Executive Privilege and its Current Implications

Although bureaucracy’s have a significant amount of power over the United States most important decisions and laws they cannot always execute or perform certain actions. Two particular forces who oversee and control bureaucratic agencies are congress and the president who is part of the executive branch. Both congress and the president are constantly competing for agency control (Lecture 7 10/24/16). They both have their own individual and unique sets of strategies they use such as using congressional control, appropriations process, privatization, executive order and management of agency budget in order to seize complete command. The main goal of these two means of control are to ultimately limit the discretion of bureaucrats and to also if possible shrink the size and number of bureaucracies.

Another of these monumental changes would be the surrender of the control of power from the legislative branch to the executive branch. Over the twentieth century, this became an increasing reality as the focus shifted from Congress to the president (Cooper 2009, 388). While this development has many different advantages in the American government system, there are disadvantages as well, such as a decrease in stability (Cooper 2009, 379). The role of the president has become more important because of the changes that have led to the modern world (Cooper 2009, 388). This has occurred because of a number of reasons, such as “substantial increases in the responsibilities of the federal government, the stakes of politics, and the ease of communication and travel” (Cooper 2009, 388). Furthermore, in recent years, Congress has not worked hard in certain circumstances to protect their rights but have surrendered to the executive branch (Davidson, Oleszek, and Lee 2010, 498). It is

Based on this case, the nine Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosure exemptions indicate the information that government agencies can withhold. For instance, documents which are “records or information compiled for law enforcement purpose” (Ciment, 2015). Exemption (7)(A) provides for the withholding of a law enforcement record the disclosure of which would reasonably be expected to interfere with enforcement proceedings. Furthermore, the 2002 law establishing the Department of Homeland Security gave that department

Since the passing of FISA came after a widespread finding of warrantless wiretapping by a number of different government entities, Congress along with the Carter administration, needed to carefully craft a bill that not only reconciled national security needs to conduct domestic surveillance, but also continued to protect individual liberties such as that of the first and fourth amendments. The once top-secret Carter administration memos regarding FISA offer a first-hand glimpse at the thinking that went into

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.

While some would argue that the framers of the Constitution did enough to limit the power of the President because of actions carried out by the leaders of the past, the more valid perspective is that these actions were made based on personal goals, and that judgements on these actions are justified based on opinions—not facts. From this, it can be concluded that the authors of The Constitution of the United States have placed enough rules, regulations, and checks to successfully limit the power of the President. In this modern American world, social and governmental society is continuously developing and evolving over time; important decisions that drive this evolution are made everyday by people of great importance. One of these important

The conflicting power struggle and rival relationship between the legislative branch and the executive branch is one that has always seemed anticipated. The relationship between a President and the Legislative branch is not only essential but it is significant making it equally an extremely delicate affair. One of the main questions that experts on the workings of congress have is whether or not the legislative and executive branch are capable of effectively cooperating with one another to ultimately promote and sustain the American agenda. George H.W. Bush’s relationship with congress can be seen as a dynamic one.

going public remains a potent weapon in the president’s arsenal, for advocating his own agenda and blocking initiatives from adversaries in Congress.

In the Supreme Court case United States vs. Richard Nixon there was a lot of controversy about Nixon’s executive privilege. Well, what is an executive privilege? It is known as the privilege, or special right, claimed by the president in the executive branch of the US government, of withholding information in the public interest. Although Presidents get special privileges, their rights are “not absolute and must be balanced against other political interests”(United States vs. Nixon). Nixon abused his right of Executive privilege when he helped his government officials break into the Watergate complex. It was said that the Watergate affair relates to the re-election of Richard Nixon, which later worked out in his favor because he won the election.

Congressional oversight is a mechanism that delegates Congress the power to investigate the activities of executive agencies, in order to ensure there is no violation of legislative goals (Lowi (et al), 2014). This summary concluded some discussion of the oversight mechanism from three articles by Lowi (et al) (2014), McCubbins and Schwartz (1984) and Kingdon (1984), particular on the effectiveness and its influences on agenda-setting process.

Digital privacy concerns, which have been a major issue in our country since 2001, increasingly violate our basic human rights as global citizens. The growing amount of government surveillance has manifested in the enactment of acts such as SOPA and CISPA. Although their intent on stopping digital piracy and attacks were clear, both were immediately met with harsh criticism; they allowed big corporations to violate our privacy rights by sharing our personal information with both other companies and the government. Our President, although publicly expressing his acknowledgement of the issue, failed to discuss an array of other pressing dilemmas regulated by the recently exposed National Security Agency (NSA), especially those involving

Everyday citizens often live unaware of their government’s inner workings. The knowing of political espionage is often too heavy of a subject to be inducted in conversation. True, prima facie, modest twists and turns of information may not be considered substantial, but this inconsideration leaves much to be uncontrolled. It is easy for political leaders to become power crazed, to not realize the massive implications that come of their actions. Only after all is said and done do the people actually realize their government is an opaque mask of deception. The Watergate Scandal substantially impacted Americans’ trust in their government.

"Secrecy and a free, democratic government don't mix," President Harry Truman once said. Harry Truman understood the importance of an open government in a free society. Unfortunately, George W. Bush has a different outlook. From the first days of his administration, President Bush has taken steps to tighten the government's hold on information and limit public scrutiny of its activities. Expansive assertions of executive privilege, restrictive views of the Freedom of Information Act, increasing use of national security classification, stonewalling in response to congressional request for information – all these were evident even before the September 11 attacks (At Issue: Has the Bush administration misused government

The Freedom of Information Act was enforced when our government realized the importance of the relationship between access to information and government accountability. This act enables citizens to view a plethora of different files and records from government agencies. This act proved to be “a principal instrument for breaking down bureaucratic secrecy in American public administration” (p. 62).

The attacks on American soil that solemn day of September 11, 2001, ignited a quarrel that the grade of singular privacy, need not be given away in the hunt of grander security. The security measures in place were planned to protect our democracy and its liberties yet, they are merely eroding the very existence with the start of a socialistic paradigm. Benjamin Franklin (1759), warned more than two centuries ago: “they that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Implementing security measures comes at a cost both economically and socially. Government bureaucrats can and will utilize information for personal political objectives. The Supreme Court is the final arbitrator