After reading the NPR article I handed out in class, answer the following questions by end of school on Friday for credit.
1. How does this illustrate the use of Congress "power of the purse" as a check on executive power?
2. How does htis article illustrate the influence of political parties in Congress?
3. Do you think what Obama is doing with his executive actions is unconstitutional (as Republicans clearly do)? What if you framed the legal argument as the President using his pardoning power? What then? Does that change your opinion of his actions? Why or why not?
4. Do you think it is justified for the Republicans to threaten government shutdown or should they go another route? Justify your answer.
32 comments:
1. The "power of the purse" gives Congress the ability to control how funds are being dispersed. If Congress stops funding the Department of Homeland Security, this is a check on executive power because it diminishes Obama's actions of legal status for undocumented immigrants since funding is needed to carry out the action.
2. The Republican party dominates the House. This influences the actions in the House for Congress since the Republicans do not agree with Obama's decision and try to hinder them. In the first part of the article it states, "some Republicans in the House have said that shutting down DHS would be an acceptable coast of thwarting the executive actions on immigration."
3. I do not see what Obama is doing as unconstitutional because I believe that everybody should have the opportunity to when seeking work or a better education. However, I can also see how some people disagree and say that it is unconstitutional because the immigrants were undocumented. As the President using his pardoning power, this case would not work for undocumented immigrants that have unlawful presence in the United States. This is because unlawful presence is not a federal crime, but a civil violation. And since the pardoning power can be used only for federal crimes, it could only work for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally, which is a federal crime and therefore the pardoning power can be used.
4. I do not think it is justified for the Republicans to threaten a government shutdown because I feel that it won't do any good with negative effects for the citizens that are employed by the government. This will just result in more unnecessary chaos and will not get anything done. I think that the House and Senate should be able to work out through their disagreements and reach a compromise to avoid another shutdown.
1. Congress controls the finance. When any government agency is being funded it has to have the approval of Congress. So even if President Obama enacts an executive action the funding for that department still has to have the approval of Congress. So if Congress defunds that, he still has the executive action but it will be difficult to enact it.
2. Even though President Obama is a democrat, both houses are controlled by Republicans. So anything the President wants to try and get done, they can thwart it. “Democrats have successfully stopped bills that seek to overturn his actions, so to thwart them, some Republicans have suggested defunding DHS...”
3. I do not think what the President is doing is unconstitutional. He has the executive power and by being President he is entrusted with certain executive powers. Just about all Presidents in the same thing so he is not doing anything differently. I believe that obviously the President has the power to pardon and there are also their cases were he can also enact executive powers.
4. I think that there will not be any advantages of a government shutdown because those issues will still be there and nothing is really being solved. I think that the leaders of Congress and the white house should get together and come up with his solution.
1) Congress's use of the "power to the purse" strategy allows for Congress to utilize their control over budget and funding to achieve their specific goal due to their lack of direct power over departments like the DHS, even when the executive branch may have an opposing goal to the Congress's making it difficult for the executive branch, who has direct executive power over departments like the DHS, to implement any planned actions on the DHS (in this case Pres. Obama's executive actions on immigration.)
2) "...Ron says, would be a 'total victory for the Democrats and the president."
- Clashing political parties makes decisions like these very difficult for both sides. The House consists of a Republican majority while Pres. Obama is a Democrat and the two are likely to have conflicting views and plans. When it gets this difficult to come to a compromise and when things get as tense as threats of another government shutdown, the clashing political ideals of both parties can be seen as a significant influence on Congress's decision making and in order to actually come to a compromise instead of simply trying to beat the other party, this influence becomes crucial to agreeing an effective plan.
3) I do not believe Obama's actions are unconstitutional because he does have the ability to pardon federal crimes--BUT, I do not believe that his actions are right since unlawful entry of the country is in fact ILLEGAL. Presidential pardons apply to federal crimes and under federal law illegal and undocumented entry into the country is a misdemeanor and can be a felony if repeated after being deported. Although this is technically constitutional according to this pardoning power, it's still wrong to pardon obvious criminals and is unfair to those who apply for entry into the country LEGALLY, those of which who can LEGALLY seek a better life/better education and be of service in terms of the work force.
