The Legislative Control Essay Example

powers still operate only within the presidential docket (Fisher 2013, 30). The legislations that approve the validity of presidential acts have haunted many governments’ stability.

Another aspect of Presidential action, as noted in President Bush’s authorization of the secretive and warrantless surveillance program after an attack indicates the use of the “Empty ‘Sole Organ’ Doctrine” (Fisher 2013, 46). Here, the President is the sole organ in the external relations. The vice remains unresolved as some parts of the constitution cite the doctrine and express presidential powers as exclusive. On the other hand, the courts have never denied the Congress the authority to limit or modify the decisions as per the same constitution (Fisher 2013, 53).
In bypassing the Congress Entirely, the presidents could move into war without consulting the Congress after the World War II. Good examples are the Korean president in 1950, the Kosovar president in 1999, and the Libyan president in 2011 (Fisher 2013, 71). In 1950, President Truman sent military troops to Korea before seeking for a joint resolution with the Congress. More recently, President Barak Obama reported to the Congress his involvement in Libya, after he had already sent troops as well as the NATO (Fisher 2013, 78). Constitutionally, the authority to involve a country in war comes from the Congress.

Another aspect is the Paramilitary Operations and warfare. In a resolution passed by the Congress in 1973, the “War Power Resolution” (Fisher 2013, 88), the introduction of the Armed Forces into hostilities was the main focus. The legislations laid down did not cover the civilian combatants who operated in the paramilitary forces under the Central Intelligence Agency. The Presidents normally use these voids

to secretly or distractively plan “indigenous Laotian forces into hostile actions” (Fisher 2013, 90). They, at times, have agents with arms, but exhibit unnoticeable actions that would result into war (Fisher 2013, 95).
Finally, the Judicial Ruling of 1800 to 1863 decided and accepted most of the war power cases. The prevalent national policy stated that the power to initiate war lay with the Congress, as in the Quasi-war of 1978 (Fisher 2013, 55). Nevertheless, people like the Attorney General Charles Lee could advice President John Adams that the maritime war was a war between France and the U.S (Fisher 2013, 56). The Attorney General’s comments trigger the President’s decision, even without prior consultations.

In summary, the Framers vested the power to declare war on the Congress. However, after the World War II, it became difficult to recognize the source of war power. The roles of the U.N. Charter and the NATO are misconceived by shifting the authority to the President. On its part, the Congress has not done much to reinstate its veto powers. The end result is a weakened representative government and a government system full of checks and balances. All these virtues, therefore, are a threat to general stability and peace.

Bibliography
Fisher, Louis. 2013. Presidential war power.