Introduction
The American government was formed based primarily from the fragments of state governments instituted before the unification. After federalism was established in the country, powers were shared among the local level and the division of power was created separating the Executive branch from Legislative and Judicial branch. Through the years, the division slowly diminishes as one branch extends its power and expanding its influence in governance. The Legislative branch in particular continuously expands it power, which causes the tipping of the balance of power in governance. In return this expansion of power results to struggle and conflict between other branches of the government. In order to define the extent of reach of the Legislative branch’s expanding power, issues pertaining to conflict in decision-making will be discussed. In addition, the changes perceived to be the result of such expanding power would also be discussed as a point of reference. It is apparent that the Legislative branch is now more involve in governance and even displays a much bigger take on critical decisions that are not typically covered by their authority, which stipulates how the Legislative branch have expanded the reach of its power.
The Legislative Branch
The American Constitution clearly stipulates that the Legislative branch is responsible for enacting laws and act as an appropriation body that allocates the Federal money to operate the government (ncsl.org). However, that responsibility has already gone far from just a law-making chamber into a more involved branch that takes an active participation in governance. The legislative branch is also known as the Congress, which generally possesses immense power that so immense that they were divided into different categories. The first one is the expressed power, which explicitly named in the Constitution, several of these are enumerated in Article 1, Section 8 stipulating that the Congress has the power to levy taxes and even hire pirates to attack the nation’s enemies. Such provision in the constitution depicts extent of power that Congress has. Such provision in the Constitution appears to be in contradiction to the general job description of the Congress.
It is surprising to know that the Congress even has the power to command pirates that are actually terrorizing seafarers in the ocean and are generally considered as bandits. However, the extent of Congress’s power allows them to use pirates to attack the United States enemies, which brings a chilling fact that the Congress itself can actually manipulate the course of international relations. This is because when the Congress uses that power and command any pirates to attack a foreign vessel, it would result to a massive conflict between the attacked nation and the United States. This brings the idea that the Congress actually has the power to create war. This realization appears to be in full contrast to the typical notion of Congress being the lawmaker and budget allocator.
War Powers
The power to declare war does not only reside on the President alone, the Legislative branch also shares significant contribution to such declarations. Going back to the general obligation of the Congress in terms of passing laws and conducting budget hearings, the Legislative branch appeared to have expanded its power in terms of decision making whether to go or not to go to war. It is clear from the War Powers Resolution also known as Public Law 93-148, 87 Stat. 555, which was enacted during the time of President Nixon on November 7, 1973 (loc.gov). Since the War Powers Act was enacted as a joint resolution by the Executive branch and the Senate it was codified in the United States Code (loc.gov). However, the term “Resolution” can be misleading, when the Congress passed a law it is normally referred to as a Bill, but Resolutions are generally confers set of policies that has definite implementing dates. However, the War Powers Act although originally was a joint resolution was passed by the both House or Congress in pursuant to the legislative process (loc.gov). In effect the Resolution obtained the same effect as a Bill and therefore constitutes the same effect of a law.
Given that the Congress has the power to convert Resolutions into a law such as that of the War Powers Act, it would appear that the Congress could extend its power in deciding whether the country will go to war or not. It is apparent that the President alone cannot make the decision to go to war alone; there is a need for the House of Congress to agree to the idea in order to commence the President’s decision (Zelizer). It suggests that the Congress actually has the power to bring the country into a devastating war and that it supersedes the Executive branch’s critical decisions that have an adverse effect to the country in the long run. The Legislative branch holds the collective judgment and statutory authorization as stipulated in 50 USC Sec. 154 (loc.gov) on concerns of regarding war engagement. The kind of power constitutes a threat to the country as a whole because, at any moment that the Congress decided to exercise such power it would entail devastating consequences not only in the United States, but also on the side of the countries involved.
Court Influence
Congressional powers expand not only in terms of influencing decision outcomes of war, but also in court decisions making the Legislative branch’s power to extend over the Judicial branch. The government’s division of power clearly stipulates that each branch will work independently and their scope of power should not supersede the other and that the nature of their responsibilities are defined only within the jurisdiction described by the Constitution. Weinstein-Tull (2007) reviewed the case of Gonzales vs. Carhart regarding the affirmation of Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 in Virginia in relation to women’s right to choose during events that requires abortion. In the case, the Court emphasized the scope of Congressional power stipulating the Congress’s factual findings determining no exemption to the rule of the said Act declaring that the mother’s health is not in any way a ground for abortion.
In the said case, the Court stood to their findings that the substantive due process requires that each of the abortion legislation have an exception that stipulates the importance of the mother’s health particularly when supported by health authorities (Weinstein-Tull 165). However, the Court did not specify whether the court itself or the Congress is the appropriate body to determine the strength of medical authority’s position over the case. Therefore, Justice Kennedy who presided in the case declared that the Congress is the one that has the authority to determine the factual findings regarding health exceptions on the issue of abortion (Weinstein-Tull 166). The Justice branch should and supposed to make decisions independently and should not be interfered with by the Congress. However, the outcome of the Court case exampled here is an indication that the power of the Legislative branch expands to the point that even the Judicial branch rely on Congress for decisions.
Conclusion
Given the constitutional mandates about the separation of power, it appears that the Legislative branch is already expanding its power over the other branches of the government. It is clear from the American Constitution that each branch should work hand in hand, but should not supersede the other. The extent of power that the Congress displays creates an apparent influence to the outcomes of government decision-making that are not part of legislative scope.
Works Cited
Loc.gov. "War Powers." Library of Congress Home. loc.gov, n.d. Web. 27 June 2013. <http://www.loc.gov/law/help/war-powers.php>.
Ncsl.org. "Separation of Powers--An Overview." NCSL Home. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 June 2013. <http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/legislatures/separation-of-powers-an-overview.aspx>.
Weinstein-Tull, Justin. "Expanding Congressional Power in Gonzales vs. Carhart." Virginia Law Review in Brief 93 (2007): 165–171. Web. 27 June 2013. <http://www.virginialawreview.org/inbrief/2007/07/23/weinsteintull.pdf>.
Zelizer, Julian E. "War powers belong to Congress and the president." CNN.com International. CNN, 27 July 2011. Web. 27 June 2013. <http://www.cnn.com.ph/2011/OPINION/06/27/zelizer.war.powers/index.html>.