4) I do not believe that Republicans are justified in threatening another government shutdown regardless of any previous outcomes from shutdowns as they stated that the previous shutdown had "hardly any effect whatsoever on the Department of Homeland Security." I believe it would be smarter to avoid confrontation and take another route to effectively solve the problem instead of simply trying to win against the Democrats on this issue, although they may be justified in their beliefs that what the Democrats are doing is wrong. I don't believe it's worth the risk the security of our country because the duties and responsibilities of DHS are largely needed especially at such a time as this with the recent terror threats around the world and in our own country. I also do believe that it's not completely the Republicans fault and that the Democrats should work towards shifting their plans to compromise with Republicans in order to reduce the threat of another shutdown.
1)The use of congress "power of the purse" is a check on executive power since they do not have complete power. The "power of the purse" is how the congress approves funding and it cannot be carried out without congress since they have to approve it and the everyone votes on it.
2) This illustrates that political parties influence congress' decisions and both parties disagree with one another and remain support toward their own parties. They try to negotiate with one another and come to a common understanding. "Send out his whips to talk to the 51 Republicans", "Republicans upset with the deletion of a provision stripling funds", "Democrats... pushing for full funding", all demonstrate how their ideas clash. Congress must create a negotiation which will be suitable for both parties so they closely consider both sides.
3) I do not think he is being unconstitutional because he has the power to do it and knows what he is doing. Although it is wrong and unfair for those who try to do the same, only legally.
4) It is not justified for the Republicans to threaten government shutdown because that does not solve anything it causes mistrust and issues. They should maturely go another route just as the article says, "two chambers of Congress time to work out a compromise measure". The parties should not face one another in a competitive manner, they need to negotiate on an understanding.
1.) Congress controls finances and by having the "power of the purse" with this they are able to control how funds are being distributed. This is a check on executive power because if President Obama tries to put more finances into Obama Care he has to get it approved by Congress first.
2.)Political parties influence Congress with their money and political propaganda. In the article it states that" Republican in the House and Senate have failed to agree on a unifying strategy" this means majority rules and because they are not able to agree they are not able to get anything passed. Unlike the Democrats who have "successfully stopped bills".
3)Immigrants who are of illegal presence are considered to have committed a federal crime because they have entered the U.S illegally. Because Obama is the president he has the right to use any of his executive powers which includes the pardoning power in any way he chooses.
4.)I think its justified for Republicans to threaten government shut down because one party shouldn't have to take being bullied by another party who doesn't want to work together.
1) The congress was manipulating and controlling the executive power by withholding the funds needed for the Department of Homeland Security that was about to run out of funds. They put restrictions on the funds by deciding to fund the Department of Homeland Security for only three weeks until they got the compromise they wanted.
2)political parties can use the power of the purse they have to control the power of others. An example of this is evident in the article when it says that "some Republicans in the House have said that shutting down DHS would be an acceptable cost of thwarting the executive actions on immigration". This shows how they had the ability to shut down a cabinet department of the United States by withholding funding.
3) I don't see how giving illegal status to immigrants is unconstitutional because he does have pardoning power which is legal. On top of that a lot of immigrants have good reason to come to the United States whether it is to escape oppression ALDC warfare or escape severe poverty because poverty in the U.S is a lot better then poverty In other countries anyway.
4) I do not think that it is justified and I think that they should find a different approach especially if this can affect other people's livelihood because they are unable to work.
1) This illustrates Congress "power of the purse" as a check because of the way congress controls the finance that is going on and what is being distributed. This cannot be approve without Congress permission.
