Do our current “major” political parties by their nature bring us closer to a unitary form of government? In the first 6 six years of the Bush presidency we seemed to get closer and closer to a unitary government (to Dick Cheney’s delight). Republican members of Congress seemed to be Republicans first and then members of Congress, as opposed to a separate branch of the federal government. In some ways the House Republican revolt on the Bush supported financial bailout was exciting to see, for a moment Congress was again a co-equal branch. We seem to go between a unitary government and a divided unwilling to work together government. Is this caused by the political parties? Will the new Congress and new administration be different? Certainly when one party controls both the executive and legislative branches they are going to see things similarly but shouldn’t Congress protect its integrity as an equal branch of government and how does Congress do this?
Tags
2009 activism antifederalist Aristotle bono Bush Center for the Constitution Cicero citizenship Clinton constitution Constitutional Faith constitutional teaching Declaration of Independence Disorder Earth from space Federalist Federalist No. 2 Federalist No. 14 Fourth of July Independence Day innovation invention John Jay Katie Reen Knowledge Kuhn Levinson maker's knowledge McCain Michael Jackson Montpelier NAACP Noah Pickus Obama panel presentations Preamble Red Boxes Under the Tree! Scipio Scipio's Dream tech technology TED Thomas Jefferson Virtual AcademySearch
Recent Comments
Categories
- 2007 National Academy
- 2008 National Academy
- 2009 National Academy
- 2010 National Academy
- Blogroll
- BLUE/Government
- BLUE: Antifederalist Thinking
- BROWN/Citizen
- Front of the Class
- Fruit Plate
- GREEN/Nature
- ORANGE/Civilization
- POLITY/constitution
- PURPLE/Polity
- PURPLE: Federalist Thinking
- RED/People
- Uncategorized
- WHOLENESS/order
- YELLOW/Humanity
© 2012 Politicolor | Powered by WordPress
It’s possible that there has been no better moment in recent history than now for Congress to reassert itself. The manner in which it does so, though, is the tricky part. It will largely fall to Mr.Obama to open the door to it, too. He will have to truly perceive himself as head of a co-equal branch, and welcome the assertiveness of the legislature. But will he be able to do so, while at the same time reassuring Americans that “help is on the way?” The relief he refers to is in the form of cash and prizes distributed by the executive branch. The power of the purse? Coughed up by a Congress. Running the country via legislation? Passe.
If Mr. Obama isn’t prepared to allow a reinvigorated Congress to take the lead on recovery legislation, and thus forgo some of the credit for possible successes, then it can’t happen. A Congress that asserts itself in opposition to the President will find itself rendered nearly irrelevant, or, at best, a faint Greek chorus.
Will Harris spent a few days with us recently, in Vancouver, WA. (Yes, the USA has a Vancouver, too.) We talked about how this might come about, mainly in the context of a hypothetical “unseen debate” over Constitutional matters. The exercise was more than moving, as several in our crowd dabbed at tears for how far our nation seems to have gone from ‘the supreme law of the land.’
Congress should, without question, protect “its integrity as an equal branch of the government,” as you well-said. I think, though, that we’ve gone so far down the path toward a unitary executive that a person with a serious commitment to the re-balancing of powers won’t get elected.