Welcome to our latest Monthly Topic! Remember, you don’t have to write an eloquent treatise – just a couple of simple sentences will do!
It’s a great time for our NEW MEMBERS to jump in and let their voices be heard!
Some presidents used their powers very expansively while others not so much. Do you think it serves the United States better to have a powerful president, or one who defers more to Congress? Â
I think a powerful President who uses his powers is a good thing for the US. However, I also like a President who at least confers with Congress on some issues to ensure major policy initiatives that are good for the country can move forward. If a President can’t move forward on his own without always checking in, then that’s not a person capable of leading a nation. Congress provides the checks and balances similar to a board with a CEO. The President is the Chief Executive, after all. Still, the ultimate power must remain with the people whose votes put the right people in the White House and in Congress.
Keith, I definitely agree with your comments. First I did not intend to make this response long. I would add there are some issues that the President alone may have to act unilaterally for the best interests of the U.S. This is typically when it comes to national security issues. The President will be privy to sensitive information that most of Congress will not be privy to. The speed and decisiveness of the U.S. President is necessary, while keeping in mind the interests of the nation. Even when presidential unilateral action is not preferred by Congress, there is always the Congressional powers to balance that action, through its power to investigate, fund, legislate or approve certain actions and initiatives.
[BUT, as there is always a but, we must also acknowledge that historical fear rooted in unchecked power, where it is believed that once it is surrendered, it is virtually a point of no return or one cannot get that power back. Again, I would defer to the Congressional powers as an answer to that. To that end, any right, power or generally any governmental function is only as strong as the government’s willingness to enforce those rights and use those powers and functions. A President cannot passive and equally a Congress cannot be passive.]
I think much depends on a president’s relationship with Congress. Historically, some relationships between the two branches have been strong while others have been contentious. If Congress is willing to work with the president, then the president should keep Congress in the loop – notwithstanding the valid point made about national security issues). But if Congress is at odds with the president, then it would be difficult for the president to govern without taking other measures, such as issuing Executive Orders.
Over the last 20 years, it seems to me that Congress has failed to assert a lot of their powers provided by the U.S. Constitution. I don’t recall the volume of this many Executive Orders – that seem to go back to at least the “pen and the phone” days.