2)This article illustrates influence of political parties by one party agreeing with one thing and another party disagreeing with another. So the argument tends to go back and forth and nothing ends up getting done at all. For example in the article it said "Republicans in the House and Senate on a unifying strategy".
3)What I think about what Obama is doing is honestly not a bad thing he just wants to give everyone an equal opportunity in this country.
4)I don't think it is justified for the republicans at all because if the government is shut down what is getting accomplished? Nothing at all is getting done!
1. The congress is responsible for the finances and the funds. Congress use of “power to the purse” to have control over the money working towards important uses.
2. The article illustrates the influence of political parties in congress by showing the intellectual connection between parties. The parties agree and disagree with other each other, arguing with each other having a democratic president and houses being republicans.
3. I think that what Obama is doing is not unconstitutional because he’s helping out other people worldwide using his powers but is unfair to people who apply for the country legally, it’s sort of like a short cut.
4. I don’t think shutting down the government would be a good idea because that gets nothing done. I think shutting down the government will cause more problems because it show weakness, shutting down won’t solve anything.
1. "Power of the Purse" gives congress the power to allocate money and funding.p, in turn checking the executive branch because congress has to have final approval, not the president.
2. This article illustrates the influence of political parties in congress because both houses are ruled by the Republican Party despite the fact that there is a democratic president in office. This immediately presents concerns because of conflicting resolutions on issues and different opinions, such as in the case of funding DHS or not. The Associated Press reports "Some republicans in the house have said that shutting down DHS would be an acceptable cost of thwarting the executive actions on immigration."
3. I do not think what Obama is doing is unconstitutional because the United States is built on a system of freedom and equality and it is, and he is only trying to further this by allowing those unable to prosper in their own countries to come to the United States and try and further and better themselves. I do agree. I still don't see it as unconstitutional even if he is using his pardoning power because it is legal for him to do that regardless of the fact that the immigrants were undocumented.
4.i don't think it is justified for the republicans to threaten government shutdown because that ultimately slows down this process and proceeds to make it even worse, they need to find a compromise. Shutting down the government not only is useless but also effects citizens who are not even directly involved who happen to work for the government , creating even more problems than before.
1. The Congress "power of purse" as a check on executive power allows Congress to have the ability to control how and where funds are going towards.
2. This article illustrates the influence of political parties as the Republicans want to fund the DHS, as it states "shutting down DHS would be an acceptable cost of thwarting the executive actions on immigrants" and with a democratic President, they don't agree with each others strategies on handling the DHS.
3. I do not think that what President Obama I doing is unconstitutional, it does not seem like he's doing it for his personal benefit. If the President was using his pardoning power, then my opinion still would not change, because the President is not trying to cause harm by doing this but rather give more opportunities.
4. I think that if the Republicans truly want their way then they should think of another route, it is not worth people sacrificing their pay check because the government has to shut down, they should try to think of other ways so that more problems won't arrive from shutting the government down
1. The “power of the purse” means that Congress controls the financing of different government agencies. With this, Congress can control if and how the Department of Homeland Security gets funded. This is used as a check on executive power in that President Obama has to get the funding (or lack thereof) approved by Congress.
2. This illustrates the influence of political parties through the fact that there is a divided government; President Obama is a Democrat, while there is a Republican majority in both the House and the Senate. Concerning the issue of funding for the DHS and immigration, “Republicans in the House and Senate have failed to agree on a unified strategy” by “[suggesting] defunding [the] DHS” to thwart the efforts of the Democrats.
3. I don’t think that what President Obama is doing is unconstitutional given the fact that he has a right the veto anything that Congress sends him. Also, he has stated beforehand that he would veto what Congress would send him, given that it was unsatisfactory, and any lack of progress would be their fault if they weren’t up to par. President Obama has the right to exert his executive power, if that means inciting Congress to make some progress on important issues that affects the lives of millions.
4. I believe that the Republicans should go another route because if people believed that the Republicans were prohibiting progress from being made now, during this government shutdown, no progress will really be made. Their job is to make sound decisions for the greater good of the majority and on issues that affect the whole country. They already get flack for their lack of progress, why make it worse for themselves?
1. This illustrates the use of Congress "power of the purse" because republicans are withholding funds and asking for more allotted time. This allows republicans to control other groups and continue to fund the DHS.
2. The article states that "Republican leaders came up with a new idea" which will be enforced. This shows the power that Congress holds and how influential they can be. They also use defending to show their power and influence opinions.
3. I do not think it was unconstitutional because it shows that Obama cares for the people who seek a better life in America. If I formed the legal argument, I would try to make it seem a little more subtle than what Obama said to keep Republicans from uprising.
4. I do not think it is justified and I think another route would have been a better choice. Government shutdown would have created chaos which could effect other countries as well in a negative manner by cutting them off from communications and/or other methods of relationship.
1. Even though Obama executed an executive order to try to allow undocumented illegal immigrants to stay, the Republicans in the Congress may have found a way to stop it. By defunding Department of Homeland Security, Republicans could stop the very program that enforces immigration rules.
2. Congress' actions are always based off the desires of the two main political parties- Democrats and Republicans. The Congress members of each party will try to do their best to complete their respective party's goals. For example, the article specifically says "with the help of Democrats, pass the Senate's version of the bill..." which would be a "total victory for the Democrats..."
3. To determine if an action is unconstitutional, one must look for a clause in the constitution that outlaws that specific action. To my knowledge, there is no clause that outlaws executive actions. Obama's action was perfectly legal.
4. Yes, I do think Republicans are justified in trying to shut down the government. What Obama did was, although legal, very harmful to the Republicans and their philosophy. In order to get the attention of Democratic Congressmen and the nation, this may be the only way.
1) The power of the purse is the ability to control finances and funding of different programs. Congress uses this check on the executive by threatening to appropriate less funds to the DHS, rendering the president's control over the DHS limited.
2) This article illustrates a divided and conflicted government because the largely Republican congress wants to pass a bill that the democratic president does not agree with and will veto.
3) I believe President Obama's plan is within constitutional rights. But the debate lies on whether it is morally right to vastly use that pardoning power for illegal immigrants. Both sides, Republican and Democrat, have valid arguments and it is only a matter of actually getting something done.
4) Republicans should definitely go a different route because the congress already has the negative image that they are responsible for dead lock and shutting down would only highlight this image.
The "Power of the Purse" provides a check on the executive branch because it limits the president's power on finance. Congress has control of financing, so the president must gain Congress' approval in order to manipulate financing.
2) The article illustrates the influence of political parties in Congress by showing the conflict that they face with one another. The article states that, "Republicans in the House and Senate have failed to agree on unified strategy.", and this shows that political parties have a strong influence on making decisions, and it also shows that there can be conflict within the same party.
3) I believe that Obama's use of his power to pardon the illegal immigrants is not unconstitutional because he has the power as president to do so if he pleases. I also believe that him pardoning the illegal immigrants is morally correct in that he is trying to make the lives of those who suffer hardship a bit better by presenting them with the opportunity to work to make their own lives better.
4) I don't think that the threat of s government shutdown is justified and I think that they should go another route. With a government shutdown, the problems that are currently present will not be solved and could create more problems following the shutdown. I believe that the Republicans should work to compromise and create and solution which satisfies both sides of the argument.
1. The “power of the purse” gives Congress the right to control the money being spent in, by, or for U.S. departments. This illustrates Congress’ check on executive power because while President Obama may want to take action on the Department of Homeland Security, which involves the spending of funds, Congress can keep that money from being used. Congress cannot tell Obama what he can or cannot do, but they can make sure he does not have the money to follow through.
2. This article shows that depending on if there is a majority of Democrats or Republicans in Congress, the group’s views will be expressed through the actions Congress chooses to approve or cut down. A problem in this situation is that Obama is Democratic while both the Senate and House are a majority Republican so whenever one group wants something put into action, the other group will most likely veto it if it does not incorporate their goals.
