The relationship between the president and Congress has changed drastically in the past two hundred years. The framers of the constitution did not want an executive power in charge of the whole country in fear of it turning into a monarchy. They knew they needed a leader for America though. The framers did not want political parties. “Political parties established after Washington left the presidency” (Mandate). The relationship between Congress and the president changed in a very visible way. In the past, the president would meet to discuss issues with Congress, but that is not how it is today. Also the president would have to go through congress to pass a bill or an amendment, but presidents found a way around going through congress. The president can sign a bill without congress’s approval. For example, president Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln wanted to pass an amendment that would end slavery but Congress said no. Lincoln then did what the people wanted and signed the emancipation proclamation anyways to end slavery. Also known as the thirteenth amendment. Some presidents even put the people in power.
The main breaking point between the President and Congress was in the Vietnam war. This war sparked a debate on who has the right to declare war, and who has the right to only send advisory troops. Only Congress has the right to declare war, the President can only send advisory troops to other countries. This is a very controversial topic because many people think that the President can declare war, but they have to ask the Congress first. Another convincing reason on why Congress is more powerful that the President is the fact that Congress can make laws and the President has no say. Laws are the outline of America, and they are the only thing keeping crime from all streets in all states across America. Those are only two reasons why Congress is more important to America than the President. All of these powers are stated in Article 1 of the Constitution and the powers of the President are listed in Article 2 of the Constitution. Some people still disagree, though, they think that the President has more rights than
The president is the leader of the executive branch. We can’t fully understand what the president is capable of unless we recall that he is held primarily accountable for, the ethics, loyalty, efficiency, and responsiveness to the american whishes. Both the congress and the constitution gave power to the president and rely solely on him to guide
When a president is sworn into office, he or she takes on a multitude of titles. One of the many titles the president is issued is the role of Chief in Legislator. This means that the president plays a crucial part in the legislative process or lawmaking. This title holds much authority in the eyes of Americans (Hoffman & Howard, 1317). Though this title does not give the president absolute authority, it does grant him or her strong jurisdiction in the legislature. The framers of the Constitution did not want America to be a monarchy the way they were when under the rule of England. As a result, the framers purposefully outlined the president’s limited power in the constitution, creating a democratic
In United States v Nixon, five burglars broke into the Democratic Party headquarters. After investigations, president Nixon received a subpoena ordering him to release tapes and transcripts connected to meetings between him and some individuals who had been indicted in the incident. Although the president released edited copies of the transcripts, his attorney filed a motion to quash the subpoena on grounds of executive privilege. The attorneys claim was that the judiciary lacked the powers to determine the president’s claim of executive privilege. It was held that no individual, not even the president is above the law and, therefore, the president cannot use executive privilege to withhold criminal evidence. The problem of separation of powers in this case arises from the president’s attorney that the concept of executive privilege stems from the doctrine of separation of powers and the independence of the executive insulates the president from judicial proceedings. Although the constitution provides for the separation of powers, these powers are not intended to operate independently and the assumption that the president is immune to judicial proceedings would affect the constitutional balance and impair the functionality of the judiciary. It is noteworthy that the offenses that led to the resignation of Nixon were relatively minor and the crisis was constitutional.
In the past, the power of executive privilege has been used by Presidents to conceal information that has to do with foreign affairs and negotiations, military, national security issues as well as deliberations and policy making that is done between the President and his top aides. This power is only used when Congress asks the President or one of his top aides to produce all of the information pertaining to an event or situation. If the President then feels that parts of this information needs to be kept secret to protect the best interest of the public, or the other issues listed previously, then he will use executive privilege in order
The president is the foreign policy leader for the United States with an important political, military and economic role in the international arena. If there is collision between the president and congress, can congress restrain the president in foreign policy making?
Throughout American history, after the establishment of the U.S. Constitution, the validity of executive privilege has been questioned in federal courts and among legal scholars on countless occasions. According to Merriam-Webster, executive privilege entails, “exemption from legally enforced disclosure of communications within the executive branch of government when such disclosure would adversely affect the functions and decision-making processes of the executive branch” (Merriam-Webster). In other words, executive privilege is the notion that the President is exempt from having to give evidence or disclose information to congressional hearings or to judicial inquiries. Executive privilege also typically includes immunity from legal disputes involving the presidency. Although not officially referred to as “executive privilege” until Eisenhower’s presidency, the first argument of executive privilege or immunity took place during George Washington’s presidency (The Constitution and Executive Privilege). Claiming executive privilege has been a common occurrence throughout all U.S. presidencies and continuing with President Obama. Those who argue against the legitimacy of executive privilege use the reasoning that it is not constitutional because it is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution and interrupts the separation of powers. On the other hand, many legal scholars assert that executive privilege is necessary for
The views of the presidency by the first sixteen presidents varied widely but all of their actions set precedents for their successors to use, expand, or even curtail the power of the office. Some believed in the Whig theory of strict adherence to the constitution, while others believed the president was the steward of the people with a loose interpretation of it. The power of the office expanded through the years, however it only expanded as far as the public and congress allowed.
As mentioned in the video lecture, in terms of America’s legal history, there has never been a situation where the judicial and legislative branches faced the president with a writ to provide evidence that could be valuable in a criminal case. In essence, this Supreme Court case tackles the political principle of “separation of powers,” which represents the foundation of the American federal system. President Nixon possessed secret audio recordings of several meetings with the top members of his administration, and a special prosecutor appointed by Nixon investigated this cover-up. Nixon refused to comply with a subpoena that ordered him to release the tapes because he believed that his “executive privilege”
Congress has many functions to keep it working and functioning. They do many things to make laws, make sure they’re fair, and much more. There are also many committees with important jobs. There are many things that influence congressional elections such as reapportionment, redistricting, much more. There are many people who make up the House and Senate and they have many important jobs to keep things running smoothly.
Executive privilege assures that the president can have open and honest communication within the Oval Office between his staff and advisors. It also ensures that those conversations are entitled to be private. Executive privilege happens throughout various presidencies. The primary controversy of it is whether or not the president has the right to use it in order to withhold information from Congress or judicial proceedings. There is an ongoing discussion in regards to who really needs to know who the president is meeting with and what the context of the conversation is, as well as where to draw the line to distinguish what is private and what is public knowledge. Former President George W. Bush invoked executive privilege six times
Executive Privilege is a constitutional principle that allows presidents and/or high level executive branch officers to withhold information from the courts,
Since the late 18th century, presidential claims of a right to maintain the confidentiality of information in response to legislative demands have evolved significantly over the course of U.S. history. This right is regarded as executive privilege, or “the right of the president and important executive branch members to withhold information from Congress, the courts, and the public” (Rozell 323). As the federal bureaucracy has grown to assume the responsibilities for managing and implementing public policy in a wide variety of areas, it has experienced a steadily ascendant level of executive power. Congress’s ability to obtain information about the ways in which that power is exercised becomes increasingly difficult as the Executive gains more authority.
In this module we have study modifications to the way Congress and the President do business. The Constitution lists specific duties for Congress to attend to; it is a little vaguer when assigning duties to the President. It is up to both of these institutions to best determine how to accomplish these duties. The major theme of this module is change, the addition of offices under the President and the modifications to the power distribution within the Congress to help better and sometimes hinder these institutions in accomplishing their duties.