The Powers That Be Within Government - Coursework Example

The Powers That Be Within Government With the declaration of independence from Great Britain came the ability to live under a new society. A new society which would include a new form of government. A government which would not be overseen by a monarch and parliament. Rather, it would have a national leader, or President, and a legislative body that would make up the government for which would work towards the betterment of the national populous. Without the presence of entitlement through means of birthright or conquering through war, every two years the citizenry vote for the legislative body and every four years they vote for their national leader. This new government would be in the form of being one that was for the people and by the people, a step aside from the previous which was more inclined towards the ruling class as compared to the lower classes of society. Each branch off the United States government has its distinct roles as to it comes to the governance of its stakeholders, or politically speaking the electorate which places it in power. Having two primary political parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, the choices made within the government tend to primarily run along those two party lines. Each side greatly strives to proclaim their role as the branch of government which concerns itself the most with working for the people, but all the while each in their own way seeks to hold a more primary power over the other one, even if it is slight in nature. Congressional leaders draft legislation of the rules for which, if passed by their representative bodies in the House of Representatives and the Senate, with later signing by the President, they become the laws for which everyone is required to abide by. The President holds within his power of the office the right to veto such legislation which he deems not to be in the best interest of the nation. On the other hand, if the required amount of votes are reached, congress can in fact hold a vote within their caucus, or group, with the purpose of ultimately overriding the Presidents veto of their legislative agenda. This in itself would be the primary consideration for the early framers of the constitution after the Americans were given their freedom, or independence from England in 1776. In this instance, both sides hold considerable power between them, but in the end through the instating of the checks and balances system, neither side is given ultimate authority over the decisions made and the way in which they are made. The Center on Congress at Indiana University goes into detail on the roles in government when it says that, “It is important to remember, however, that the Constitution does not envision a master- and-servant relationship between the President and Congress. The framers of the document took care to create a system of government in which there is a balance of powers and extensive checks and balances between them. In fact, the framers actually gave more specific powers to Congress, for they were wary that a too-powerful President would repeat the wrongs that the king of England had inflicted on the colonies,” (“Congress”, p.1). With such a system in place, the role of those in government is more equal rather than totalitarian which was the purpose when the governmental body was first created. While the President can make suggestions to the congressional body as it comes to issues which he would like to see put towards the creation of legislation for, it is in fact primarily the role of Congress as it comes to the creation of those rules for which the people will in the end be required to live by. Politics comes into play heavily as it pertains to national governance, with legislation creation being one of the times in which it occurs. While essentially it would be easier for a President to pass their goals and policy agendas if the congress is made up of a majority of members that are a part of his party, he in the end is faced with the practice of political hand holding of sorts with the hopes of making enough friends to vote for the legislation which he wants to see passed in the first place. When grouped together, distinct personalities can be prevalent in those who hold the power to govern inside the nation. Human nature comes to the surface as each individual is faced with the task of being responsible for making laws, all the while having certain goals for themselves and those things which they firmly believe that they would like to see come to reality in whatever way possible. That is also the case in regards to the political parties that are in power. Each having their select belief structure and throughout their approach to legislative decisions, maintaining a close tie to the system in place for their party, while not desiring to be seen publicly as forgoing the betterment of the electorate as a means of personal, as well as political gain and advancement. In essence, each having their own political relationships within their individual political parties, but also having to reach across the power structure to solidify the relationship for which the executive branch, or the President, has with the congressional body and vice versa. “The relationship between Congress and the President lies at the very core of our system of government, and, under our Constitution, tension and struggle between these rivals for power is inevitable,” (“Congress”, p.1). As the previous source says, the nature of the relationship that the executive branch has with the congressional branch is very fundamental to what the United States government was intended to be at its inception. As a democratically elected body, the government is one which is formed of distinct personalities that are faced with the task of working together for the common good of all. Conflicts can arise to whatever degree anytime individuals are placed together with the means of taking action on tasks to be completed. Ideally, governmental decisions are to be made with as little conflict as possible, but even as the framers were laying the foundation for what would be the modern governing body, many