3. What Obama has chosen to do does not seem unconstitutional to me as he has been granted the right to put his executive actions on immigration into practice. The whole reason for checks and balances is to keep anything unconstitutional from occurring, but currently, it seems there only is the opposite of progress being made. While the president has the right to pardon federal crimes, it is still does not seem right for him to allow some people to break federal laws that were set for the protection of American democracy. I believe our country is not as strong as it once was and we need to focus on strengthening it, not helping other hurting countries.
4. I believe the Republicans should never threaten government shutdown. That would not help anything as they seem to be little babies wanting only what they see to be right. Compromise would be a good direction to go. For example, allow the immigrants citizenship as long as they have proof every year of holding a job and supporting themselves and the American economy. Americans today seem to feel they are too good for physical labor jobs, which immigrants will most likely do like making roads, yet they will gladly take money from the government in return for nothing. FDR’s Works Progress Administration was one of the best things that happened to the US, so that is always a very promising route.
1: Congress uses the power of the purse to influence the funding of the DHS to influence the president's control over the DHS.
2 : the article showed a view of a divided Congress with a republican side that is fighting against the President with his " series of executive actions giving legal status to millions of undocumented immigrants" and using the fiasco with the DHS to influence the funding of the president's actions with immigration.
3: I personal do feel as if the president's actions are in fact unconstitutional because the immigrants are illegal and I feel as if the actions would bring illegals into the country and would have a terrible effects on the US citizens. And as far as the president's pardoning power goes; the pardoning power only has the ability to pardon people who have commuted federal offenses against the us which these illegal immigrants don't apply to so the pardoning power is null and void.
4 : I Think that the Republicans and Congress are justified in their actions against the president because they have no other logical course of action. I mean yes they could find a different way but even the president said in his state of the union speech said that he would veto any bills relating to his executive orders regarding immigrants, so based on that information it is clear that he wouldn't have worked with them any other way.
1. The use of "power of the purse" is where Congress can approve or disprove of funding and choose how the money is spent. They can use this as a check on the executive branch. So, even if Obama wants to carry out a particular action, such as Homeland Security, funding is needed to do so. If Congress chooses to not fund Homeland Security, then this takes away Obama's power.
2. This article illustrates the influence of political parties because of the different views each party has and how they project those views on implementing policies. Obama is a democrat and The House is controlled by Republicans. These conflicting viewpoints can limit what policies get passed and what don't since the republicans tend to disagree with Obama. The Republicans have a strong influence as they approve what actions Obama are seeking.
3. I don't believe Obama is being unconstitutional. He is the president and is carrying out what he believes to be right. However, these immigrants weren't be documented which is also an issue. However, he cannot use his pardoning power since this isn't a federal crime. This doesn't change my view though because Obama is trying to help those seeking a better opportunity.
4. I don't believe it is justified that the Republicans threaten government shutdown. They're being selfish and if they shut down the government, this can affect many people in a negative way. They're avoiding the issue because they aren't getting their way. They need to find another way and compromise better with the president, the leader of our country. If not, nothing will get done.
1. This illustrates Congress's power of the purse to check executive power because if the president makes an action that Congress does not like or is potentially unconstitutional, then Congress can cease funding for this unwanted or illicit action to effectively nullify the action.
2. This article illustrates the influence of political parties because Democrats in the Senate, where Republicans are the majority but not a supermajority, "have successfully stopped bills that seek to overturn [Obama's] actions, so to thwart them, some Republicans have suggested funding DHS, the home of Immigration and Customs Enforcement." This means that each party is trying to prevent the other from either changing the action or from keeping it in effect, with the Democrats reigning supreme so far.
3. I do not believe that Obama's executive actions are unconstitutional. I believe that it is under the president's power to pardon illegal immigrants of their crimes and to allow them to stay in the United States. It is shameful that the Republican Party is trying to deprive the president of his unique powers of pardoning, especially at the expense of millions of people who the Republicans will not help with the passage of the president's immigration bill.
