The Relationship between Congress and the President in Policymaking from Mid-19th century to Present-Day.

580 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Political compromises 19th century

The backbone of American politics is derived from the concept of democracy, where the people govern themselves, understanding this concept is vital to the policy making process. The president and congress should have equal jurisdiction in policymaking, Constitutional checks and balances were created by the founders to keep one branch from gaining unequal power over the other. Under very specific circumstances, such as , powers of each branch may be altered. The constitution can be interpreted in many ways and each interpretation has sparked debate over whether the president or congress has more influence over policy making. War Powers: The U.S. Constitution gives military responsibility to both the executive branch and legislative branch, but scholars have long debated the jurisdiction of their War Powers. In the past century presidents have further and further ignored the constitutional requirements for taking military action. U.S. Constitution. Art. I, Sec. VIII [The Congress shall have the power] to declare war, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal, and m...

Show More
Related

  • Congress The Electoral Connection David Mayhew Summary

    567 Words  | 2 Pages

    The excerpt “Congress: The Electoral Connection” written by David Mayhew centers around the fundamental arguments that discusses how members of congress are self-interested for reelection. Mayhew further elaborates on his idea by discussing the electoral activities that congress members devote their time into and resource from, which are advertising, credit-claiming, and position taking. Mayhew’s excerpt further examines the framework in how congress operates which contributes to the explanation of how and why congress partakes in the certain electoral activities.

    Read More

  • Sectional Compromises In The 19th Century

    1433 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are two mind paths to choose when considering the statement that the compromises of the 1800s were not really compromises, but sectional sellouts by the North, that continually gave in to the South's wishes. The first is that the compromises really were compromises, and the second is that the compromises were modes of the North selling out. Really, there is only one correct mind path of these two, and that is that the North sold out during these compromises and gave the South what it wanted for minimal returns. The three main compromises of the 19th century, the compromises of 1820 (Missouri) and 1850 and the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 each were ways for the south to gain more power so that eventually, it could secede.

    Read More

  • Constitution Dbq

    863 Words  | 2 Pages

    After the preamble the second part of the Constitution is the seven articles which describe the elements of the Constitution. One of the articles gives the legislativ...

    Read More

  • The War Powers Act of 1973

    1541 Words  | 4 Pages

    War Powers Resolution, Wikimedia Commons. The War Powers Resolution states that the President s powers as Commander in Chief to introduce U.S. forces into hostilities or imminent hostilities are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war; (2) specific statutory authorization; or (3) a national emergency created by an attack on the United States or its forces (War Powers Resolution: Presidential Compliance).... ... middle of paper ... ...

    Read More

  • How Did The Founding Fathers To Create A Government In The United States?

    584 Words  | 2 Pages

    In both wars, “Presidents have often engaged in military operations without express Congressional consent. These operations include the Korean War, the Vietnam War,” (War Powers 2008). The result of the action to go to war in Vietnam led to the passing of the the War Powers Resolution in 1973. Since World War II, the presidency seemed to have control over Congress, which did change after the Vietnam War. The wars, though, were meant to protect the ideals of democracy in other parts of the world. However, to their claim, they say that, “since the Constitution was adopted there have been at least 125 instances in which the President has ordered the armed forces to take action or maintain positions abroad without obtaining prior congressional authorization, starting with the ‘undeclared war’ with France,” (Woods). However, they include several things that were very small, and not very large scale attacks, not even against other federal

    Read More

  • Relationship between the American People and Congress

    765 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the past century, people continued to express an increasingly discontent view of Congress especially true when one looks back before the Clinton Impeachment debacle As the size of the nation and the number of congressman have grown, the congress has come under attack by both public influences and congressman themselves. Yet looking at one congressman's relationship with his or her constituents, it would be hard to believe that this is the branch of government that has come under suspect. In “If Ralph Nader says congress is 'The broken branch,' how come we love our congressman so much?” author Richard F. Fenno, Jr., provides insight into this view and why, through congress coming under fire, constituents still feel positively about there congressmen. Although congress is often criticized, its fine tuned functioning is essential in checking the power of congress without hindering the making of legislation.

    Read More

  • The Structure Of Congress And Affects It Has On Its Policy Making Role

    969 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Constitution gives powers to Congress in order to execute its many responsibilities. These responsibilities are necessary and proper for carrying out its policies such as, imposing taxes and regulating interstate commerce. The constitution has 435 members in the House and 100 more in Senate. Congress faces issues with action problems and the solution to correcting these collective problems are at the expense of the incentive members. The Cabinet, President, state and federal courts, political groups, media, etc. all have input when determining a political decision in the United States. Open arrangement is an objective arranged strategy that the legislature follows in managing an issue or issue in the nation. Open approaches are focused around law; however numerous individuals other than officials set them. People, gatherings, and even government organizations that don 't follow strategies can be punished. This confounded procedure has been concluded with an anticipated arrangement of steps.

