Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (161331)	7/16/2001 5:27:55 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 769670

The flow of power back and forth between Congress and the executive is a part of the checks and balances vision of the Founders. In the recent Century of War, the executive branch had accrued the greater share of the power, out of organizational necessity. Our acceptance of the legitimacy of a government role in pensions, medical insurance, and the welfare state in general since WWII are indicative of that surging executive power. The pendulum started swinging back near the end of Vietnam, with the Clark amendment, which essentially amounted to Congress condemning South Vietnam to communist tyranny. The flow back to the legislative branch accelerated after that, through a near-impeachment, an actual impeachment, as well as the constant fights over spending, where the Congress has essentially taken back the purse strings, for better or worse. With the termination of Democrat dominance in the House in 1994, the way has been cleared for Congress to further advance against executive power. The coming fights over Supreme Court nominations-which will carry forward into future Democratic administrations, illustrates the trend in Congress of taking back power lost to the judicial branch, even though its ostensible reasons are given as preventing one president from "changing" the Court. The Congress has certain advantages in this fight today. Few Sentaors or House members have a need to pay attention to the opinions of the Washington or New York liberal media, whereas the presidents in recent history seemed hamstrung by those entities. The obvious acceptance by the Bush team of the fact that the media they deal with is adversarial rather than objective is a big first step toward their defending what executive power may still be left...

To: jlallen who wrote (161331)	7/16/2001 5:28:08 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 769670

The flow of power back and forth between Congress and the executive is a part of the checks and balances vision of the Founders. In the recent Century of War, the executive branch had accrued the greater share of the power, out of organizational necessity. Our acceptance of the legitimacy of a government role in pensions, medical insurance, and the welfare state in general since WWII are indicative of that surging executive power. The pendulum started swinging back near the end of Vietnam, with the Clark amendment, which essentially amounted to Congress condemning South Vietnam to communist tyranny. The flow back to the legislative branch accelerated after that, through a near-impeachment, an actual impeachment, as well as the constant fights over spending, where the Congress has essentially taken back the purse strings, for better or worse. With the termination of Democrat dominance in the House in 1994, the way has been cleared for Congress to further advance against executive power. The coming fights over Supreme Court nominations-which will carry forward into future Democratic administrations, illustrates the trend in Congress of taking back power lost to the judicial branch, even though its ostensible reasons are given as preventing one president from "changing" the Court. The Congress has certain advantages in this fight today. Few Senators or House members have a need to pay attention to the opinions of the Washington or New York liberal media, whereas the presidents in recent history seemed hamstrung by those entities. The obvious acceptance by the Bush team of the fact that the media they deal with is adversarial rather than objective is a big first step toward their defending what executive power may still be left...

To: jlallen who wrote (161331)	7/16/2001 5:28:12 PM
From: CYBERKEN	Respond to of 769670

The flow of power back and forth between Congress and the executive is a part of the checks and balances vision of the Founders. In the recent Century of War, the executive branch had accrued the greater share of the power, out of organizational necessity. Our acceptance of the legitimacy of a government role in pensions, medical insurance, and the welfare state in general since WWII are indicative of that surging executive power. The pendulum started swinging back near the end of Vietnam, with the Clark amendment, which essentially amounted to Congress condemning South Vietnam to communist tyranny. The flow back to the legislative branch accelerated after that, through a near-impeachment, an actual impeachment, as well as the constant fights over spending, where the Congress has essentially taken back the purse strings, for better or worse. With the termination of Democrat dominance in the House in 1994, the way has been cleared for Congress to further advance against executive power. The coming fights over Supreme Court nominations-which will carry forward into future Democratic administrations, illustrates the trend in Congress of taking back power lost to the judicial branch, even though its ostensible reasons are given as preventing one president from "changing" the Court. The Congress has certain advantages in this fight today. Few Sentaors or House members have a need to pay attention to the opinions of the Washington or New York liberal media, whereas the presidents in recent history seemed hamstrung by those entities. The obvious acceptance by the Bush team of the fact that the media they deal with is adversarial rather than objective is a big first step toward their defending what executive power may still be left...