Executive Power

[Imperator Romani]

Has Obama become too powerful? He has a history of making decisions himself, without going through Congress, and on top of that he wants to consolidate power into the executive position. I'm of the opinion that the executive position could lose a little power. Opinions?

[saglam2000]

Executive has little power compared to any other branch, the legislature has slowly been draining whatever influence the president had so they can have power. Plus trying to get something through congress is trying to down a backed up toilet. It ain't going down and all it will do is spew back at you.

So no he's not too powerful.

[Sphere]

Most observers would agree that for the past century we have been in a period where executive power has been increasing. Obama's presidency has continued this slow and steady trend.

There are two reasons for this in my opinion.

One is the growing complexity of the economy and technology. The executive is charged with regulating and/or monitoring everything from airlines to the financial industry and as such agencies like the FAA and the SEC have had to grow in scope and complexity to match. And aiding this expansion has been an increasing reluctance in both the Legislative and Judicial branches to get involved in the details of such complex regulating where technical specialization means neither Congressmen nor Judges really understand things like bands of the Electromagnetic Spectrum, Network Data protocols, genetically modified crops etc.

The second is a drastic change in the nature of warfare and international threats/obligations of the US. The defense of the nation as invisioned Constitution is drastically different from what exists our modern world. Instead of state militia's, we have an ICBM arsenal, an airfleet of thousand of planes, multiple ocean fleets, electronic warfare systems, not to mention millions of soilders. And instead of straight forward wars, we have low intensity conflicts or ongoing peacekeeping missions not to mention "homeland security".

[Claudius Gothicus]

In presidential republics the executive is more or less ''destinied'' to become the Senior partner in the ''Legislative-Executive'' relationship. This is, in general, related to the fact that the inner and external factors that the State have to manage are getting more and more complex... therefore there's only 2 solutions more centralization(which goes to the Executive) or more decentralization(which doesn't in itself go the legislative).

On a more ''political'' note, the USA system of government was kept ''balanced'' because of the stability between the GOP's and Democrats ideological stance... sadly, that's chaging, and right now both parties are experiencing huge modifications in their inner realities(mostly due to the radical, ''non-compromise'', stance of many republican voting bases and the watering down of Dems policies into a misunderstood form of ''Third Way'').

[Inkie]

I agree with lots of the points raised here, although Terrorism has a great deal to do with it also. Some of the more sinister new laws granting executive power - which many criticize for impinging directly upon individual liberties- are directly linked to this relatively new phenomenon.

[Kanaric]

Its only appearances. Since elections have become more polarized people have been running on being a strong leader. As a result Obama has to be SEEN being powerful and "the decider" even though its simply status quo. You are buying into democrat election propaganda.

[motiv-8]

Executive power has been growing steadily since, well, ever... To think that Obama's abilities are unusual or unprecedented in any especially notable way would be disingenuous.

I would worry more about when and if the checks on the office become degraded rather than whatever tiny prerogatives it snatches up, though.