Gun Show Debate

The U.S. President has a veto right over any bill approved by Congress. This practically means that "if the president doesn't like a bill, he or she vetoes it" (Kowalski 2012: 22). Even with this, his authority can be challenged if two-thirds of the senators and House of Representatives vote accordingly. The Congress also has the ability to limit the president's actions as a result of the fact that it has power over the finances. Similarly, each body in Congress can check the other, considering that all proposals have to be issued

That’s right congress seems to have a grudge of sorts on the executive branch. This could be from a number of things, it could be that they see the president as some annoying co-worker that just deleted their last months project, every time the president vetos. We all know this must be frusterating be cause im sure we have all been in their place. And if congress breathing down his neck wasnt bad enough, one of the only checks that the executive branch has can be overridden. That means that the thing that is supposed to stope legislation from passing can be passed. Which isn’t tha tbad of a thing because if congress passes legislation which means there is aleady a majority. So when one man says no and then even more men say yes i think we can all see where the real preoblem

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.

If the President is suspected of unlawful acts, he can be impeached, or tried by the Senate for misusing his power. The Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. If he is found guilty, he can be punished but his sentence can be no more than being thrown out of office and being forbidden to hold any government office. Furthermore, if the President wants to spend money, his request must pass through Congress, since it has control over spending. Lastly, Congress can re-pass a bill that was vetoed by the President. Congress also has checks and balances against itself. The President can veto a bill from Congress, and although Congress can override a veto, obtaining a two-thirds vote to do so is very difficult. Public speeches by the President may also concern the public with an issue, putting pressure on Congress to act upon it. The Judicial branch exerts control over the other two by deciding whether or not actions made by the President or Congress, i.e., laws are constitutional.

The framers experienced the abuse of the English monarchs and their colonial governors. As a result, the framers were skeptical of the excessive executive authority. Furthermore, they also feared excessive legislative powers. This was something that the Articles of Confederation had given their own state legislatures. The framers of the constitution deliberately fragmented power between the national government, the states, and among the executive legislative and judicial branches. The framers of the United States Constitution incorporated a system of separation of powers. They divided the legislative powers between the President and the Congress. The separation of powers authorized the President with the veto power. The veto power is found in the Constitution in Article one, section seven. Only two-thirds of the majority of both chambers to override the president’s veto. Secondly, the president is expected to set the national agenda. This happens before the decline in popularity. The President is focused on legacy rather than on re-election. They want a policy that is good and lasting. Unfortunately, the framers did not intend for the President to set Congressional policy agenda. Only in the times of crisis is the President to act, or call Congress into session. This power is stated in Article two section three of the Constitution. In

Throughout the history of the United States of America there has been debate on gun control. The debate has become even more relevant as more semi-automatic assault rifles are being sold and the amount of shootings we have been having, especially in this last month. There are a variety of views one can take on this argument. Many conservatives have been saying that more gun control is not necessary as it’s not the guns killing the people, it’s the people pulling the trigger that are killing innocent lives. On the other hand, people who are more liberal would like to see legislation passed that would put control on the sale of firearms as keeping weapons out of the hands of dangerous people who will willingly pull the

The system of Checks and Balances is broken in many ways. For instance the President had the power to make executive orders that aren’t laws but have the power of one. The president has the power to make an order and an example is order number 9066 which stated, “Presidential order signed by Franklin D. Roosevelt, which authorized the

the US to sign a new treaty, the senate would have to ratify it with a

The better the reputation of the president, the easier it will be to negotiate. There are people in agencies and departments that have a huge amount of power and can have a huge force on the president. There is an example that Neustadt illustrates to show a president's reputation being questioned Neustadt stated “ Eisenhower's secretary of treasury George Humphrey publicly questioned the integrity of some of Eisenhower's changes to the budget for that year of 1957. The very public scrutiny by Humphrey, caused a national questioning of the budget and coarsely the reputation of Eisenhower”. Although Humphrey's words may not have been justified, Eisenhower's reputation was scarred nonetheless”. The president must always act and keeping in mind that there are those powerful enough to publicly embarrass him. The last and important thing of presidential power that Neustadt explains is public prestige. Public prestige is related to the president’s reputation. Public prestige is basically how the public views the president. Even though the public has no direct link with the president, the public's view of the president affects how congress will act

People may feel that our president in executive branch may have too much power but in reality he does not, all of the three powers are equal in power. It is obvious the president was not given enough power in the Constitution to overpower the other branches . The president's authority to lead the nation is limited by checks and balances that were added by the framers of the Constitution. Without approval by Congress, the president can't get legislation passed. Without the support of the Supreme Court, the president's actions can be deemed illegal. The President is responsible for implementing and enforcing the laws written by Congress and, appoints the justices

The American Presidency is one of the greatest seats of political power in the Western World. As the Chief Executive of the governmental and bureaucratic bodies charged with serving the public interest, the President is granted a broad range of powers and jurisdictions. However, the U.S. Constitution was also designed with the intent of creating sensible limitations on this power such that the executive branch might be balanced by the roles of the legislative and judicial branches. This critical system of checks and balances is intended to define certain authorities as being vested in the presidency by the Constitution and other authorities as being tempered by the critical role of others. However, as this discussion will demonstrate, the presidency has also historically armed itself with certain powers that are extrapolated from or even genuinely undermining to emergent or existing legislation. This denotes the critical contrast between the Constitutional powers granted the presidency and the Institutional powers that the presidency has generally created and expanded across a series of office-holders. This is the subject at the center of the following discussion, which considers the implications of these variances in executive authority.

Especially with a divided government, and even without, the president is challenged to gain the support of Congress (Heffernan, 2005:59). While the President is responsible for carrying out the law and can even issue executive orders ultimately Congress hold the purse strings. Without the budgetary support of Congress the President’s agenda will not be fulfilled. Treaties and all appointments from cabinet officials to Supreme Court justices have to be approved by Congress, specifically the Senate. “As a result, the White House is engaged in a constant process of persuasion” (Heffernan,

In recent years, congress has been incredibly adversarial to the president, providing that it is not controlled by members of his (the president) political party affiliation. The main source of this weakness is that congress and its members are defined by partisanship, they value tribalism, and are rewarded based on their loyalty to their party and antagonism to their opposition. This makes congress a breeding ground for viscous opposition where any room for compromise between parties is villainized, because of this the president can only govern efficiently when his party controls a significant percentage of both or either house. The major cause of this new political culture is highly contested, some say it is because political parties have come to gain too much power by way of their influence and ability to build campaign war chests. Others believe that political parties are too weak, citing that special interests and third party intervention has made members of either party less responsive to their leaders causing them to govern based on their fiscal supporters, which, would not allow compromise between two single groups. Regardless, it is very appropriate to cast the blame of a dysfunctional congress upon party politics. To illustrate this relationship between the executive and partisan congress we will look at the presidency of Barack Obama,

Another reason that suggests the favor toward limiting the president’s power is that his actions can reflect on how long he stays in office for. The President does not have any power among any other citizens of the United States to commit any illegal offenses and not be punished. “The President of the United States would be liable to be impeached, tried, and, upon conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors, removed from office; and would afterwards be liable to

Presidential power has increased immensely over recent years and little is being done in an attempt to restore the original intent of the Constitution. There are multiple factors that affect this, including the executive orders of presidents, the Constitution giving an unequal distribution of power between the executive and legislative branch, the failure to use checks and balances, and the ineffectiveness of Congress. With the lack of congressional involvement in legislative decisions, the president has the ability to take matters in their own hands.