The interaction between the executive and legislative branches of government depends on the specific party that is ruling and the aspects that form part of their respective manifestos. Another basis is the personalities of the paper in charge of the government and occupying the leadership positions. As a result of the notable and exceptional inauguration of Donald Trump as 45th president and the existing challenges in United States, there has always been high speculations as far as many policy issues are concerned (Carmines & Fowler, 2017). This paper will be examining the new relationship that is existing between the executive and legislative branches.
The greatest challenge that the United States of America is encountering is one that has received less attention and normally in shrill dual-party tones. This is a challenge that constitutional conformists (who are less in number) understand, and a challenge that reformists are beginning to recognize again the disarrangement of the many branches of the government comparable to the thing the makers of the United States’ Constitution anticipated. . Fouirnaies (2018) determined that t he Supreme Court has made overreaching efforts even beyond its pattern to cause the realignment. There is implausible growth of the national government’s influence and powers over the last two decades. Above all these, evidently, there is advancement of the powers and authority of the executive docket as the legislative branch is suppressed.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Currently, the media environment has been portraying the president as one the one office that all aspects are transferred and have their being. The situation may also be accelerated by partisanship, in which case one party has the White House and it extends its jurisdiction in spite of the other party’s cries of hopelessness. It is at the point the wailing party holds the White House again and pushes aside all regarding its intended great aims (Bolton & Thrower, 2016). The Congress itself has members who possess a tendency for redirecting hard decisions to the executive docket. The whole idea is that the current government, precisely Trump’s presidency, offers an inestimable opportunity to harmonize the executive and legislative branches, since the opposite party as well as a majority of his individual party fear the current president. This offers a political inducement for steps that give restraints in executive authority.
Several conservatives gave conflicting opinions about the position of Trump. Even when he had not become a president, there were different levels of hatred for him. From the time of his election, most of these conservatives, had decided to allow him time to take the steps, both because of adhering to the ballot box results as well as the nation’s politics, and for the legitimate concerns of many citizens who are not convinced the election was manipulated (Hamilton & Slutsky, 2017) . The current president should take this opportunity to come up with legislative priorities and to prove that he can govern.
A big part of the legislating functions that is supposed to be executed by the Congress is carried out by regulatory agencies. This is happening since the Congress wants it. For instance, the REINS Act that demands that any law with a budget of above $100 million to subjected to an up and down vote by Congress (Hamilton & Slutsky, 2017) . This could be the best strategy to restore a constitutional balance between the executive and legislative branches. It will be helpful that way since one challenge is that so much of legislating functions that should remain in the docket of the Congress is left to the regulatory agencies, often because Congress needs it.
There is also the Lee-sponsored bill, the Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2016. It performs poorly than its impressive name and status would indicate. However, again, it can be a significant phase in the proper course, both symbolically and fundamentally. The bills endeavor to terminate what is referred in policy legalese as ‘ Chevron deference,” getting its title from the Supreme Court decision which maintained that when Congress does not solve a problem as in the statute, courts should submit to federal watchdogs’ clarification of such a law. As Lee maintains, the principle of Chevron deference leads to a “specter Fourth Branch of government” that comes up with its laws and not regarding public acceptance or criticisms (Winkler, 2017). The law would substitute the Chevron- deference paradigm with ancient judicial appraisal of executive activities.
Considering the relationship between heightened committee oversight and reduced congressional effect compared to the president, one might be surprised about the existence of various committee administrators must have affect the rest of the frameworks. It could be that the influential committee overseers have caused the weakness in the congress or a reaction to forgoing presidential impact (Winkler, 2017). If more committee engagement leads to congressional influence, then there would not be an increased presidential influence as it is the case. Since the house and senate directions that speculate the committee’s jurisdictions sufficiently fix the extent of committee oversight in the interim, it is evident that the creation of committees is the reason for reduced congressional supervision rather than a response (Hamilton & Slutsky, 2017) . The jurisdictions of the committee definitely change with time as committees modify their jurisdictions to supervise specifically striking issues.
In addition, concerning foreign policy, the post-Vietnam War Powers Act as well as the post-9/11 Authorization for Use of Military Force has allowed the heads of state to utilize American military force one-sidedly and virtually without any restriction. This is possibly even more critical currently because of the character of the Donald Trump (Jones, 2014). Positively, the stubbornness and firmness of Donald Trump is what may calm and fix issues in tough states such as Washington D.C. However, as much as terrorist organizations should not be entertained and the president as the commander-in-chief has a wide responsibility, but the war-instituting supremacies have been extended way above what any of the constitutors might have foreseen (Carmines & Fowler, 2017). With the leadership of President Obama, the United States was involved in war in Libya and secret wars in Syria and Yemen, and other regions, guided by a legal injunction that was not intended to reach those regions, those enemies, those clashes. If the fights were decent steps, then Congress should have considered voting them in, but it tells you the disparity between the executive and legislative branches.
In conclusion, the new relationship between the executive and legislative branches is that the committee oversight are given more influence that the congress are reducing their impact of core issues of the nation. The number of committees that are exercising active oversight depends on the presidential interest and impact in the agency. The executive is seen to be conducting active oversight and would want to act according to the interests of the president and not being subject to the jurisdictions of the congress.
References
Bolton, A., & Thrower, S. (2016). Legislative Capacity and Executive Unilateralism. American Journal of Political Science , 60 (3), 649-663.
Carmines, E. G., & Fowler, M. (2017). The Temptation of Executive Authority: How Increased Polarization and the Decline in Legislative Capacity Have Contributed to the Expansion of Presidential Power. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies , 24 (2), 369-397.
Fouirnaies, A. (2018). When Are Agenda Setters Valuable? American Journal of Political Science , 62 (1), 176-191
Hamilton, J., & Slutsky, S. (2017). Judicial review and the power of the executive and legislative branches. Research in Economics , 71 (1), 67-85.
Jones, J. M. (2014). Americans’ Trust in Executive, Legislative Branches Down. Gallup, September , 15 .
Winkler, M. B. (2017). Executive Order Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States: Violating First Amendment Rights or Altering Constitutional Provisions Granting Foreign Policy Powers to the President. TM Cooley L. Rev. , 34 , 79.