4. I do not think it is justified for the Republicans to threaten government shutdown; it is effectively the same as a toddler throwing a temper tantrum when they do not et what they want. The House Republicans should do what their Senate counterpart Mark Kirk suggested and "suck it up." This is politics, and sometimes it doesn't go the way of another party. Deal with it, and get back to governing the country.
1. This illustrates the power of the purse because Congress control whether or not the DHS will be funded or not. This serves as a check on executive power because President Obama has to get the funding approved or denied.
2. This illustrates the influence of political parties because, like Ron Elving said, the votes needed are, “more a matter of persuading.” /based on what party the whip is and what he is trying to accomplish, it shows the power pf how persuasive that particular party can be. They can convince their fellow party members to join them in voting yes or no on a bill.
3. I don’t think it is unconstitutional. He I using the power that he earned when he won the election. He has that power and he is using it. Also, the fact that he publicly announce it gives the public the knowledge that it is happening. It is not a secret he is trying to keep on the down low. Even if he used his pardoning power, I would still think the same thing. He earned that power once he won the election.
4. I don’t think it is justified for the Republicans to threaten a government shutdown because then it’s at a standstill land no progress will be made. If the government shuts down, it’s because the Congress cannot move forward and cooperate due to a rivalry between the two parties. They need a compromise that fixes the issues. Because Congress doesn’t seem to cooperate very well, the President has the power in the end, not the people who disagree with him.
1) The republican leaders in the house had the ability to determine their funding for the department of homeland security. They had the option to fund DHS fully or to fund them for 3 weeks. They ended up funding a weeklong funding extension. This shows the use of Congress' Power of the Purse because it shows how congress can change or eliminate funding.
2) The republican leaders of the house and the democratic leaders of the house have conflicting ideas on funding. Ron Elving says that "Speaker Jon Boehner will send out his whips to talk to the 51 republicans who voted against the measure to try to convince them to reconsider." The two parties disagree on how to handle situations, which can potentially lead to "government shutdowns." Boehner said that he could "cobble together enough democratic votes to make up for those in his caucus that voted against the measure." Also, congressional votes are used to make people vote the right way and a divided government causes not a lot of progress to get done.
3) Yea, I think that what Obama is doing with his executive actions is unconstitutional. It's one thing to modify a law in the book in order to execute a presidential action, but it's another thing to create a new law in order to successfully achieve your goals. If you framed the legal argument as the president using his pardoning power, I would still think it's unconstitutional because he is pardoning such a large group of people in which he doesn't know the exact details of. Even though it is technically proven constitutional, it is scary that one person can have such a large amount of power over so many people.
4) Yes, I think that it is justified for the republicans to threaten a government shutdown because the other side won't even compromise or come to the table. Simultaneously, both parties can be accused of fowl play, but I still believe that it is justifiable.
1. "Power of the purse" is the power given to Congress to authorize the presidents spending requests in order to fund and support agencies and programs. This would exhibit "power of the purse" because it strips Obama of is ability to act on this issue because in order to carry out his task on immigration, he must first be approved by congress. Therefore, this checks executive power because he does not have the final say so on what goes down.
2. This illustrates the influence of political parties on congress because in the article, it even said that "...Americans blamed [the government shutdown] mostly on republicans". This shows that political parties are capable of getting congress to lean towards their ideas and influence them to do certain things.
3. I do not see President Obamas executive actions as unconstitutional because he is the president. I think this because he should do what he thinks is best for the country. Yes, I do understand that entering the country illegally is bad and most people are looking down on him for pardoning it, but I don't think it should be taken to the extreme of saying its "unconstitutional". It doesn't change my opinions of his actions because I still believe what he does with his power is what is best for us.
