths and weaknesses of specific Administrations throughout history.
The United State’s Constitution, the shortest written Constitution in the world, only has twenty-seven amendments, and now it is time to add another. The power of a presidential line-item veto was denied to the Clinton Administration in 1998, but with this last Congress being the least productive Congress ever, it is time to re-think the power distribution in the legislative process. In Congress, on average, only 10% of the bills proposed make their way through, and ever reach the President’s desk. In this modern day and age a bill, on average, is 3,105 words. When Congress was first created the idea was that each proposed legislation would be contained in one bill, now bills are comprised of various provisions. Which is why the power of the line-item veto would be beneficial to expand presidential authority. This line-item veto authority is the ability to cross out certain provisions while still being able to sign in to law the entire bill. This would be beneficial to the United States government, as an amendment that would allow the president to cut out unnecessary spending to in turn lower the national deficit. The United States government needs to pass an amendment to allow Presidents to use the line item veto.
... This precedent allows future presidents to take actions strictly forbidden by the executive branch in times of national emergency without congressional approval. The most important expansion of the power of the presidency happened during the Jackson administration. When Jackson used the veto power of the president to influence legislation as a matter of policy and not constitutionality, he arguably altered the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches.
Yes, I think Congress has too much power. Because under the constitution, Congress has the most important power and that is to make/change laws. (The powers of Congress-http://www.ushistory.org/gov/6a.asp) In this paper I will explain to you how Congress has too much power by, it being split into two large bicameral legislatures, they have the power of impeachment, and they have the power to approve the spending of federal money.
The president has a significant amount of power; however, this power is not unlimited, as it is kept in check by both the judicial and legislative branches. The president is held responsible for passing legislation that will improve the lives of everyday Americans, even though he shares his legislative powers with Congress. The sharing of power acts as an impediment to the president’s ability to pass legislation quickly and in the form it was originally conceived. However, Americans do not take this into account when judging a president, as they fully expect him to fulfill all of the promises he makes during his campaign. By making promises to pass monumental legislation once elected without mentioning that Congress stands as an obstacle that must be hurdled first, the president creates unrealistic expectations of what he can fulfill during his time in office (Jenkins-Smith, Silva, and Waterman, 2005). A president is expected to have the characteristics that will allow him to efficiently and effectively lead the nation and to accomplish the goals he set during his campaign (Jenkins-Smith et al., 2005). There have been a handful of presidents that have been immortalized as the ideal person to lead the United States and if a president does not live up to these lofty expectations the American public will inevitably be disappointed. Since every president is expected to accomplish great things during his presidency, he is forced to created and project a favorable image through unrealistic promises. The combination of preconceived ideas of the perfect president and the various promises made by presidential candidates during their campaign create unrealistic expectations of the president by the American public.
The American Academy of Political and Social Science The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science,(2013)
When the constitution of the United States was formed, the framers specifically designed the American Government structure to have checks and balances and democracy. To avoid autocracy the President was give power to preside over the executive branch of the government and as commander –in –chief, in which a clause was put into place to give the president the power to appeal any sudden attacks against America, without waiting for a vote from congress. While the president presides over the executive branch there has been ongoing debate over the role of the president in regards to foreign policy. Should foreign policy issues be an executive function by the president or should congress play a much greater role? With the sluggishness of our democracy,
Genovese A., Michael. "'What Have You Done For Me Lately?: The Demands Placed On The American Presidency.' National Forum 80 (2000): 30-40.
Congress enacted legislation now known as the Clean Water Act. During the Truman era, originally called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. The bill Congress passed in 1972 was an overhaul of the original act. The Clean Water Act set limits on the amount of pollutants industries and cities could discharge and gave the Environmental Protection Agency the power to sue and penalize polluters that exceeded those limits. Congress banned DDT, reduced emissions and sued major cities.
The power to appropriate funds is crucial to the U.S. government because it enables the flow of funding for the government to function. Congress’ ability to fund government functions provides for everything from entitlements such as: Social Security, Medicaid, to running the nation’s national parks, the postal services, and the work of all federal agencies and the military. Without the legislative branches’ ability to raise revenues and appropriate funds, nothing would function. The Constitutional authority for Congress to fund government also gives Congress a weapon that the Executive and Judicial branches both lack. For example, the President may wish to regulate a certain area such as offshore oil drilling. After the B.P. disaster in the Gulf, the President could have established very onerous regulations o...
---. “The Clean Water Act—Is it Successfully Reducing Water Pollution?- Draft 1.” UTSA: WRC 1023, 31 Mar 2014. Print.
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system. Neustadt brings to light three main points: how we measure the president, his strategy of presidential influence, and how to study them both. Today we deal with the President himself and his influence on government action. The president now includes about 2000 men and women, the president is only one of them, but his performance can not be measured without focusing on himself.
Savage, Charlie (April 30, 2006). Bush challenges hundreds of laws. The Boston Globe, Retrieved June 9th, 2008, from http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/04/30/bush_challenges_hundreds_of_laws/
Several aspects of the executive branch give the presidency political power. The president’s biggest constitutional power is the power of the veto (Romance, July 27). This is a power over Congress, allowing the president to stop an act of Congress in its tracks. Two things limit the impact of this power, however. First, the veto is simply a big “NO” aimed at Congress, making it largely a negative power as opposed to a constructive power (July 27). This means that the presidential veto, while still quite potent even by its mere threat, is fundamentally a reactive force rather than an active force. Second, the presidential veto can be overturned by two-thirds of the House of Representatives and Senate (Landy and Milkis, 289). This means that the veto doesn’t even necessarily hav...