    Read More

  • The War Powers Act or The War Powers Resolution

    558 Words  | 2 Pages

    Anyone wishing to argue that the War Powers Act is unconstitutional must be prepared to explain the purpose of article I, section 8 of the Constitution (Carter). Article I, section 8 clearly states that Con...

    Read More

  • Essay On War Powers

    2436 Words  | 5 Pages

    War powers refers to the powers exercised by Congress or the president during times of war or other crises affecting national security. Article 2, Section 2 of the US Constitution declares that the president is the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States. He may direct the military after an official declaration of war from Congress. There is a lot of disagreement and confusion about what exactly the president has the power to do under the Constitution. The purpose of this paper is to determine what war powers the constitution and Congress give the president, domestically and abroad during times of war, and what the scope of those powers is.

    Read More

  • Congress and The Presidency

    370 Words  | 1 Pages

    (Sell Lecture Notes, p.6) Congress shares responsibility with the president in declaring war, negotiating treaties with other countries and proving funds for soldiers and weapons. This is when conflicts come to head. The Vietnam War is a perfect example of this conflict, when the President waged war without a formal declaration of war from Congress. Because of this Congress then passed the War Powers Act in 1973. (Sell Lecture Notes, p.2) The Presidency has many responsibilities and powers.

    Read More

  • War Powers Resolution

    1613 Words  | 4 Pages

    The War Powers Resolution was the result of a consistent and ongoing power struggle between the President and Congress in the United States. The Constitution of the United States lays out the powers of the different branches of government. These branches are specifically designed to check each other to create a balance of power. In regards to foreign security affairs, Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that the Congress has the power to declare war, maintain the army and navy, and control war funding. Under article II, section 2 the President is the Commander and Chief of the Army and Navy. The President can also veto a declaration of war made by the Congress which must be overturned by a 3/4ths vote by the Congress. The Presidential veto power was also used to create a hurdle for the Legislative branch in passing this policy. However, as this essay will establish, the Congress was able to pass the bill despite the opposition from the Executive branch. The War Powers Resolution is a controversial piece of legislation because it challenged the power of the President as the Commander and Chief of the army and navy. This challenge was perpetrated by Congress in order to check this power of the President and strengthen the significance of the right to declare war.

    Read More

  • The Power Struggle between the President and Congress

    862 Words  | 2 Pages

    From the inception of the Constitution, there has always been a power struggle between the President and Congress. In the beginning, Madison and the Jeffersonians were placed in a gridlock with Hamilton and his school of political philosophy. Andrew Jackson fought to extend the powers of the President, then Congress spent 50 years fighting to repeal the powers of the Executive. Abraham Lincoln refined Jacksonian presidential politics, then Congress impeached his successor, Andrew Johnson, for fear of another quasi -- tyrannical President. Even today, a Congress, whose majority is of the same party as the President, fights 24 hours a day to check the power of President George W. Bush. But why, and how? Inherent Power Struggles Within the Constitution: Article I, Section I -- "All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and a House of Representatives" VS. Article II, Section I -- "The executive power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America" Article II, Section II -- "The President shall be the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States" - The Founders' ambiguous and contradicting language sets the stage for a power struggle between the Executive and the Legislative branches - Being that the Founders were political masterminds, they realized that unique circumstances would demand some deviations from the restraints that the Constitution places on both the Executive and the Legislature - Founders anticipated that during times of crisis', the nation would need ...

    Read More

  • United States Sailor

    1376 Words  | 3 Pages

    Under the orders of the President, who is our Commander in Chief and is put in such a position of power in article two section two of the

    Read More

  • Conflict Between the Executive and Legislative Branches of Government

    1742 Words  | 4 Pages

    American politics is often defined by a continuing power conflict between the executive and the legislative branches of the government. This struggle for political power between the two stronger branches of the three is inherent in the Constitution, itself. The concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances ensure that the branches of government will remain in conflict and provide a balance that keeps the entire government under control. As it was first established, the executive branch was much smaller and weaker than as we know it today. Consequently, the legislative branch was unquestionably dominant. Over the course of history, the executive branch grew in both size and power to the point where it occasionally overtook the legislative and today rivals the legislative in a much closer political battle. Today both branches have major factors that contribute to their power, but on the whole the legislative remains the lastingly dominant branch.

    Read More

  • The Three Branches of Government

    1075 Words  | 3 Pages

    The United States government braces its power among three powerful branches, legislative, executive and judicial. These branches interact with one another to establish authority that is strong, yet equal to have power over the country. Each branch pursues certain responsibilities and duties to operate in an efficient and effective manner in which society upholds. The executive, legislative and judicial branches all interact amid each other to validate accuracy of the nation’s most powerful law of the land, the Constitution. It is important to know how these branches interact with each other to learn how a bill becomes a law. Reflecting on how the three branches promote a balance of power that is constructive to include the agendas and electoral roles that also plays a vast part in the government’s operation.

    Read More

More about The Relationship between Congress and the President in Policymaking from Mid-19th century to Present-Day.

Open Document