4. I don't really think it's the worst thing ever, but I do think it's a contradicting. They said that they would never repeat such an action again, so for them to go against their own words is a little untrustworthy and they should really reconsider their actions.
1. President Obama wants to use his executive power to fund the DHS. The Congress has the "power of the purse". Congress decides whether the president can spend money on different things. The president can not spend money without Congress's consent and approval. This article illustrates Congress's use of "power of the purse". Congress reviewed President Obama's funding plan. Now they have to approve or disapprove it. Congress will have to make a decision.
2. Democrats and Republicans have their own opinions, and they influence Congress. Republicans in the House of Representatives don't want to fund the DHS because it would essentially be funding the office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. In the text, "some Republican in the House have said that shutting down DHS would be an acceptable cost of thwarting the executive actions on immigrants." They do not want to fund because they are conservative and don't want too much power for president. Democrats are siding with the president in funding the DHS. In the text, " with the help of Democrats, pass the Senate's version of the bill." Democrats want to help Senate pass a bill to fund DHS.
3. I think what Obama is doing is unconstitutional because he shouldn't give legal status to undocumented immigrants. They should gain their legal status through legal process. They should become a US citizen the right way. Obama shouldn't encourage this illegal act because it will hurt the US economy. If I framed the legal argument, I would still feel the same way about the issue.
4. I think the Republicans should go another route. They have already shutdown government before. It wouldn't look good for them to shut it down again. By doing this action, it would hurt innocent people who work for the government. They wouldn't get money to pay for living expenses.
1.) The "Power to the purse" allows the congress to keep a check on the executive power, by withholding funfs and various finances.
2.) This particular articles illustrates the influence of political parties in congress by showing how the Republican party dominates the congress , both the Senate and the house . Because the congress is mostly republicans and hey have been in a gridlock with tje president for the past four years.
3.) No, Obama actions are not unconstitutional, he is simply taking the initiative and doing what needs to be done while the republicans continue to halt things. Obama is simply doing his duty as the president of the U.S and getting things done regardless of how childish others may act.
4.) No,for the past two terms the republicans have been unwilling to compromise. A government shutdown will just drive the U.S down and it would not accomplish anything and thier true intentions (to hurt Obama) would not be effective because he will no longer be in office less than two years from now or will be able to run again for office.
1. The way the Republican Senators could vote to not renew the Homeland Security budget illustrates how Congress could bypass an executive order.
2. Since members of a party will most likely all vote the same way, their voting power increases with the amount of officials in each party.
3. Although I don't 100% agree with his decision, I definitely think it's within his power to do. I don't know the full facts of the case, but he is the president America voted in so I'm sure he has some reason for doing it.
4. No. Despite Mo Brooks saying shutdowns don't have the meaning people think, I think the effects of a shutdown would effect the whole country and not just them. Their job is to manage the countries' issues and them allowing a shutdown would be ignoring these issues.
1. Congress used their "power of the purse" to check Obama's executive order by attempting to cut funding from the DHS.
2. The Republicans in the House and Senate are the people pushing to stop funding the DHS, and the obviously had enough influence to force a compromise with the Democrats.
3. No, I don't think that Obama's executive action is unconstitutional; while it doesn't exactly improve his relations with Congress, it is perfectly legal and within his rights as head of state. Framing the legal argument as the President using his pardoning power is still perfectly constitutional and legal.
4. No, I don't think it's justified, because the Republicans need to compromise and learn that they can't always get what they want. Instead, they need to compromise with the Democrats; Obama's term is almost over, so shutting down the government just to shut down Obama seems kind of childish to me.
1) This illustrates the Congress “Purse of Power” because it shows how eliminating the funds for a organization can immediately have an impact. It shows an executive check on power because the president can turn around and veto whatever is proposed by congress.
2) This article illustrates the influence of political parties in congress. It is a perfect example on out divided government and how nothing will get done. If the republican congress proposes something the president who is a democrat will just shut it down. “Stripping funds from Obamas immigration proposal” is an example of what the president will soon veto.
