You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #19: How true. The President has limited powers, given by the Constitution. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
RickFromMN Donating Member (275 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-21-11 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. How true. The President has limited powers, given by the Constitution.
Edited on Thu Jul-21-11 10:54 PM by RickFromMN
Otherwise, it depends on the law passed by Congress, and signed by the President.
The President's check on Congress is the veto, and to a lesser extent the bully pulpit.
The President has to stop the legislation before it becomes law.

I watched an explanation from one of the former Presidents on this very subject.
If the law is "general", open to interpretation, the President has lots of latitude.
If the law is "strict", with little ambiguity, the President can, at best,
go to the Supreme Court claiming the law is unconstitutional.

When I was in China, a person I was working with, didn't understand our form of government.
He knew there were three branches, but little else.

I tried to explain our form of government using the Constitution as a blueprint.

Article I gave all power to Congress.

Article II created the Executive Branch, with the veto, to check the power of Congress.

Article III created the Supreme Court, to interpret the Constitution.
It was only, with time, did the Supreme Court claim the power to declare laws unconstitutional.

I told him, Congress has the power of the purse, and with that it can fund or de-fund anything.
Congress has the power of impeachment, and can remove anyone in the Executive Branch,
from the President on down, to anyone in the Judicial Branch, including the Supreme Court Justices.

A united Congress cannot be stopped. A United Congress is a dangerous thing.
One branch of Congress can, and many times will, stop the actions of the other branch of Congress.

I know we have two branches of Congress to please the small and large states.
The effect of having two branches is to slow down the actions of Congress.
The Presidential veto and the Supreme Court review slows down the actions of Congress.

The Constitution was written to give all power to Congress, and then check its power.

Congress can, unless the item is specifically spelled out by the Constitution,
take back any power it gives the Executive Branch or the Judicial Branch.

And now we have a bunch of people, in Congress, intent on wrecking our economy. Heaven help us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC