Surname 1

Name

Lecturer

Course

Date

The Relationship between the Executive and Legislature and the Implications of both
being under control of the Democratic Party.

One of America’s great leaders Abraham Lincoln attempted at his definition of

democracy. He thought of it as the leadership of the people, by the people and for the

people. The same concept has also been variously defined by different scholars, in similar

ways. For a fact, democracy is a concept whose definition is not that easy! In fact, it may

not have a definite comprehensive definition. However, we can tell some of the tenets

that should be observed for any given system to be termed a democracy. It has been

described as a hall mark of human civilization by some scholars, and more often that not

the concept has been applied selectively by political craftsmen.

Democracy is said to involve leadership by consent. This is achieved through the

leadership function being conducted either directly by the people or through elected

representatives. The elected are expected to work in close contact with the electorate in

arriving at compromised decisions incase of a variance in ideas.

Democracy also entails the adherence to the rule of law and natural justice. Due

process should be on the agenda of any system purporting to be traveling on a democratic

footing. This also means that there should be laid down formal rules that guide the

operations of any given system.

 Surname 2

In a democratic system, the majority should have their way, with the minority

maintaining their stake in society. A democracy is not a winner-take-all system of

operation, but one where the wishes of the minority are also considered.

Regular election through direct suffrage or otherwise is a popularly accepted tenet

of a democratic dispensation. This does not however mean by merely holding regular

elections, the system is okay. The elections must reflect the opinions of he population,

through a free and fair exercise of the decision by informed consent.

Separation of powers and a strong system of checks and balances is one of the

most important provisions of a democratic leadership. This means power should not be

over concentrated in one institution or individual as the case in many dictatorships. On

this note, many countries adhere to a political system, with at least a theoretical, if not a

practical, separation of powers between three conventional arms of government. These

arms are the executive, legislature, and the judiciary. On the foregoing, this paper

concerns itself with two of these three arms, the executive and the legislature.

The three conventional arms of government: the executive, legislature and the

judiciary have distinct areas of competency as per their structures.

The executive arm is the implementer of government policies and is often

mistaken by being termed as the ‘government.’ This is because the implementer of any

policy has some discretionary authority to interpret the policy to suit the circumstances.

Also, the executive is charged with the responsibility of the daily running of the affairs of

the government, and the head of government is often termed the chief executive officer.

He enjoys the real power of governance. In a democratic system, this chief executive is

an elected individual.
 Surname 3

The policies implemented by the executive emanate from the legislative branch,

which is mandated to making laws, including a larger say in the formulation or

amendment to the supreme law, the constitution. However, this amendment, in some

political systems, has to get the approval of the masses through a referendum. In many

democracies or the likes of democratic regimes, the members of this arm are elected by

the people theoretically or practically to represent them to the policy formulation panels

of government.

For the proper functioning of the two branches mentioned above, there has to be a

mechanism to check on the functioning of each. In case one branch acts past its domain,

then it has to be checked. Here now comes the judiciary, which acts as a check to real or

potential; abuse of authority. The main function of this arm is the administration of justice

and the resolution of disputes. Its officers are selected competitively and are expected to

operate with absolute impartiality.

The three arms of government are expected to operate within their jurisdiction for

the smooth running of the system. The American model has operated for many years

successfully with this system, and contends that it the best ever. The interaction of the

executive and the legislature has also been friendly on many occasions.

Before embarking on the relationship between these two branches, it is important

to consider how they are appointed. Because they refer to the basic structure of the

government, the two branches are provided for, with clear responsibilities in the

Constitution. The executive is made up of the president of the Federal Government, who

is the chief executive elected alongside his running mate after every four years. He then

appoints a cabinet of ministers, or Secretaries, who assist him or her in the daily running
 Surname 4

of government business. These appointments usually go for senatorial vetting before

being confirmed. This then becomes the first instance of interaction between the two

arms. The cabinet of secretaries is responsible to the President, and carries out their

responsibilities in the name of the president. The Vice President is the president of the

senate, and presides over Senate meetings except on special occasions, for instance when

the Senate is trying the President on impeachment charges.

