Congress and Presidency in the United States - Essay Example

Congress and Presidency in the United s al affiliation The federal government of the United s is divided into three branches that are intended to perform separate functions independently. These branches are the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. However, the legislature is more powerful since it has the role of oversight and making laws that affect the operations of the arms of government. The president, on the other hand, is the head of state and plays a significant role in the coordination of the executive to deliver its mandate to the citizens. Therefore, there is a dependency created by the Congress and the presidency, and they share legislative powers (Dewhirst and Rausch, 2009). While the doctrine of separation of powers was intended that the three arms act autonomously, it has turned out over time that it is a system of shared powers. According to Richard Neustadt, a president is a person trusted by the public to offer viable solutions to problems. Thus, he or she should work not as a master, but as a coworker with the elected leaders in the Congress (Lee, 2012). In this regard, the primary duties of the presidency are to persuade the Congress to legislate on crucial matters. Similarly, the Congress also depends on the president to signs bills into law, thereby making the sharing of power more conspicuous. Nevertheless, there are constitutional provisions that allow the Congress to pass bills into laws. For instance, if the president fails to sign a draft bill in 10 days, it automatically becomes law. Likewise, if the president declines to sign a bill into law and sends it back to Congress, the Congress can, therefore, apply the two-thirds majority rule to override the president’s decision. Furthermore, while the Congress has the numbers to override a presidential veto, it is important to note that the house is divided into two: the Senate and the House of Representatives. The bicameral Congress, thus, has mixed politicians across the divide of Republicans, Democrats, and the rest. Therefore, reaching a decisive conclusion is not always possible. On the hand, the president may opt to institute executive orders to fight the Congress, which is usually detrimental to national development. This culminates in a conflict of interests and a balance ought to be found. The stalemate can be solved through sober consultations by both the presidency and Congress, in the long run, usually after one President vacates office (Christenson and Kriner, 2015). For example, some of the policies proposed by Bill Clinton, including welfare and gun control, were overruled when George W. Bush came into power in 2001. In this case, the presidency and Congress had to concur in voiding previous policies and drafting new ones. Nevertheless, when George Bush’s executive lost connection with the Congress and made policies on Afghan and Iraq war, the legislature used the Congressional Review Act during the first term of Obama administration to reverse the unimplemented bills. This step further proves that legislative powers must be shared to realize the intended effects. Concerning the federal budget, the Congress reserves the rights to checks and balances. Ideally, the legislature should pass or refer the budget proposal back to the treasury without the involvement of the president. However, there was an amendment in 1921 that requires the president to present the budget to the Congress. The budget outlines the proposals for revenue and expenditure by the federal agencies. Also contained in the budget are recommendations and key economic indicators. During the entire process, the Congress has its committees scrutinizing the proposals to offer a concurrent resolution (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2015). These recommendations including clear guidelines and limits to which spending, allocations, and appropriations should be confined. Notably, the president and his executive experts have no power over the appropriations. Despite the fact that they are the same people who request the appropriations, the Congress practices discretionary powers to grant the requests. This entire process indicates that the success of the executive regarding budgetary control heavily depends on the resolutions and recommendations of the Congress. Therefore, the powers of formulation and implementation of the budget are shared, violating the doctrine of separation of powers. In particular, the legislature can alter the budgets due to discretionary powers while the president has to make submissions avoid adverse changes and support the proposed budget. Throughout the history of the United States, there has been a supremacy battle between the president and the Congress. There have been two presidential impeachment attempts, for Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton in 1863 and 1999 respectively. Richard Nixon had to resign in 1974 in fear of impeachment due to his controversial governance. The Congress has always threatened federal official with removal from office unless they comply with some standards with which the Congress is contented. In line with this, all presidential nominations and appointments are subject to approval by the members of the House of Representatives. This push is aimed at fostering the efficiency, transparency, and accountability of the officials. The Senate usually summons a federal official after allegations of corruption or other gross misconduct in office surface. However, the executives are always reluctant to offer detailed information since the politicians can easily use the government data to manipulate various aspects of federal leadership. As a result, there is conundrum on the vetting process and the ingenuity of congressmen. Therefore, the appointment is not a preserve of the presidency, confirming sharing of powers. On the same breadth, all treaties that the government commits to ought to be ratified by the Senate, even after assessment and acceptance by presidential advisers. In the recent times when the world is slowly turning into a battlefield, the United States has to take steps as the superpower to enhance that peace prevails. In this pursuit, there has been heated debate on who should authorize the military to go to war or continue fighting in foreign countries. During the constitution making process, it was anticipated that separation of powers would make the president conduct war, but the Congress was to declare the war. For many years, this remained the norm until after the Vietnam War that led to the killing of about 53,000 military men from the US. Besides, the war had not been declared by the Congress and ended in massive fiscal spending. The end of this war led to ratification of War resolutions Act of 1973, where the president’s powers to declare war were constrained. In 2013, President Obama made a formal request to the Congress to launch a military attack on Syria (Council on Foreign Relations, 2015). Many political analysts viewed this as precedence to presidents who will come after. While it is undisputed that the president is the commander-in-chief of the defense forces, there is involvement of the Congress in controlling what the president can do in the exercise of his jurisdiction (Council on Foreign Relations, 2015). However, during the attack on Libya in 2011, the legislature needed not authorize war since it was presumed combat was not in the quest to amend or change the constitution. Therefore, the security of the nation and the involvement of the US army in foreign wars depend on the intention. Thus, the presidency and Congress share the responsibility of ensuring war matters are addressed adequately. From the preceding, it is clear that the Congress and the presidency are intertwined government arms that relate in a complex manner. Therefore, there lacks independence between the two with the congress assuming more oversight and the executive assuming more formulations. Hence, the two share power without utter dominance. The main areas of focus are foreign affairs and treaties, public appointments, budget making process, and matters of defense. Since all these aspects are crucial in national development, there should be a balance of the presidency and Congress through persuasion and appropriate bargaining for support. References National conference of state legislatures. (2015). The federal budget process. Retrieved from http://www.ncsl.org/research/fiscal-policy/federal-budget-process.aspx Council on foreign relations. (2015). The balance of war powers: The U.S. president and congress. Retrieved from http://www.cfr.org/united-states/balance-war-powers-us-president-congress/p13092 Lee, M. (2012). Congress Vs. the bureaucracy: Muzzling agency public relations. Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press. Dewhirst, R. E., & Rausch, J. D. (2009). Encyclopedia of the United States congress. New York: InfoBase Publishing. Christenson, D. P., & Kriner, D. L. (2015). Political constraints on unilateral executive action. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 65(4), 897-931. Read More