Guy Zuv's US Foreign Policy

The main breaking point between the President and Congress was in the Vietnam war. This war sparked a debate on who has the right to declare war, and who has the right to only send advisory troops. Only Congress has the right to declare war, the President can only send advisory troops to other countries. This is a very controversial topic because many people think that the President can declare war, but they have to ask the Congress first. Another convincing reason on why Congress is more powerful that the President is the fact that Congress can make laws and the President has no say. Laws are the outline of America, and they are the only thing keeping crime from all streets in all states across America. Those are only two reasons why Congress is more important to America than the President. All of these powers are stated in Article 1 of the Constitution and the powers of the President are listed in Article 2 of the Constitution. Some people still disagree, though, they think that the President has more rights than

The president is the foreign policy leader for the United States with an important political, military and economic role in the international arena. If there is collision between the president and congress, can congress restrain the president in foreign policy making?

The legislative branch is also the “only part of the government that can make new laws or change existing laws.”("white house"). A society is formed and controlled by rules and regulations, those who make these rules and regulations basically control society. The president does have the power to veto any law he doesn’t approve of, but if Congress is in accord with the Senate they can “override his veto with two thirds vote of each chamber.”("white house") ounce again subordinating the president . When the legislative branch has both houses in coalition with each other the executive branch really has no power over the legislative branch.

Richard Neustadt had famously asserted that the American system is one of “separated institutions sharing powers”, this implies a hopeful sense of cooperation between the three branches of government (cited in Andres et Thurber, 2000:554). However, political realities led scholars to dispute Neustadt’s claim, proclaiming the system as “separate institutions competing for power” (Murphy, 2007:9). Political paralysis, particularly between the US president and Congress, has become increasingly common in the modern era. “President proposes, Congress disposes” famously sloganised the relationship between the two institutions (Johannes, 1974). Many scholars attributed this strained relationship to the constitutional design (Edward

The relationship between the president and Congress has changed drastically in the past two hundred years. The framers of the constitution did not want an executive power in charge of the whole country in fear of it turning into a monarchy. They knew they needed a leader for America though. The framers did not want political parties. “Political parties established after Washington left the presidency” (Mandate). The relationship between Congress and the president changed in a very visible way. In the past, the president would meet to discuss issues with Congress, but that is not how it is today. Also the president would have to go through congress to pass a bill or an amendment, but presidents found a way around going through congress. The president can sign a bill without congress’s approval. For example, president Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln wanted to pass an amendment that would end slavery but Congress said no. Lincoln then did what the people wanted and signed the emancipation proclamation anyways to end slavery. Also known as the thirteenth amendment. Some presidents even put the people in power.

Congressional authorization is the ability to empower and allocate funds, which supports Congress with an effective tool for omission and authority of intelligence activities. Congress is expected to have more power than the President and the Supreme Court. Its powers are also known to be Constitutional as well as evolutionary (ushistory). After the Senate as well as the House of Representatives approves a bill or proposed law, it then becomes an actual law. These two houses also share other powers, that involve coin money, the power to declare war, establishing rules of naturalization as well as immigration, raise an army and a navy, regulate commerce, and set up the federal courts along with their jurisdictions (ushistory). Although Presidents can have authority to act without Congressional authorization when necessary for the nations security, it would be better if they did seek Congressional authorization before acting or making any important decision regarding the nations security, in order to preserve Constitutional checks and balances, as well as make the right decisions and protect the President politically.

If we go back in time Congress was doing good job. According to the book “The Broken Branch How Congress Is Failing America and How to Get It Back on Track” By Thomas E. Mann and Norman J. Ornstein, earlys of 1820s, House and Senate were working together to process legislation. Most of 19th century, the Congress dominated policymaking maintain their privilege. I believe it in the late of 1950s the Congress was being controlled by independent people. By then there were not

Congress and the president use their powers to check and balance each other. One power of Congress is the ability to declare war. However, Congress generally gives the president control during war time. Because of this, the president is able to acquire more power over the war while Congress can do little if they have already given their approval. After the Vietnam War, in which Presidents Johnson and Nixon continued to wage despite a divided Congress[i]; they decided that the Constitution did not warrant the president to have the power to declare war, so they passed the War

The Power and Significance of Congress Firstly it is important to look at the power and significance of congress as a legislative body. This includes the creation of law, and the scrutiny of the executive. Because the US federal system is ruled by 'separation of powers', it is important that the legislative - congress - acts as a good check and restraint on the executive - the president.

The government of the United States of America has been around for over 2 centuries, in this time the original setup has been little altered. The government is composed of three individual branches: judicial, executive, and legislative branches. All three branches are held together using a system of checks and balances. While each branch has some kind of trump or has control over another branch, some branches are arguably more powerful than others. The main focus of this paper will be on where the executive branch stands power-wise. When our founding fathers first started building our nation from the dust, they had in mind a system of branches where no one branch was more powerful than the others. The decision of whether or not they hit

War is a horrible evil that is unfortunately sometimes necessary. Nobody likes war especially the American public. But who is really to blame? Is the president who entered our country in the war or the president who inherited the war to blame? Neither but the real question is how the presidents handled themselves in office. One thing that the American public doesn’t really look at in detail is how the president at the time executed his office before and during the war. How did the president approach the war? Did the president keep the same cabinet in the country’s time of crisis or did he change it? Did the president’s military strategies change or did they stay the same? Did the public support him? There have been some classic examples in history with presidents who “started” or entered a war and then having it carry over the successor’s term and even more cases of presidents changing their policies they were so set on before entering a war and during a war. There was the Vietnam War, which included Presidents Lyndon B. Jonson and Richard Nixon.

Especially with a divided government, and even without, the president is challenged to gain the support of Congress (Heffernan, 2005:59). While the President is responsible for carrying out the law and can even issue executive orders ultimately Congress hold the purse strings. Without the budgetary support of Congress the President’s agenda will not be fulfilled. Treaties and all appointments from cabinet officials to Supreme Court justices have to be approved by Congress, specifically the Senate. “As a result, the White House is engaged in a constant process of persuasion” (Heffernan,

Another very notable role of the President also outlined in Article II. Section 2. of the Constitution and reads, “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(http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html). It essentially gives the President power to make treaties with foreign nations however, two-thirds of Congress must be in agreement with the decision. Although the President, or the Executive Branch can be interpreted as the most authoritative arm of government, its powers are still limited and restricted by the process of checks and balances. Each branch of government has some governance over the other two divisions. For instance, just as it is outlined above, the President can nominate Ambassadors and Judges of the Supreme Court but the decision must be upheld by Congress. In other words, under the "Advice and Consent clause the appointed member must be sworn in by the Senate. Again, this is an example of how the system of checks and balances limits the powers of the President.

American politics is often defined by a continuing power conflict between the executive and the legislative branches of the government. This struggle for political power between the two stronger branches of the three is inherent in the Constitution, itself. The concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances ensure that the branches of government will remain in conflict and provide a balance that keeps the entire government under control. As it was first established, the executive branch was much smaller and weaker than as we know it today. Consequently, the legislative branch was unquestionably dominant. Over the course of history, the executive branch grew in both size and power to the point where it occasionally overtook the

Congress has helped develop the Presidency as we know it today. This is because Congress argues over proposals and legislation proposed by the President. They are a major determent in whether bills turn into laws. But it’s not easy. One reason for this is because there are many powerful groups out there who argue about what should be discussed such as air pollution with the EPA or jobs.