Discussion World Forum  


Go Back   Discussion World Forum > Politics & Current Events > U.S. Politics

U.S. Politics Congress, elections, government and discussion of all US political issues.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old Nov 16th 2016, 06:46 AM
Sucre's Avatar
Sucre Sucre is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 335
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
But yet, it's the President's prerogative to appoint Supreme Court Justices. It seems to me that there's a bit of a chicken an egg problem here. Do you really have separation of powers if you constitutionally submit membership of the highest judiciary institution to the 'whim' of the Executive branch?
Yes, there is of course. Following Montesquieu's theory of the separation of powers, there is.

Legislative= makes the law
Executive = applies the law
Judiciary = rules whether the law is correctly applied

Maybe somebody would enlighten me on the rationale of this provision of the US Constitution?
__________________
Liberté ... j'écris ton nom ...
  #12  
Old Nov 16th 2016, 07:01 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,838
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sucre View Post
Yes, there is of course. Following Montesquieu's theory of the separation of powers, there is.

Legislative= makes the law
Executive = applies the law
Judiciary = rules whether the law is correctly applied

Maybe somebody would enlighten me on the rationale of this provision of the US Constitution?
Oddly enough, the only country in the world with a vaguely similar constitutional system to the US government is France.

Anyway, for some odd reason, the framers of the US Constitution seemed to believe that strictly separating government between the Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary was super-important. History has shown that this is a crock of shit and has no beneficial effects - if anything, the US system of separation of powers has resulted in a system where no branch of government can be held responsible for anything, which just reinforces the anti-democratic character of the US government.

The Judiciary MUST be separate from the Legislature and the Executive, absolutely. But separating the Legislature and the Executive seems arbitrary in theory and absurd (and/or highly dysfunctional) in practice.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
  #13  
Old Nov 16th 2016, 07:30 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,838
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sucre View Post
Hillary was also in charge (first health care packaged? Failed?) when Clinton was president.

How do the Americans in general feel about that, do you know?

Don't they see the conflict?
This is a very complicated issue.

On the one hand, by long historical tradition, the wife of the President is supposed to be entirely 100% non-political. That tradition ran into trouble even in the earliest days of the Republic under President Adams, but most notably, was symbolically violated by Eleanor Roosevelt, who was a very political woman of great talent and popularity.

Since then, the pendulum keeps swinging back and forth. Nancy Reagan was practically Ronald Reagan's Chief of Staff in this second term of office, while Hillary Clinton was equally high profile in Bill Clinton's administration. Michelle Obama has followed the old tradition, along with Barbara and Laura Bush, and has been mostly a low-profile and non-partisan ribbon-cutter.

Americans seem to be equally divided on the issue. There is a strong political conservative idea that women belong at home, raising children and doing/thinking only what their husbands tell them to do. On the other hand, more modern thinking people see no problem with a wife of a president being a close insider to the Presidential administration - indeed, almost impossible to avoid.

So, no clear answer is available on the issue.

Bottom line is that I think it will follow every other rule in partisan Washington - that is to say, Republicans are fine with a wife of a Republican being politically active, but are totally opposed to the wife of a Democratic president being active - and vice versa.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
  #14  
Old Nov 17th 2016, 10:30 AM
dilettante's Avatar
dilettante dilettante is offline
Moderator
Resident Historian
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,082
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
Oddly enough, the only country in the world with a vaguely similar constitutional system to the US government is France.

Anyway, for some odd reason, the framers of the US Constitution seemed to believe that strictly separating government between the Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary was super-important. History has shown that this is a crock of shit and has no beneficial effects - if anything, the US system of separation of powers has resulted in a system where no branch of government can be held responsible for anything, which just reinforces the anti-democratic character of the US government.

The Judiciary MUST be separate from the Legislature and the Executive, absolutely. But separating the Legislature and the Executive seems arbitrary in theory and absurd (and/or highly dysfunctional) in practice.
The framers were attempting to replicate the British constitutional system of their time: King, Lords, and Commons became President, Senate, and House. SCOTUS wasn't really envisioned as a serious check on the others until the Marshall Court established the precedent of striking down laws as unconstitutional in the early 1800s. The first Chief Justice (Jay) almost turned down the position because he thought it was trivial and unimportant.
__________________
kyrie eleison
  #15  
Old Nov 17th 2016, 07:02 PM
Dominick's Avatar
Dominick Dominick is offline
Globetrotter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dying Europe
Posts: 3,837
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sucre View Post
Yes, there is of course. Following Montesquieu's theory of the separation of powers, there is.

Legislative= makes the law
Executive = applies the law
Judiciary = rules whether the law is correctly applied

Maybe somebody would enlighten me on the rationale of this provision of the US Constitution?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
Oddly enough, the only country in the world with a vaguely similar constitutional system to the US government is France.

Anyway, for some odd reason, the framers of the US Constitution seemed to believe that strictly separating government between the Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary was super-important. History has shown that this is a crock of shit and has no beneficial effects - if anything, the US system of separation of powers has resulted in a system where no branch of government can be held responsible for anything, which just reinforces the anti-democratic character of the US government.

