Undermines Congressional power Argument: Checks and balances
Counter: Ineffective and inefficient
In my first argument I discuss the downsides of bypassing Congress. I also acknowledged the counterargument that Congress is inefficient. |
Executive orders made by the Obama administration, in recent years, have undermined Congressional power. The executive decisions being made from within the White House are deliberate. As President Barack Obama emphasizes, the orders are “not going to stop” (“Remarks on Signing an Executive Order” par. 15). Not only has the President ignored Congress by signing legislation without their approval, but he has stated that he will continue doing so. With President Obama choosing to ignore Congress many are starting to see the errors of his ways. Dale Sprusansky wrote a piece on an unpopular executive order in the works by President Obama entitled, "Guantanamo Bay: Year 14." Sprusansky complains that even if Congress disagreed with the motion being made President Obama would just use his executive power to override lawmakers (par. 8). His actions have forced members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to fight back. It is the members of Congress’ job to fight for what they believe the American citizens that voted them into office would want, and they are not backing down. Haley Sweetland Edwards, a writer for Time Magazine acknowledges that Congress “represent[s] a pushback against a White House that has used regulatory and executive action. . ." (par. 3). The actions that members of Congress have taken have made their disapproval of executive actions clear, and President Obama has made clear that he is not concerned with Congressional approval. Although Congress forms one-third of the American government, it has become obvious that the current President of the United States of America is not concerned with whether or not the executive orders he is signing into action are approved by anyone other than himself.
Continually, Senators and Members of the House of Representatives have been outspoken about the executive orders being formed recently. The former House Speaker John A. Boehner has been forthright against President Obama’s executive orders. He has even gone as far to say that President Obama’s particular order dealing with immigration should instead be named “executive amnesty” (“Obama Readies Executive Order” par. 1). The House Speaker is not the only person in government to openly take a stance against the President’s actions. Many people in the political and governmental line of work have come together in order to take a stronger stance against executive orders. In fact, Edwards agrees when she discusses that as a result of the widespread disapproval of the actions of the President, and the union of his opposition, within the last ten years suing the federal government has become typical (par. 6). Because of the rise in numbers of lawsuits against the federal government, it is obvious that America needs a change. President Obama’s executive orders have bypassed Congress, and Congress has since taken a stance against him. While the negative effects of bypassing Congress are apparent to most, some constituents have argued that executive orders are necessary. President Obama believes that he is only “doing what is best” for our country as a whole ("Remarks on Signing an Executive Order” par. 2). Although members of Congress do not agree with the extreme measures that are being taken, the Obama administration is not wavering from the idea that all of the executive orders being made are to improve the lives of Americans. The biggest argument supporting President Obama bypassing Congress is explained when he says, “The best way to avoid me acting on my own is to work with me to actually do something" ("Remarks on Signing an Executive Order” par. 13). The main issue with this statement made by the President is that if a member of Congress disagrees with a movement being made he or she should not feel obligated to “work with him”. As a member of Congress, it is up to their judgement to decide if a bill is worth their time to work on. Each Senator and Representative is elected in order to stand up for what the American citizens want. If Presidents begin to pressure members of Congress to approve of legislation that they do not agree with, it is a slippery slope leading to the eventual downfall of the foundation of the American government. As Edwards observes in her Time article, nearly all of what President Obama has done for the country has been challenged in court (par. 2) If the President was truly “doing what is best” for America than he would not be challenged in court the way he has been. Any President should not feel that they need to override Congress to this extent just because they did not get their way. |