would agree with the notion that, in any form of healthy debate and discussion, there is a certain degree of conflict that comes with opposing belief systems. Such vigorous debate leads towards further scrutiny of issues and as a result, can lead to a better conclusion for the greater group of people who are impacted by whatever decision is ultimately made. With the role of the Presidency, the office holder is placed in such power that leads to broad implications and expectations. To be not just the leader on a national scale, but also the main representative of their nation on a broader international level. The person for which many look to in times of crisis to lead the nation into a more secure state and also in times of prosperity when theyre decisions can decide to a degree the longevity of the prosperity being experienced. Being elected every four years, the President is the head of the executive branch and as a result holds a considerable part in the overall picture as it comes to governing decisions. While abiding by the system of checks and balances put in place by the framers, the President retains a unique role for himself that no other elected representative, or governing body, holds. A role in which the nature of the responsibility, as well as the level, would be dependent upon the situations for which the leader of the free world was faced with at the time, whether it being issues on either a domestic or international level. Taking on the role of welcoming visiting heads of state both in private meetings, as well as in more formal settings such as state dinners, the President also concerns himself with legislative goals to be reached through congressional discussions with the hopes of ultimate passing and approval of the rules and regulations for the land. Essentially performing some of the same pomp and circumstance duties which trace back to the same practices for which monarchs also were known for, the other facets of the Presidency differ in regards to implementation of legislation agendas. In the end working more handedly with the congressional body in the hopes of reaching any sort of consensus towards the passing of laws that benefit the vast majority of those in the general populous who rely so greatly upon those whom they place in power through means of general election. Constitutionally speaking, each branch of government is responsible for maintaining the order of the nation, with the President considered to be the leader and premier representative for the nation which he is placed in the office to govern and protect. In the process of making such policy decisions, the President can find himself enabled by the structure of officials within the executive branch, or more pointedly those whom are within his own cabinet, that are placed in their roles as a means of being an advisory board to the President as he attempts to decide such crucial matters of state and international affairs. While afforded the ability to rely upon a Vice-President that is also democratically elected for the purpose of being “second in command” to the President, the leader is also aided by such roles as the Secretary of Defense, State, the National Security Adviser, along with a whole list of other position holders that seek to advise the President on the broader level of issues which the person in his office faces. The power of the Presidency is laid out within Article II (two) section two of the United States Constitution. Part of it reads that, He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments, (“Constitution Article II”, p.1). The US Constitution, as it is read in Article II Section II of the document, clearly alludes to the practice of checks and balances in its description of the power of the President. While he is given the opportunity to make appointments to key governmental offices, in most instances he is bound by the oversight of congress in regards to observing that which he is attempting to do in the first place. In consideration of that, Congress is also afforded the right of allowing the President to fill vacancies which they as a judicial body feel is within his right from the position which he holds as the nations commander in chief. Oversight which is meant to encourage and facilitate responsible government, rather than totalitarian rule that serves a select goal or purpose instead of serving the common good of all. Personality differences aside but still considered, it is the role of the US Constitution to act as the doctrine for which all legislators, whether congressional or executive, to abide by. As the other level of power that works towards decisions that enable better governing, congressional leaders hold within them a substantial power in the means of achieving legislation that serve their constituents, but also serve them when it comes time for re-election in their individual congressional districts. With 535 members of the House of Representatives and 100 Senators who make up the Senate chamber, the legislative branch of the United States is quite a formidable entity. Each having some distinctly different parts to their role in government, but come together in a collective state as it relates to performing oversight of the executive. It is also these elected officials that more often than not are exposed to those who elect them more directly than the President. Representatives of the House face their constituents every two years as they face re-election, while Senators are put to the vote every six years by their respective districts. Just as is the case with the executive, the legislative branch is also prone to the same tendency to have personality and political party affiliation play a role in policy decision making, but on a grander scale in that the size of the legislative decision making branch is far greater than that of the executive branch. With a collective size of 635 people, the instances of personality clashes and party wrangling are not just a potential occurrence, but in most ways an expected one. The legislative branch, yielding whatever slight advantage afforded to them through the constitution, may move forward in their quest to seek passage of an