The Judiciary MUST be separate from the Legislature and the Executive, absolutely. But separating the Legislature and the Executive seems arbitrary in theory and absurd (and/or highly dysfunctional) in practice.
My point is precisely that it isn't despite the theory and the 'framers', not when the Executive branch appoints the highest functionaries in the Judiciary. With separation of power -desirable or not- the Judiciary would choose their highest functionaries inter pares, i.e. amongst themselves, without any input from the Executive branch.
__________________
Wir haben es wieder nicht gewusst.
  #16  
Old Nov 17th 2016, 07:04 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,838
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by dilettante View Post
The framers were attempting to replicate the British constitutional system of their time: King, Lords, and Commons became President, Senate, and House. SCOTUS wasn't really envisioned as a serious check on the others until the Marshall Court established the precedent of striking down laws as unconstitutional in the early 1800s. The first Chief Justice (Jay) almost turned down the position because he thought it was trivial and unimportant.
More likely Chief Justice Jay thought the position lacked sufficient prestige since we are talking about 18th century here!

Anyway, if the framers thought the US president, Senate and House were remotely like the British system, that doesn't say much about their education, research abilities or knowledge of constitutions.

The similarities are entirely on the surface. In reality, the British Parliamentary system is the polar opposite of the US presidential system. And even in 18th century Britain, the executive was entirely dependent on and fundamentally linked to Parliament. That is the key point of distinction and the most important characteristic of the difference between the US and British system.

I'd say that the US system has zero actual 'checks & balances'. it just has lots of roadblocks/veto points to protect the ruling elites from the democratic populace. The British parliamentary system uses the electorate as the principal form of 'checking' any abuse of power by parliament - they can do this because all power and authority is vested in Parliament and that makes it bloody obvious to everyone who is to blame. The US system has no checks because the separation of powers ensures that neither the President nor Congress can be held responsible for anything (they just point fingers at each other) and the voting public has no real proof as to which one is actually fucking things up.

Anyway, I don't think that the British monarch was the actual model for the US Presidency - to my mind, it looks much more the Roman Consul was the model.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
  #17  
Old Nov 17th 2016, 07:09 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,838
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
My point is precisely that it isn't despite the theory and the 'framers', not when the Executive branch appoints the highest functionaries in the Judiciary. With separation of power -desirable or not- the Judiciary would choose their highest functionaries inter pares, i.e. amongst themselves, without any input from the Executive branch.
The key point about the 'independence' of the judiciary is not about who appoints the judges.

The principal issue of concern for the definition of an independent judiciary is the ability to actively remove judges from office and/or interfere with court cases. If the government cannot remove judges or actively interfere in court cases, then the judiciary is considered entirely independent.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
  #18  
Old Nov 18th 2016, 06:53 AM
Sucre's Avatar
Sucre Sucre is offline
Citizen
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 335
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
My point is precisely that it isn't despite the theory and the 'framers', not when the Executive branch appoints the highest functionaries in the Judiciary. With separation of power -desirable or not- the Judiciary would choose their highest functionaries inter pares, i.e. amongst themselves, without any input from the Executive branch.
Yeah ... In France the State President chairs ("préside") the Conseil National de la Magistrature. Means he participates in the appointment of Judges indirectly although he does not nominate them like in the USA.

I agree with Michael though that a purist separation of powers cannot work. If completely separated the three powers will - by essence - collide and compete. Some cooperation is necessary to have them work together and not just against each other.

Look how Obama was unable to push his agenda forward during his second mandate.

A delicate issue that no constitution has, to my knowledge, perfectly solved.
__________________
Liberté ... j'écris ton nom ...
  #19  
Old Nov 18th 2016, 03:30 PM
Dominick's Avatar
Dominick Dominick is offline
Globetrotter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Dying Europe
Posts: 3,837
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Less theoretically there are some names on the table:

Jeff Sessions: Attorney General
Michael Flynn: National Security Advisor
Mike Pompeo: CIA

While most people and commentaries focus on Sessions for obvious reasons, I'm far more concerned with Flynn. That guy seems completely unhinged and paranoid. Luckily Daesh may be history by the time the Trump administration gets in position because the methods someone like that is bound to suggest would doubtless create a whole new wave of insurgency in Iraq and/or Syria and/or Afghanistan.
__________________
Wir haben es wieder nicht gewusst.
  #20  
Old Nov 18th 2016, 06:46 PM
Michael's Avatar
Michael Michael is offline
Administrator
Herder of Cats
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 14,838
Default Re: The Trump Regime

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dominick View Post
Less theoretically there are some names on the table:

Jeff Sessions: Attorney General
Michael Flynn: National Security Advisor
Mike Pompeo: CIA

While most people and commentaries focus on Sessions for obvious reasons, I'm far more concerned with Flynn. That guy seems completely unhinged and paranoid. Luckily Daesh may be history by the time the Trump administration gets in position because the methods someone like that is bound to suggest would doubtless create a whole new wave of insurgency in Iraq and/or Syria and/or Afghanistan.
Yes, Flynn is bad. But Sessions as AG - he's the guy who got voted down for a judgeship because he was way too openly racist in court.
__________________
Remember what the dormouse said: Feed your head!
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2008 - 2017, DiscussionWorldForum.com