Congress and the Presidency - Term Paper Example

 Congress and the Presidency Introduction The presidency and Congress are two important organs of the U.S. government established under the American Constitution. Aubuchon (2008) notes that, despite the fact that the two organs are independent of each other, the Constitution created the offices in a manner that each provides checks and balances for the other. At the same time, the two are closely interlinked and require the support of each other in order to push the agenda as has been seen in the past. The fact that the two act as checks and balances for each other in the daily management of the country, it means that none can function independently or without seeking the support of the other. This paper will explore the roles of the presidency and the Congress as far as governance and legislation are concerned. It will then analyze the relations between the two arms of government in day-to-day governance and legislation in the United States. The roles and powers of the president are defined in Article II section I of the U.S. Constitution which states that the powers of the executive arm of the government shall be vested on the president of U.S. (Aubuchon, 2008). The article also states that the president is expected to take an oath before assuming office. The oath clearly defines the roles and powers of the president as far as the constitution is concerned, which include being the commander in chief of the U.S defense forces and the responsibility to make treaties with other countries with the consent of the senate. The Constitution also gives the president powers to appoint Supreme Court Judges and Ambassadors (Shull, 2000). The president also acts as the head of state and is charged with the responsibility of presenting budget proposals before the Congress for approval (Thurber, 2009). The article also states that the president will from time to time keep Congress up to date with how the office of the president is executing its mandate. The U.S. president is required by the U.S. Constitution to preserve and defend the Constitution by showing respect to Congress. The roles and powers of the Congress, on the other hand, are contained in Article I Section I of the U.S. Constitution (Shull, 2000). The section confers all the legislative powers on Congress. Its role is to ensure that necessary laws are enacted for the effective governance of the country. The Congress, in this case, consists of the House of Representatives and the senate. Other functions of the Congress according to the U.S. Constitution include making legislations that govern the U.S. armed forces and regulation of commerce in the country particularly with respect to foreign affairs (Shull, 2000). Other powers vested on Congress are the impeachment powers in case of need. This power tells clearly that despite the fact that the president is the Commander in Chief of the armed forces, the Constitution requires him/her to respect Congress. In this respect, Congress has the power to control the president and can impeach him/her from office in case he/she disregards the Constitution. Based on the roles of the Congress and the President, it is evident that despite the two being independent branches of government created under the Constitution, they must work together in order to get their agendas approved. This is because the U.S. Constitution created these two branches of government in a manner that each checks the action of the other (Martin (2007). As such, none can work independently and succeed without seeking for the support of the other on major issues pertaining to how the country is governed. This has been evident in the past where the president is sometime being compelled to seek the approval of the Congress on certain bills that need to be discussed (Martin, 2007). In addition, in case of an appointment, the president is required by the Constitution to seek approval of the nominees by the Congress. This implies that for the nominees to get approval by the Congress, then he must have a positive relationship with them otherwise the nominees may end up not getting confirmed, which may affect the overall running of the country (Martin, 2007). For instance, report indicates that very few laws were passed by the Congress during president Kennedy’s tenure where many of his proposals languished in committee stages due to lack of a positive relationship with the Congress coupled with the fact that the majority of the Congress was composed of the republican. The president’s need of the support of the Congress was particularly evident during President Clinton and Bush’s tenures. This is because their governments were very much divided along party lines making the passage of Bills and other agendas difficult for the government as was evident during their bid to forge a majority coalition and party building aimed at winning the elections. President Bush, for instance, was constantly embroiled in this struggle throughout his tenure. Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000) noted that throughout his administration, president Bush had found himself in need to lobby for the support of the whole Congress in his attempt to get the Clean Air Act Amendment, trade legislations and Savings and Loan Recapitalization Act approved. This is because in order for these bills to sail through in the house, he had to persuade the Democratic Party committee heads and rally members of the Congress to get majority support for his policies. Andres, Griffin, and Thurber (2000) reveal that president Bush did everything he could to persuade the democrats to back him up in order for the Bills he was proposing to Congress to get approval. In this case, President Bush focused much on luring the conservatives Democrats in a bid to build support in Congress. Such a situation was also witnessed during President Clinton’s tenure when he had to lure more republicans to his side in a bid to have the proposed NAFTA Bill passed by Congress (Martin, 2007). This was because the majority of the congress members were republicans who were opposed to his policies. The reliance of the president on the Congress has also been witnessed when the incumbent president wants Congress to approve major policies from his/her campaign agenda. In such instances, Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000) noted that the president first engages his party leadership in Congress to help in pushing the agenda in the house by lobbying other party members in Congress to approve the agenda. This was witnessed during the first two years of President Clinton’s tenure in office (between 1993 and 1994) in which he was able to push though several of his campaign promises such as the Goals 2000 and instituting educational reforms. Other campaign promises that were also successfully approved by the congress included family medical leave, installments on the vice president’s program on reinventing government, as well as the motor voter legislation according to Foley and Owens (1996). Another scenario that has shown that the president must work closely with Congress in order to succeed in passing important bills and amendments was witnessed recently when the ratification of bills by the Congress was preceded by intense lobbying. An example was the Lyndon Johnson’s Great Reform bills which managed to sail through only after intense lobbying by the White House according to Martin (2007). Reports indicate that despite the fact that Johnson had a negative relationship with the Congress, he was able to rally enough Congressmen in the house that led to the passage of the Bill that has been hailed by many as having helped in the alleviation of poverty in the country (Thurber, 2009). He knew that for the bill to pass through, he had to convince enough Congressmen to support the Bill (Martin, 2007). As a result, he tactically lobbied for the support of enough members of the Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, by seeking their approval of SALT 1, as well as expanding the amount spent on the Vietnam War (Martin, 2007). Certainly, without seeking the approval by the Congress with respect to this law, it would probably have been dismissed. This scenario indicates the extent to which the president cannot execute their mandate effectively without seeking the support of Congress. As earlier stated, Congress also needs the support of the president in order to pass Bills in the house. This was evident during the Clinton and Bush administrations in which the House of Representatives and the senate constantly lobbied the support of White House to alter certain legislations (Thurber, 2009). As Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000) noted, the Congress continually attempted to promote its agenda and legislations by putting matters before the president’s ‘radar screen.’ In this case, the leaders of the Congress and heads of committees as well as the minority members in the house had special powers, which enabled them to lobby the president’ssupport (Martin, 2007). Report indicates that the lobbying of the president by the Congress has been particularly intense in the final stages of law making process. Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000) noted that, during Senate and House floor, members of these houses tend to lobby the president at the final stages to approve certain amendments or to approve changes made during conference committee. However, report also indicates that it was possible for the legislators to lobby the president at the early stages of the legislative process (Aubuchon, 2008). For instance, report indicates that even before President Bush could unveil his Clean Air Act Amendment of 1990, many house representatives and senators from Republican and Democratic parties had already began persuading the president to exclude or include provisions that are of benefit to their districts or state. Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000) reveal that, at the time, the Amendment was being introduced in Congress for approval, the Congress had already battled over it for about twelve years. Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000) argue that the amendment contained some provisions that had previously been forced on the president by the Congress members. In most cases, the president welcomes the lobbying by the Congress hopping to receive support from them in case of a need, as was the case with the Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1990. In fact, political analysts have argued that President Clinton could have succeeded in getting his comprehensive health care reform approved by the Senate if he could have used a more inclusive approach in formulating the Bill (Foley and Owens, 1996). In this regard, the analysts have pointed out that the manner in which Ira Magaziner and Hilary Clinton the First Lady designed the proposal was selective and nonexistent to some extent (Thurber, 2009). This caused the proposal to be rejected by the Congress when presented in the house despite the intense lobbying by the white House to convince members of Congress to give the bill a green light (Aubuchon, 2008). This is after the bill created a controversy, which waned the existing support of the many members of the Congress on the Bill. Although the several factors, might have contributed to the rejection of the legislation by the Congress, the failure by the White House to lobby intensively by seeking the support of the Congress at the earliest faces of the legislation process was among the serious ones according to Andres, Griffin and Thurber (2000). However, the Congress and the president have in recent time worked closely with each other as a show of unity as far as governance and legislation are concerned. This particularly began in 2011 as President Bush has had an easy ride in getting his proposals passed by Congress. For instance, he received overwhelming support of the Congress with regards to his Executive Orders aimed at improving the security situation in the country and beyond. An example was the support he received from the Congress regarding the U.S. plans to send military troops in Afghanistan (Andres, Griffin and Thurber, 2000). However, what is notable is that despite the president being the Commander in Chief of Armed Forces, he is expected to seek the approval of the Congress before declaring a war on a sovereign country. For instance, currently a section of Congress members is organizing an impeachment against President Obama for his unauthorized use of military force against Syria and Libya. According to a section of the Congress mainly drawn from Republicans, President Obama violated the constitution, which requires the president to seek approval of the Congress before using a military force. However, president Obama has defended his move arguing that the move had received wide international support in addition to the fact that the move has restored order in these countries. Nevertheless, the Congress has gone ahead to argue that receiving the international support does not make the move right according to the Constitution, which the president is expected to preserve and defend (Thurber, 2009). In this regard, the Congress has argued that the international community has no powers to determine for the people of the United States what is right or wrong rather the Constitution, which is Supreme according to a famous Republican Congressman (Tailer, 2013). This incidence shows clearly that the president though being the commander in chief of the armed forces has no absolute powers as far as declaring war is concerned. Instead, he is expected to seek for approval of Congress as contained in the constitution. This implies that there a relationship exist between the two branches of government with regards to checks and balance as one monitors the actions of the other for effecting governance. Conclusion The president and the Congress are indeed two independent branches of the government charged with different role, which must executed in accordance with the Constitution. The president according to the Constitution falls under the executive arm of the government and is the Commander in chief of the defense forces. He is also the head of state and is charged with the responsibilities such as appointing of ambassadors and judges among other duties. The Congress of the other hand also plays a vital role as far as enactment of legislation is concerned. However, the despite the independency of the two offices, it has become apparent that the two officers cannot operate effectively without the assistance of the other. This is because in order for the president to have bills passed, he is expected to have enough Congress support to approve the bill as has been demonstrated. At the same time, the Congress also relies a lot on the president, as some of the bills presented in the Congress require the approval of the president in order to sail through. At the same time, the two arms of government have a close relationship because both provides checks and balances for each other to ensure that the country has effective laws and is also effectively governed by the president. References Andres, G., Griffin, P., & Thurber, J. (2000). The contemporary presidency: Managing White House-Congressional relations: Observations from inside the process. Center for Study of the Presidency. Presidential Studies Quarterly Vol. 30 No. 3. Pp. 553-563. Aubuchon, D. (2008). “The relationship between the president and congress.” Retrieved from http://www.helium.com/items/1209420-the-relationship-between-the-president-and-congress. Foley, M., & Owens, J.E. (1996). Congress and presidency: institutional politics in a separated system. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Martin, S. (2007). “Congress and the President: Do They Work Together?” Retrieved from http://voices.yahoo.com/congress-president-they-work-together-158963.html?cat=37. Shull, S.A. (2000). Presidential-congressional relations: policy and time approaches. Michigan: University of Michigan Press. Tailer, H. (2013). “Obama impeachment hearings begin!” Weekly World News. February 9, 2013. Retrieved from http://weeklyworldnews.com/politics/45122/obama-impeachment-hearings-begin/. Thurber, J.A. (2009). Rivals for power: presidential-congressional relations. New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More