Is Separation of Powers Important?
Or is the President always right and everyone should follow in lockstep?
61-69, M
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
lily88mercy · 26-30, F
@Laiful
I agree with you, Laiful. That was the intention of our founding fathers when they wrote the Constitution. However, this "separation" has been become more and more obscured by a SCOTUS that is given to 'making law' versus 'interpreting law'; by massive regulatory agencies that have powers to make laws and regulations outside of the purview of Congress and the Courts; by Presidents who misuse and abuse the "executive order" intended to be used for times when response to crisis was needed versus how it is now used as a way of making policy into law without intervention of Congress or debate; and lastly, by a Congress that takes it's marching orders by the lobbyists paid by the plutocrats, the folks controlling banking and the arms trade.
*sigh*
🤔
I agree with you, Laiful. That was the intention of our founding fathers when they wrote the Constitution. However, this "separation" has been become more and more obscured by a SCOTUS that is given to 'making law' versus 'interpreting law'; by massive regulatory agencies that have powers to make laws and regulations outside of the purview of Congress and the Courts; by Presidents who misuse and abuse the "executive order" intended to be used for times when response to crisis was needed versus how it is now used as a way of making policy into law without intervention of Congress or debate; and lastly, by a Congress that takes it's marching orders by the lobbyists paid by the plutocrats, the folks controlling banking and the arms trade.
*sigh*
🤔
SW-User
@lily88mercy: Very insightful. I hae to agree with you on everything except one small point. I am curious to know which regulatory agencies can make laws outside of Congress. My husband is with the FDA, and they certainly cannot. I am not saying you are wrong though. It appears as if the agencies that focus on individual citizens have far more power than the ones that regulate corporations.
lily88mercy · 26-30, F
@Laifu1:
Yes, you are right, Laiful. They do not make 'law'. What they create are "regulations" that become part of an administrative code. These adm codes have the weight of "law" in that they are enforceable by a police, impose immediate cessation of business, have the power to penalize by monetary penalties such as in tort law and in some cases criminal such as the Treasury Dept and ATF.
I guess when I take a look at their powers in a simplistic manner it is hard to differentiate what they are doing from a body of duly elected law makers except they don't have to have a potential regulation debated and then voted on for it to be enacted and enforced....by anyone except the authorities who run the department.
Now then. What do you call a body can do these things without citizen input, debate, and capacity to vote?
I'm no savant...but I would hesitate to allude to this as a behavior of a republican democracy. In fact I would be tempted to use a stronger term such as the kind of government run by Mussolini in the 30's
When it comes to regulating the corporations in our behalf, one has only to see the devastation caused by the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act by Bill Clinton and then the emasculation of the Dodd-Frank Act led by Hillary via the huge payments Wall Street made to the Clinton administration.
Gad, I gotta get ready for another class or I'd pound the pulpit a little more.
You all have a good day!
Yes, you are right, Laiful. They do not make 'law'. What they create are "regulations" that become part of an administrative code. These adm codes have the weight of "law" in that they are enforceable by a police, impose immediate cessation of business, have the power to penalize by monetary penalties such as in tort law and in some cases criminal such as the Treasury Dept and ATF.
I guess when I take a look at their powers in a simplistic manner it is hard to differentiate what they are doing from a body of duly elected law makers except they don't have to have a potential regulation debated and then voted on for it to be enacted and enforced....by anyone except the authorities who run the department.
Now then. What do you call a body can do these things without citizen input, debate, and capacity to vote?
I'm no savant...but I would hesitate to allude to this as a behavior of a republican democracy. In fact I would be tempted to use a stronger term such as the kind of government run by Mussolini in the 30's
When it comes to regulating the corporations in our behalf, one has only to see the devastation caused by the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act by Bill Clinton and then the emasculation of the Dodd-Frank Act led by Hillary via the huge payments Wall Street made to the Clinton administration.
Gad, I gotta get ready for another class or I'd pound the pulpit a little more.
You all have a good day!
Greathands01 · 61-69, M
@lily88mercy: While I understand your point, I have to disagree a little. These agencies can only make regulations because they were given that power through legislation approved by Congress and the President. Laws typically do not spell out every detail of the process, so the agency has to make rules and regulations to perform the intended function; however, an agency cannot make regulations outside of the charter given them by law. These agencies are bound by law and subject to judicial penalties. In addition, Congress can change the law if they so desire to limit them further.
lily88mercy · 26-30, F
@Greathands01: Thank you, thank you, Greathands01 for taking the time to make clarifications regarding this important issue. I truly appreciate it!
😺
😺