American politics is often defined by a persistent power conflict between the executive and the legislative branches of the government. Nevertheless, the concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances are to ensure that the branches of government provide a balance to help keep the entire government under control. Yet, according to James Madison, the legislative branch should be and was unquestionably dominant (Madison). Over the course of history, the executive branch grew in both size and power to the point where it occasionally overtook the legislative. Today, though both branches have major factors that contribute to their power, the legislative remains the more dominant branch for its ability to override presidential vetoes,
…show more content…
(Epstein, 123). These abilities give the legislative branch power over both the executive and the judicial branches.
As the prime lawmaking body of the American government, Congress has the power to affect everything from the inner workings of the government to the daily lives of every American. Without laws, there would be chaos. The function of government being simply enough to govern, Congress appears to be the naturally dominant branch. With two-thirds of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and ratification by three-fourths of the states, Congress even has the power to amend the Constitution itself. With the proper support, Congress can also change the fundamental blueprint for the American government.
The House of Representatives and the Senate are two chambers under the legislative branch. The system of “bicameralism” in the legislative branch lends its own support to the power of the Congress by splitting the Congress into two chambers. The legislative branch becomes more versatile and responsive because the duties are divided. It also help prevents the branch to less likely tyrannize. The House of Representatives, the lower chamber, is able to filter out many of the issues that the Senate, the upper chamber, should not bother spending time on. This allows the Congress to not have to waste …show more content…
Yet, the incentive about the power of the legislative branch is that it is somewhat less dependent upon who holds office inside of it. The power that Congress exercises remains specifically defined in the Constitution. Article two for executive branch display some vague interpretations not making everything clear and precise. According to Balkin, if or before Obama continues to try and increase the presidential power, there are “many problems he will face from the presidency-on-steroids he inherits” (Balkin). Taking on responsibilities from previous persons and trying to turn things around based on one’s belief can be difficult and there is no specific way on how to do it. The Constitution spells out the first article and the enumerated powers that Congress may hold. This is intended to keep even what was by design supposed to be the strongest branch of the government from gaining tyrannical power as well as specific orders and guidelines for the legislative
(Epstein, 123). These abilities give the legislative branch power over both the executive and the judicial branches.
As the prime lawmaking body of the American government, Congress has the power to affect everything from the inner workings of the government to the daily lives of every American. Without laws, there would be chaos. The function of government being simply enough to govern, Congress appears to be the naturally dominant branch. With two-thirds of the House of Representatives and the Senate, and ratification by three-fourths of the states, Congress even has the power to amend the Constitution itself. With the proper support, Congress can also change the fundamental blueprint for the American government.
The House of Representatives and the Senate are two chambers under the legislative branch. The system of “bicameralism” in the legislative branch lends its own support to the power of the Congress by splitting the Congress into two chambers. The legislative branch becomes more versatile and responsive because the duties are divided. It also help prevents the branch to less likely tyrannize. The House of Representatives, the lower chamber, is able to filter out many of the issues that the Senate, the upper chamber, should not bother spending time on. This allows the Congress to not have to waste …show more content…
Yet, the incentive about the power of the legislative branch is that it is somewhat less dependent upon who holds office inside of it. The power that Congress exercises remains specifically defined in the Constitution. Article two for executive branch display some vague interpretations not making everything clear and precise. According to Balkin, if or before Obama continues to try and increase the presidential power, there are “many problems he will face from the presidency-on-steroids he inherits” (Balkin). Taking on responsibilities from previous persons and trying to turn things around based on one’s belief can be difficult and there is no specific way on how to do it. The Constitution spells out the first article and the enumerated powers that Congress may hold. This is intended to keep even what was by design supposed to be the strongest branch of the government from gaining tyrannical power as well as specific orders and guidelines for the legislative