Counterbalanced of the Power of the Executive and the Legislature - Essay Example

The Power Of The Executive Is Being Equitably And Fairly Counterbalanced By The Power Of The Legislature In The Constitution And In Practice In The USA, Germany, and France. Student’s Name Institutional Affiliation Course Name Date of Submission Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction 3 Evidence of a counterbrace of power of the executive and legislature 4 Conclusion 8 References 9 The Power Of The Executive Is Being Equitably And Fairly Counterbalanced By The Power Of The Legislature In The Constitution And In Practice In The USA, Germany, and France Introduction Constitution experts have regarded the U.S. Constitution as one of the best-drafted constitutions in the world. The drafters of the U.S. Constitutions made sure that the country operates under three main arms of government that are separate and act independently in discharging their functions. However, the drafters of the constitution were also aware that one arm of the government can sometimes abuse its powers if there is no institution in place to check its actions. As such, they ensured that even though the three arms of the government are free to discharge their mandates without interference; one arm of the government was vetoed powers to check the actions of another to avoid abuse of powers (Kowalski 2012, p. 23). This kind of checks and balance is particularly evident between the executive and the legislative arms of government that check the actions of another to prevent usurpation of powers. The drafters of the German and French constitutions also ensured that powers of the executive arms of the government are fairly and equitably balance with that of the legislature (Flower 1792, p. 19). The power balance between the executive and the legislative arm of the government of the three countries are not just evident in the constitution, but also in practice. The aim of this paper is to explore the extent to which the powers of the executive are counterbalance equitably and fairly with the powers of the legislative arm of government of the three countries. Evidence of a counterbrace of power of the executive and legislature To begin with, as earlier stated, constitution experts have described the U.S. Constitution as one of the best-drafted constitutions in the world. Schmidt, et al (2013, p. 92) attributes this to the fact that as much as it provides for the separation of powers, it ensures that the executive and the legislature keep on check the actions of the other. The main aim of drafting the constitution in this manner was to prevent usurpation of power. The U.S. constitution grants the legislature the power to make laws governing the country (Kowalski 2012, p. 23). On the other hand, the U.S. constitution grants the executive to implement the laws. This implies that once the legislature has passed a law, the function of the executive now is to oversee the effective implementation of the laws for good governance. In as much as the two arms of the government are independent of each other, the constitution provides a check and balance over the other. This has also been seen in several occasions, where the legislature and the executive check the action of the other to ensure effective running of ten countries. For instance, the Obamacare Act is one of the laws that have seen the executive and the legislative arm of the government engage in a tassel as to whether the law is good for the country or not. The Obamacare Act, which was sponsored by the executive, should to introduce certain amendments to the Medicare (DeLorenzo 2000). However, since the president had no powers to make the bill become law, he had to take it to the Congress, which is mandated to either pass or reject bill. In fact, the bill created an uproar from some Americans that later resulted in the government shutdown. Experts attributed the government shutdown as a protest by the legislative arm of the government against a bill, which some believe was not good for the country (Calabresi 2008, p. 135). Given that Congress had the power to pass or reject the bill is a clear indication of the extent to which the constitution provide a balance of power between the two arms of the government. In fact, if the constitution could not have provided for a check and balance, then the executive could have found it easy signing the bill into law without any problem. Such could have given room for abuse of power. In France, the French Senate also has the power to check the actions of the government. As the legislative arm of the government, the French Senate did unanimously reject a pension reform bill sponsored by the government through a 346 votes to zero (Lomas 2013, p. 12). When rejecting the bill, the French Senate claimed that the government had not acted in faith when it decided to modify the content of the bill beyond recognition. Therefore, using the power accorded to them by the constitution, they had no option, but to reject the bill since its contents was not good for the country (Kommers and Miller 2012, p. 87). Therefore, the fact that the French constitution grants the French Senate the power to check the actions of the executive confirms the fairness and equity of the counterbalance of powers between the two arms of government. A similar scenario came into light when the Obama administration sought for an intervention on the security situation in Syria. Even though the U.S. constitution gives the president the powers to declare war, the president must get an approval of the Congress (National Center for Constitutional 2012, p. 56). In Syrian situation, the Obama administration proposed the use of military action against Damascus in a bid to save the Syrian people from the cruel hands of President al Assad. However, since the constitution requires the approval of the legislature, Obama has had to lobby the legislature to pass the bill that will give him the permission to send American troops to fight the al Assad forces (DeLorenzo 2000). In fact, so far, the executive have not been able to order the American troops to go to Syria as Obama is still waiting the approval of the congress. A similar counterbalance of powers was witnessed in Germany during the Iraq invasion, in which president Angela Machel and the French president had to seek approval of the legislature to send their troops in Iraq. If such a balance of powers could be missing, then the two presidents would have sent their troops without seeking approval of the legislatures. Such a system would have been detrimental since the executive could easily abuse it as noted by Kunhardt, Kunhardt and Kunhardt (1999, p. 43). Therefore, the fact that the two arms of government have to consult on matters to do with government is a clear indication of the spirit of balance of powers in the U.S., German and French systems of government. The truth of the statement regarding the fact that the U.S., Germany and French constitutions counterbalances the powers of the executive and that of the legislature is seen in appointments. According to the constitutions of the three countries, the president has the power to make appoints, including the ministers, ambassadors, secretary of state and chief of defense forces. However, these constitutions provide that, once the president has made an appointed, the person appointed does not resume office until he, or she gets an approval of the legislature (Easley 2013). In this regard, the fact that the president makes an appointment does not necessarily meet that the person will get the job. Rather, the fate of the appointee also lies on the decision of the legislature that can either approve or disapprove the appointment. As much as the legislative arm of the government of the U.S., Germany, and France checks on the actions of the executive through the powers granted by the constitution of the respective countries, the same constitution also grants the president powers to check on the actions of the legislature. As earlier stated, the role of the legislature is to make laws for the country, while that of the executive is to implement the laws. Normally, bills introduced for legislation are those meant to benefit the people of a country (Prakash 2009, p. 29). However, in some instance, the executive may feel that a certain bill passed by the legislature is not good for the country. The president, in such an incident, may decline to assent to the bill in line with the powers bestowed upon him/her by the constitution. This power is meant to ensure that actions of the legislature are properly checked by the executive to prevent usurpation of powers (De Maistre 2011, p. 21). For instance, Obama did reject the Republican sponsored debt ceiling bill in October 2013 describing as a bill not good for the country (Kilman and Costello 2000, p. 12). In rejecting the bill, White House labeled the bill a ‘ransom,’ which is not acceptable. Such a counterbalance powers between the executive and the legislature is good for the country since it ensures accountability and responsible running of the government. The evidence of a counterbalance of powers of the executive and the legislature in the German, the U.S., and France is also evident from the fact that the president has powers to recommend a piece of legislation. As earlier mentioned, the constitution of the tree countries vests the legislative function on the legislature. However, this does not necessarily imply that the executive has no power over the bills. Instead, the three constitutions were designed in such a manner that the president has the power to recommend legislation to the lawmakers (Marrani 2013, p. 14). In the U.S., for example, all the presidents, including Bill Clinton, George Walker Bush, and Obama had made several recommendations of bills introduced in the house for debate. For example, in rejecting the republican sponsored debt-ceiling bill, Obama recommended to the sponsors of the bill to make amendments to the bill before it could be passed and brought for presidential assent, terming the bill in its current form a ‘ransom’ (Kilman and Costello 2000, p. 14). Conclusion To conclusion, there is no doubt that the U.S., German, and French constitutions are some of the best-drafted constitutions in the world. As highlighted, the constitutions of the three countries provide for the separation of powers among three arms of government, including executive, legislature, and judiciary. However, as much as the all the arms of government work independent, each arm checks the action of the other. The aim of the drafters of these constitutions was to prevent abuse of power of any arm of the government. Therefore, based on the concept of checks and balance and the separation of powers, it becomes clear that the constitutions of the U.S., Germany, and France provide an atmosphere where the power of the executive are counterbalanced equitably and fairly by the power of the legislature. References Calabresi, S. G 2008, The great divorce: The current understanding of separation of powers and the original meaning of the Incompatibility Clause. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 157: 134–137. DeLorenzo, J 2000, Checks & balances in government, viewed 28 January 2013 http://www.regentsprep.org/Regents/ushisgov/themes/government/checks.htm De Maistre, J 2011, The generative principle of political constitutions: Studies on sovereignty, religion, and enlightenment. Transaction Publishers, New York, NY. Easley, J 2013, President Obama immediately rejects house republican Debt Ceiling Bill as ransom, viewed 28 January 2013 http://www.politicususa.com/2013/10/15/president-obama-immediately-rejects-house-republican-debt-ceiling-bill-ransom.html Flower, B 1792, The French Constitution: With remarks on some of its principal articles: in which their importance in a political, moral and religious point of view is illustrated and the necessity of a reformation in church and state in Great Britain, Enforced G.G.J. and J. Robinson, Paris, France. Kilman, J. H., & Costello, G 2000, The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and interpretation. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Kowalski, K. M 2012, Checks and balances: A look at the powers of government. Lerner Publications, New York, NY. Kommers, D. P., & Miller, R. A 2012, The constitutional jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany: Third edition revised and expanded. Duke University Press, Munich, Germany. Kunhardt, P. B., Kunhardt, P. B., & Kunhardt, P.W 1999, The American President. Penguin, New York: NY. Lomas, U 2013, French Senate rejects Pension Reform Bill, Tax-News, 08 November, p. 5. Marrani, D 2013, Dynamics in the French Constitution: Decoding French Republican ideas. Routledge, London, UK. National Center for Constitutional 2012, Studies checks, and balances: The constitutional structure for limited and balanced government, viewed 28 January 2013 http://www.nccs.net/checks-balances-limited-and-balanced-government.php Prakash, S. B 2009, Why the Incompatibility Clause applies to the Office of President. Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy 4: 143–151. Schmidt, S., Shelley, M., Bardes, B., & Ford, L 2013, American government and politics today, 2013-2014 edition. Cengage Learning, Manson, OH. Read More