How do we shift power from the White House back to Congress?

[Politruk]

I have noticed that nobody here ever defends the principle that the president should have the power of a "unitary executive" -- only that he does and the Constitution implies it.

This kind of question should only and always be argued in terms of what position you would defend if you were a delegate the the Constitutional Convention.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I have noticed that nobody here ever defends the principle that the president should have the power of a "unitary executive" -- only that he does and the Constitution implies it.

This kind of question should only and always be argued in terms of what position you would defend if you were a delegate the the Constitutional Convention.

Under what circumstances though? You can't throw out a CC as something that happens in a vacuum though it might be ideal if it did. Like if the FF had said "Okay every 20 years we're gonna revisit everything." It would probably MOSTLY be formality thing mind you. Maybe a slight reword here or there while under hopefully low/mid stress situations. But the circumstances matter.

 

[Politruk]

Under what circumstances though? You can't throw out a CC as something that happens in a vacuum though it might be ideal if it did. Like if the FF had said "Okay every 20 years we're gonna revisit everything." It would probably MOSTLY be formality thing mind you. Maybe a slight reword here or there while under hopefully low/mid stress situations. But the circumstances matter.

I simply mean that the desirability of centralized executve power should be debated on its own merits, not in terms of constitutional law -- and nobody ever seems to defend it on its own merits.

 

[Rebel5soul]

I have noticed that nobody here ever defends the principle that the president should have the power of a "unitary executive" -- only that he does and the Constitution implies it.

This kind of question should only and always be argued in terms of what position you would defend if you were a delegate the the Constitutional Convention.

Let's turn that around. Exactly how would it work if the President didn't have unitary power?

 

[Politruk]

Let's turn that around. Exactly how would it work if the President didn't have unitary power?

The way it worked for most of American history, with each federal agency having a recognized zone of autonomy to pursue its mission, and the independence and authority of the judiciary never questioned.

 

[Rebel5soul]

The way it worked for most of American history, with each federal agency having a recognized zone of autonomy to pursue its mission, and the independence and authority of the judiciary never questioned.

Now there's a prescription for disaster.

 

[Politruk]

Now there's a prescription for disaster.

It never was before.

 

[Politruk]

Not even FDR demanded as much power as the present administration.

 

[Rebel5soul]

It never was before.

The government you're talking about is LONG gone and hasn't existed since the 1890's. We have had an explozive growth in government and agencies, especially since the FDR years. Virtually all of those agencies have to interoperate with each other which means that independence CAN NOT be permitted.

Now if your plan is to gut the government of all those agencies, have at it.

 

[Politruk]

The government you're talking about is LONG gone and hasn't existed since the 1890's

No, it existed at all times before Trump. Nixon found that out when he tried to break the Justice Department to his will.

 

[GlitterGoth]

Seems like it is way too late. The majority are compromised idiots. By design.

 

[Politruk]

Seems like it is way too late. The majority are compromised idiots. By design.

Every revolution is impossible until it becomes inevitable.

 

[Rickslaw101]

It occurs to me that a period when the same party controls both branches is exactly the right time to dismantle the Imperial Presidency -- because that is when it can be done without being in any way a partisan contest -- attention can be focused on the proper allocation of power between branches, not between parties.

Why would you want to do that? Congress is always locked in gridlock.

 

[GlitterGoth]

Every revolution is impossible until it becomes inevitable.

I agree. It is the eye of the storm.

 

[Politruk]

Why would you want to do that? Congress is always locked in gridlock.

Better a gridlocked Congress than an Administration that knows its mind and wants to accomplish the things this one does.

 

[Rickslaw101]

Better a gridlocked Congress than an Admnistration that knows its mind and wants to accomplish the things this one does.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[dmallord]

Every revolution is impossible until it becomes inevitable.

Communist thoughts.

 

[TomTeacher19]

Elect someone who cares about their country and being a public servant to the white House

 

[Politruk]

Elect someone who cares about their country and being a public servant to the white House

Harris does, but she couldn't get elected.

 

[Rebel5soul]

Better a gridlocked Congress than an Administration that knows its mind and wants to accomplish the things this one does.

And in that post we're beginning to see a glimmer of wisdom awakening in you.