The cabinet members are not appointed from the congress. This is basically for

the separation of powers between the executive and the legislature. It means they don’t

have a vote in Congress; neither can they introduce a bill in Congress. Despite this, the

President and members of his cabinet are the major producers of bills to be debated.

These bills are usually through government reports, recommendations, etcetera by the

President, members of cabinet or government agencies. The President, for instance, may

at any time request to address a joint House. He is also required to present a state of the

union address to the Congress on a yearly basis, and this is on the 20th of January.

The legislature is concerned with policy formulation. It is a bicameral house

composed of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The two together constitute

the Congress. Senators are elected by the people to serve a renewable term of six years.

However, senatorial elections are conducted after every two years in the staggered

system. A third of the members of the Senate are therefore elected every two years, to

enhance continuity in their functions. The Senate Chamber has a hundred members, two

from each State to signify equality of each state, irrespective of the population. The

House of Representatives, on the other hand comprises 435 members, each representing a

district. They each serve a two year term in the districts demarcated in respect of
 Surname 5

population. These two chambers have are equally empowered in terms of legislation.

However, there are some powers bestowed specifically per chamber. The power to

impeach the President, for instance, is vested in the House of Representatives, with the

Senate being the impeachment trial authority. In such a case, the Federal Vice President

does not preside over the process.

The power of the presidency in relation to the legislature has been varying over

time. If a laid back president happens to be elected, then Congress would seem to wield

more power than the Executive. The Bush Administration, for instance, has been so

powerful, especially on the foreign policy front where he managed to wage two wars, one

in Afghanistan okayed by the United Nations and the other a unilateral decision in Iraq.

The relationship between the executive and the legislature greatly depends on the

composition of the congress. The federal president may have it rough when congress is

dominated by his opposite party. He may fail to implement his legislative agenda in such

a case, a situation which may leave the executive as a toothless bulldog. It would be an

uphill task for the minority leader therefore to marshal support for government bills and

policies for them to be passed by the house. This is however not always the case.

Congressmen are not bound by the positions held by their parties, and for this reason,

they may vote with their conscience, not with their parties.

On some occasions, the two chambers may use filibuster as a way to delay or

even kill a bill from the chamber. This involves constant disturbances in the process of

debate, with some motive to derail debate.

The talk of the legislature being dominated by the democrats, and also the

president himself is a democrat, would make legislation favoring the platform of the
 Surname 6

Democratic Party an easy task, a situation that may be dangerous for democracy. There is

always a need to strike a compromise in a real democratic society. It is not always right

that the majority is always right, sometimes they may be wrong, and thus going by their

decision s may be disastrous.

The two different positions held by the two major political parties are that the

Republicans are expansionists, and would use the military to achieve their goals. They

have been touted as imperialists, who would go around the world to get what they want.

It is on this basis that some scholars are claiming the reason for attacking Iraq was not

really terrorism and the weapons of mass destruction, but rather that the Bush

Administration intended to tap oil from the gulf state, and to also entrench American

culture in the region. This is from the realization that the first and most effective way to

conquer a person is by first conquering his culture. By capturing Iraq, the Bush

Administration would then use its ground as a launching field for attacks in any other

gulf country, and at the moment, Syria and Iran are the most likely targets.

The Democrats on the other hand, insist on a liberal economy. They spend so little

on the military, and are advocates of a society where people are left to decide for

themselves, without strict governmental regulations. They favor the use of diplomatic

means rather than military to solve political and social problems, unlike the Republicans

who believe in the use of military force and unilateralism. The Democrats advocate for

concerted efforts in the fight against terrorism. They believe in forming coalitions of

strong nations, and to go by the decisions of the world government, the United Nations

on all matters of international magnitude in the international arena. They are not

subscribers of the realism that the Republicans advocate.

 Surname 7

On the scientific field, the Democrats believe in the enhancement of stem cell

research, a position President Bush opposed with his Party, thus cutting substantially

federal funding of the research. However, they caution that the experiments conducted

should not put the heath of the researchers or volunteers in the research at grave danger.

