- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
So out of all of the presidents that have come and go, ONE president avoided testifying before a congressional hearing and that makes the executive more powerful? I think it's gonna take a lot more than just one person to overcome the power that Congress holds over the executive..
You are saying that the fact that an override veto is something that is more difficult to do means that it makes Congress less powerful, but I completely disagree with you there. An override veto is not supposed to be an easy process, or else literally every single bill that Congress put through would pass even if the president vetoed it. A veto override is only meant to be accomplished when the bill is something that is a big big deal and Congress is very passionate about.
You are correct in saying that the president has the power to deploy troops, but after 90 days, Congress has the power to bring the troops back, and at the end of it all, it comes down to Congress to officially declare war or not, so who's hands does the power REALLY fall in? Obviously Congress.
While the executive branch has the power of executive privilege, Congress has the power to subpoena, which is summons a person to court where they can question their constitutionality. They can also hold hearings, and during these hearings, they can put the president under oath and ask whatever questions they know will make him look bad, and if he lies he goes to jail. This gives Congress tremendous power over the executive, YET AGAIN ;)
The legislative branch has more power over the executive branch because Congress has the power of the commerce clause. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution gives Congress the power "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." Trade happens so often within our government, and as soon as any trade becomes between more than one state, Congress can step in and pass laws that states have to follow. This also gives Congress the power to regulate trade among other nations, including all imports and exports.
This is such a good point. Congress can use their power of the purse to try to basically bribe the executive into passing laws when they don't have the power to make it a federal issue. An example of this is when Congress passed a law to withhold 10% of funds for highways of they didn’t raise the drinking age to 21. This power allows Congress to basically manipulate the executive into doing almost anything for them by holding back funds until they do what Congress wants.
The legislative branch has more power over the executive branch because Congress has the power to impeach the president. The House has powers listed in the Constitution to impeach a government official, and the Senate is given powers to host impeachment trials and convict. If convicted, this person will be removed from office and will be indefinitely disqualified from holding future office. This gives Congress a strong hold over the executive because if they deem the incumbent unconstitutional, they can actually do something about it.
Most of the taxes that are put into place by this new government are tariffs, taxes on imports and exports. How exactly do you suppose that implementing these tariffs will give the government the power to “take your property”? The enumerated powers granted to the government in the Articles of Confederation include the power to tax, to regulate commerce, to raise/maintain armed forces, and to establish a Post Office (page 294-295). These are all things that are put into place to help put structure in our government that benefits the people, not manipulate the people and try to steal their land.
The central government only controls things that the states could not handle regulating on their own. For example, states thought that they could manage having their own currencies. This was until we had states going bankrupt. Shifting power to the central government is allowing our nation to function properly and smoothly as possible. Look at the enumerated powers; no branch of government has unlimited power. These enumerated powers limit what the branches of government are allowed to have control over (page 302). You also bring up the point that people on the supreme court are appointed, but you fail to talk about the members of the Congress are elected by direct popular vote to represent the people!
Checks and balances! The system of checks and balances was put into place for this reason exactly. There are three branches of government, all of them responsible for holding each other accountable, and the power is distributed evenly within these branches. James Madison said it himself in Federalist 51 when he said, “It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices [checks and balances] should be necessary to control the abuses of government.” Take that, anti-fed!
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!