Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
Originally posted by: wetech
Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
I would like to see congress hobble the executive though. The president (and all those who will serve in the future) need to be taught that they are merely figureheads, and are under the total authority of the people, by way of the legislative branch.
Can you show me that part of the Constitution? I must have missed where it said that Congress is supreme.
With regards to allowing military action, yes. War is supposed to be declared by Congress, and only by Congress.
Furthermore our government is supposed to be somewhat of a democracy (democratic republic at least) which means that the people are not ruled by the government officials they elect: those officials serve the will (and at the whim) of the people.
There is no question that the executive has massively expanded its powers in the twentieth century...far beyond what was envisioned/intended. That was never supposed to happen since an overly strong executive (a king) is what the colonies were rebelling against. That's why I say they need hobbling.
Executive power (or latitude imo) has been on the slow increase since Washington was sworn in. Even Jefferson who was supposedly the paragon of traditional republican (notice the little r people) values wielded the power of the Executive in ways that seem to contradict his stated beliefs. The most extreme height it ever reached was with Lincoln in the Civil War, he was the closest thing to a dictator the US ever had in the office.
Congress however still has the purse strings just as they always have had. It is as powerful as it ever has been. They just seem to be willing to let the Executeve branch handle a lot of stuff they don't want to or are afraid to.
Another prime reason for mixed control is that Congress can't logistically handle all of the foreign policy load. That's why there are 40,000 people working in the State Dept.