3) I believe that what Obama is doing is constitutional but he is taking advantage of his power as president. He did this because he wanted to prove that he was capable of doing something but I think that he should have ran it by congress first for a second opinion.
4) The government should not be shut down again because that does more harm than good. Shutting down the government has more of an impact on the people rather than the president himself.
1) Congress aimed to prevent the DHS from being able to carry out the immigration laws by cutting its funding, thus indirectly checking the President's power.
2) The article showed how voting fell along party lines but also that, in some cases, some parts of the party had a different view. It also showed the Party structure when it spoke of the Speaker of the House and his whips.
3) I do not think that it is unconstitutional, only that is comprehensive. If framed as a pardoning power, it makes even more sense. I believe that his actions are a ploy to paint Republicans as incapable of inaction. In terms of their actual effect on people, i think he is right to pardon immigrants who have built their lives here, but are forced to remain in the background.
4) Threatening shutdown would be a poor decision of the Republican's part. Polls already indicate that they are perceived as being the party that caused the last government shutdown, so this would only add to that. However, due to gerrymandering and polarization, this would probably not cause a considerable loss to House Republicans, whose uncompromising stance may be approved by their uniquely carved district.
1. This thoroughly demonstrates Congress’ implementation of “power of the purse” as the Republicans are meeting behind doors and withholding funding by asking to extend the clock. Congress has the ultimate power when deciding how the funds are federally distributed. The power that President Obama is granted is not unlimited, because Congress can “check” him.
2. Political parties have the ability to effectively use power of the purse, as the Republicans, for example, have. The party is using Homeland Security to “thwart the executive actions on immigration”, meaning they are trying to influence the President’s policy on immigration by ceasing to fund the DHS.
3. President Obama’s executive action is not unconstitutional, but it is further deteriorating his relationship with Congress. He is simply utilizing the powers that the Constitution gives him and attempting to make the best decisions for the United States.
4. The Republicans threatening a government shutdown is not justified. A shutdown will only further set progress back instead of working towards an agreement. Shutting down a complete cabinet affects the jobs of the many people employed by the department, meaning they may not be able to afford food, electricity and other necessities.
1. The "power of the purse" gives congress the power to fund the government agencies. If congress stops funding the government agency, Department of Homeland Security, then this would be the check on president Obama's executive power. This would limit Obama's executive power to enact security tactics to protect the United states.
2. President Obama is a democrat but the political parties in congress are both controlled y the republicans. This illustrates the influence in the house for congress since the republicans controls everything. Any decision the president makes, the house/congress can try and stop it. "democrats have successfully stopped bills that seek to overturn his actions, so thwart them, some republicans have suggested defunding DHS, the home of immigration and customs enforcement." Each part influences different positions in the house.
3.I do not think what Obama is doing with his executive actions is unconstitutional. The president has the executive power to do what ever actions he wants. Although some people disagree with him. He believes his actions/decisions are for the better of America. If i framed the legal argument as the president using his pardoning power i would say that since these immigrants in America have no legal status then they should be deported right away then be given a chance to gain citizenship for America.
4.I think they should go another route. I do not think it is justified for the republicans to threaten government shutdown. Shutting down that part of the government will cause many Americans to loose their jobs. Also the United States wouldn't have a security agency.
1. The power of the purse is important, it gives congress a way of controlling funds. If the president does anything that could be considered unconstitutional congress could then potentially cut the use of funds by the president.
2. The republicans currently have the majority within the House. Since the republicans are against the democratic president Obama, they try to hinder his decisions because they are against them.
3. I do not believe that Obama's actions were unconstitutional because he does in fact have the power to pardon who he wants. But whether i think he should have pardoned the immigrants is another story.
4. I do not think that the threat of shutting down the government by the republicans is not justifiable. I do not think that the shutting down if the government will do much other than halt anything, if anything is in progress. and also make things take more time.
Post a Comment