The Constitutional framers would never have believed how much power the President of the United States has obtained to this present day. Based off their work, it seems as if the framers expected Congress to have the vast majority of power. It is true that Congress still has maintained some of their power; yet, as a collective society we tend to place our sole interest on the president and magnify on all his accomplishments and especially on all his losses (sometimes even blaming him for events that are out of his jurisdiction). Nonetheless, the president has gained quite a remarkable amount of power over the years and it is highly noticeable when analyzing differences in the institutions, the policies, and culturally.
The President may not declare war, but he may deploy soldiers. He may require in writing the opinions of any of the heads of state departments as it relates to their respective offices. The President also has the power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the U.S., except in cases of impeachment. The President also has the power to make treaties with foreign powers provided the Senate has consented by a two-thirds majority. He may also appoint ambassadors, ministers, consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and other officers with the advice and consent of the Senate. The President also has the power to fill vacancies in the Senate temporarily. On extraordinary occasions, the President may convene or temporarily adjourn either or both legislative houses in the interest of resolving disputes. The President is also charged with meeting with ambassadors and other public representatives. The President can also be impeached for treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors. With the presidential powers now outlined, let us explore the opposing opinions of each presidential power(Colonies of Nations, 549-553).
3. Power as commander-in-chief. Congress has control of the military spending so they can approve, modify, or reject funding that the president wants.
While the Exclusionary Rule sounds gratifying, assuring that evidence obtained illegally won’t be submitted it also seems to be flawed. Starting with the 2 exceptions of the “fruit of the poisonous tree” doctrine: 1.) If the police had an independent source of knowledge of the evidence aside from the fruits of the illegal search, then the doctrine will not exclude the discovered evidence. 2.) If discovery of the evidence was "inevitable", the
The American government is a government that the three branches limit the power of each other equally, so one branch does not get too much power through the system of Checks and Balances. In 1775, the American Revolutionary War broke out. The results showed that America was finally an independent
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.
George Washington believed the President had a role to play in foreign policy. Washington negotiated, and recognized other nations and also proposed policy for the US to follow. Franklin D. Roosevelt also expanded presidential power due to his use of the largely unconstitutional destroyer deal to help Britain stave off Nazis and a peacetime draft. Further, presidents like Reagan did not follow congress as evident with by funding the Contras even after the Boland Amendment. Likewise, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton actively bombed nations even without congressional approval because they believed they were allowed to under the Constitution. I believe Presidential dominance allows for a clear foreign policy that can be effective. However, I would acknowledge this also can lead to bad policy like the way we fight the war on terror and the war in Iraq. However, Congress can challenge
The President also has the power to appoint about 700 positions in the executive branch. While the Senate must legally concur, it almost never vetoes a presidential appointment. In addition, unofficial, yet very significant, presidential powers include: the power to initiate legislation and the general direction of foreign policy; access to sensitive information and intelligence; and unmatched media coverage, which allows whoever is in the White House to explain his motives and communicate with the public. As a counterweight to the President, Congress has the potentially huge "power of the purse", and must approve all government expenditures. It exercises this power most frequently in matters of foreign trade, and has long been a key
In Guy Zuv’s U.S. Foreign Policy on pages 109 to 131 and in McCormick’s The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy, Chapters 9 and 10, they talk about a similar theme. This theme is the very one-sided power the executive branch has in foreign policy over the legislative branch. At the very beginning of this Nation’s history there has always been an argument over who has what power in foreign policy decisions. Starting off this power was to be given to the executive branch, however, do to the founding fathers hesitance of giving one man that much power they gave the Congress the ability to limit the President’s powers. These methods include things such has having control of the nation’s wealth and being the only ones who can declare war.
Report to Congress I, Savannah Parmelee believe an individual's right to privacy should be protected if they do not violate the law to a certain degree therefore, I plan to seek out evidence during my research that supports this controlling idea. I am greatly concerned about this topic due to the
The President’s formal powers over Congress include recommending laws, gathering the two houses of Congress for a special meeting, appointing some government officials and proposing a “legislative agenda” for Congress in the State of the Union Address. The President was also given the authority to veto a bill proposed by Congress, to which Congress can override by a winning two-thirds vote from both houses, which is difficult to accomplish. Another formal power is the President’s right to “pardon people for federal crimes” and punishment. As Commander in Chief, the President can urgently direct troops into foreign countries without Congress declaring war if there is an emergency. If a treaty is turned down by Congress, the President can arrange an executive agreement between a foreign ambassador that serves the essential purpose of a treaty. The agreement does not need to be ratified “by two-thirds of the Senate,” but easily becomes “valid with only a majority vote in both houses” (CrashCourse). The President’s ability to appoint ministers largely affects how laws are regulated and how dominantly the President’s policies can reside in society. Once the president delegates “cabinet secretaries and other heads of administrative agencies” that agree with his political vision, the Executive branch has more power to execute the laws it picks and chooses that the other two branches may not be too keen on. Congress can also willing delegate power to the President to accommodate risky policies it does not wish to take blame for; this is predominant in times of crisis such as FDR’s implement of the New Deal. Congress has instituted “new cabinet departments and federal agencies” to help the President and his branch resolve several societal concerns. The President can then sign Executive Orders to these
One However, the essential power was typically preserved and respected until recently in which presidents have made a greater use of their unilateral powers. Unilateral powers are powers that the president alone or unilaterally can invoke without the support of the legislative or judicial branches and has been used by presidents of both political parties to make policy. When this occurs, the president is less likely to recommend that Congress enact legislation but instead unilaterally enact their own policy. This development within the executive branch of government has extended the power of the presidency but at the cost of the legislative branch . This power of the president to act unilaterally has essentially gone undetected yet become a crucial point to presidential leadership allowing him to create law strictly on his own. This power is oftentimes most exhibited through the use of executive order but has also been used in proclamations or executive
Many questions go unanswered when questioning the Criminal Justice System’s tactics to apprehending criminals in the past, present, and future. For a while the Criminal Justice system thought polygraph tests were the answer to minimizing all around crime becoming a controversial solution to a rising problem. Recently, forensic investigations have revolutionized their methods to better DNA fingerprinting to detain criminals; This becoming the next best thing other than local police and first responders using Mini Drones as an extra tool in stopping offenders who are in pursue. According to Liberty Pen, “Mini Drones would be for specific missions such as finding a lost person, monitoring traffic, or for crowd control becoming a tool for mass surveillance by the government”.
Law enforcement organizations must continually look to the future for high-tech trends that will help them stay one step ahead of the criminal element. One has often heard that crime does not sleep and long gone are the days in which patrolling the neighborhood and responding to distress calls encompass the function of a police agency. Criminals are becoming more and more sophisticated in finding methods on how to break the law with every technological advancement. Two future trends that can potentially aid police agencies combat crime is the implementation of drone technology and surveillance and biometrics. This paper will discuss these trends and explain the pros and cons of implementing them at police agencies.
Before discussing As the commander in chief, the president plays a significant role in shaping foreign policy. The president possesses the power to appoint senior cabinet members, commit troops and conduct high level talks with foreign governments. Congress, on the other hand, has the power to ratify treaties, confirm the president’s appointees and approve budgetary measures. And while the president has the ability to commit troops, only Congress has the authority to declare war. Despite criticisms of the American policy making process describing it as inefficient and slow moving, the main purpose and thus benefit of the constitutional separation of power is the framework of checks and balances that safeguard against monopolization of foreign policy decision making.