agenda if they feel they have the backing of a majority of the congressional peers as a way of showing not just the executive, but also the rest of the world, that the legislative branch of the United States is a force to be reckoned with as it comes to policy making and implementation. Like the executive branch, the legislative branch has power through such means as it is outlined in the constitution. An outline which details to its membership, as well as informs its electorate, what exactly the legislative branch members are allowed to do within their given constitutional authority as it is so written. Outlined so that uncertainty may be nixed entirely or in moderation in regards to what the role of congress is in comparison to the rest of the government itself. Further detailing, Article I (one), section seven, in part, of the United States Constitution, in regards to the role of the congressional asserts that; Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if he not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. (“Constitution Article I”, p.1). The essence of the checks and balances system is described in this section of the constitution as well. The practice of not allowing one branch of government to ascend to such a power level over the other that democratic rule becomes more like the monarchy rule that many wished to escape from in original framework for which the United States, in particular its government, was based upon in the beginning. A way in which the governing if the nation is done in such a manner that it is a more accurate and detailed representation of the insights of the governing body, but for the overall betterment and advancement of their people. All throughout history, many have set out to dissect the role which the government plays. Not just that, but the roles which the individual governing branches themselves play. The quest to take a better look at the responsibilities of the legislative and executive branches, along with the motivators they may have that lie behind the decisions which they choose to make. While many would say that as the electorate, it is not the place of the average citizen to question or inquire in regards to the state of their government and what goes on within it. As a citizen though, it is key to take in mind that there are clear systems in place to keep each branch from superseding the other. That way one branch may not gain so much power that it becomes larger than the other and in a sense “outranks” it as it comes to decision making. No matter what the rules in place may be, human nature is destined to intercede and cause many to have decisions that are more in line with their central belief system and may not be in line with the majority of the people in the nation. This is very much the case as it comes to elected government officials. Governmental affairs, especially during times of election, can be very contentious in nature. Times in which representatives fall back into the belief structure of their parties and in return that formulates how in which they go about deciding key issues for the electorate. No two people are exactly alike and with that brings forth personalities that can, in certain circumstances, bring rise to discontent in those who are brought together through election to legislate. Political motivation can greatly impact what laws if any are passed within the walls of congress and then are sent to the President for his signature. The motivation to not just stay within the ranking file of the party for which they are a part of, but also to work towards the hopes, if they have them, of solidifying their chances of political advancement in coming years. All the while surrounded by the weight of the US Constitution that clearly states the roles of elected officials as it comes to formulating the laws of the land. Along with the legislative branch, the executive branch is ultimately prone to the tendencies of human nature and personality clashes as well. The nature off the office holder to build upon his office to ensure political strength and whatever inability they may have to conquer with the legislative side in the process of seeing agendas made into laws. Checks and balances, or what is also called the separation of powers, in its true form is fundamental to maintaining the democracy of American policy making. The issue of political parties is described by Answer.com in this manner; Strong parties promote strong government because they cultivate cooperation at the expense of friction among the separated organs. Thus in the long view the history of American government seems a history of spasms. In weak party eras when the founders system prevails, Congress and the president are apt to be at odds. In strong- party eras the built-in friction is ameliorated. (“separation of power”, p.1). The first portion of the previous source goes into detail about the level in which the party system impacts the American government. Political parties are very important as a means of having differing views and suggestions when it comes to the solving of crucial national issues. In the other respect, parties can either directly, or indirectly, feed interests that go against the goals and needs of a nation to the level in which those interests of the parties take primary concern, while the needs and hopes of the citizenry are thrown to the side to be considered later, if ever. Despite the presence of parties that hold influence themselves, neither branch holds considerable power over the other. Works Cited Hamilton, Lee. Congress and the President. The Center on Congress at Indiana University. Date Accessed: 25 October 2008. URL: http://congress.indiana.edu/radio_commentaries/ http:// congress_president.php United States Constitution Articles I, section seven & Article II, section two. Cornell University Law. Date Accessed: 24 October 2008. URL: http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/ constitution.articleii.html US Supreme Court: Separation of Powers. Answer.com: The Complete Government Relations & Grassroots Management System. Date Accessed: 24 October 2008. URL: http://www.answers.com/topic/separation-of-powers Read More