On the issue of gay marriage that is dividing the Anglican Church at present, the

position of the Democrats is that the private life of an individual should not be interfered

with. A grown up person should make a decision on his or her sexual life privately. This

is an indication of their progressive nature. They believe that the world is changing and

that people should not be bound by the past in their present live. Adventure is a

phenomenon to stay.

The Democrats also believe in stricter gun control, as opposed to the Republicans

who are okay with streets full of guns. To enhance security, only registered guns should

be allowed in the streets.

On religion, the Democrats are in favor of a liberal society, one where religion is

not an issue in governance or state affairs. There should be a clear separation of church

and state. They advocate for a secular state.

If it is elected and win a majority in Congress, the Democratic Party may pass

legislations in favor of abortion, a position that President Bush has really opposed.

Immigration laws may be framed in favor of immigrants as the regime advocates for

pluralism in culture. One does not need to abandon his/her cultures just because he/she is

in America as an immigrant. The Party has successfully won over the populations of

ethnic minorities. The party supports affirmative action in an attempt to have an equitable

society with not only the rule of law, but the rule of just laws framed to benefit all classes
 Surname 8

in society. The party has a program of welfare for the haves nots. To them, there are a

group of ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’, as opposed to the Republican’s doctrine of ‘haves’ and

‘have mores’.

Since the time of John F. Kennedy, ethnic minorities believe that the Democratic

Party is their caring political and social grouping. The then President came up with

legislative proposals in favor of the Negroes and received accolades for the support and

solidarity he exhibited at the time.

On the economic front, the Democratic Party advocates for increased minimum

wage, this should be reviewed to be in tandem with the economic situation. Several other

legislations may be on the way after a successful one was passed known as the Fair

Minimum Wage Act passed in 2007.

On taxation, the Party believes that it is wrong to give incentives to big companies

by scaling down the taxes they pay. This would reduce the taxes that would be used for

the benefit of the lower classes in society. Social security and healthcare should be a

responsibility of the government in order to care for its entire population. By liberalizing

this sector, then many citizens may be denied the opportunity to accessible healthcare.

Environmental conservation is humanity conservation. The Democratic Party

believes in collective responsibility among the nations of the world to curb green house

gas emissions and its effects. Former vice President Albert Gore has been at the forefront

in preaching against impunity on the issue in the international arena, and has effectively

won a prestigious Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts. He has on several occasions faulted

the Republican policy on the environment as not serious. He argues that the climate crisis

is a moral issue, not political, and so all humanity must jump in the ship to save itself
 Surname 9

from fate. On capturing the apparatus of governance, the Democratic Party may have a

different idea from the Republicans concerning the Kyoto Protocol.

All these points may be brought to board if the Democratic Party will be elected

in the forth coming presidential elections, and if it will command a majority in the

Congress. This is however not guaranteed because as mentioned earlier, members are not

bound to vote on the side of their party. Again, the Courts may play a big role to overturn

some of the provisions which may seem unconstitutional, but passed by Congress.

However, because it is the President who appoints the Attorney General and other senior

judicial officers, he would probably go for progressive candidates who favor his social

leanings on issues.

The tradition of the United States has been that on electing the Republic Party, the

regime would spend most of the national income to wage war against real and perceived

enemies. The national economy would reach a near collapse state making the citizens to

loose confidence with the party. The end result would be to vote the Democratic Party in

the next elections. The Democratic Party on its part would consolidate the economic

muscle to have a sufficient amount in the treasury, waiting the spending by the

Republican regime on wars when it ascends to power. The advantage of this theory is

that, the United States will continue being seen as the most powerful country, whose

economic and military power is not shaken by the military spending. The alternation also

assists in the sense that a given regime may not bring about so many legislations as to be

a source of conflict.
 Works Cited

Born, Richard. “Party Polarization and the Rise of Partisan Voting in U.S. House

Elections” American Politics Research, Vol. 36, No. 1, 62-84 (2008) New York:

SAGE Publications.

Clinton, Bill. My Life. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004.

Johnson, Charles. How Our Laws Are Made. Washington: U.S. Government Printing

Office, 2003.

Mikva, Abner J. Legislative Process. Boston: Little, Brown, 1995.