Gov. 101: the President doesn't write laws

[ProSense]

A lot of people seem to think Obama can single-handedly change laws. He can work to implement his vision, but the laws of the land originate (are written and approved) in Congress before Obama gets to put his stamp of approval on them.

The President is the head of the executive branch and plays a large role in making America’s laws. His job is to approve the laws that Congress creates. When the Senate and the House approve a bill, they send it to the President. If he agrees with the law, he signs it and the law goes into effect.

If the President does not like a bill, he can refuse to sign it. When he does this, it is called a veto. If the President vetoes a bill, it will most likely never become a law. Congress can override a veto, but to do so two-thirds of the Members of Congress must vote against the President.

Despite all of his power, the President cannot write bills. He can propose a bill, but a member of Congress must submit it for him.

In addition to playing a key role in the lawmaking process, the President has several duties. He serves as the American Head of State, meaning that he meets with the leaders of other countries and can make treaties with them. However, the Senate must approve any treaty before it becomes official.

link

The U.S. Congress is made up of two parts, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Congress meets at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. Its primary duty is to write, debate, and pass bills, which are then passed on to the President for approval.

Other Powers of Congress

• Makes laws controlling trade between states and between the United States and other countries.
  
• Makes laws about taxes and borrowing money.
  
• Approves the making of money.
  
• Can declare war on other countries.

Each Congress lasts for two years. When the two years are over, new Members of Congress are elected. We are currently in the 110th Congress. Congress meets once every year and usually last from January 3rd to July 31st, but in special cases, it can last longer.

link

The House has special jobs that only it can do. It can:

• Start laws that make people pay taxes.
  
• Decide if a government official should be put on trial before the Senate if s/he commits a crime against the country.

link

The Senate has special jobs that only it can do. It can:

• Say yes or no to any treaties the president makes.
  
• Say yes or no to any people the president recommends for jobs, such as cabinet officers, Supreme Court justices, and ambassadors.
  
• Can hold a trial for a government official who does something very wrong.

link

[Clio the Leo]

1. Thank you and...

.... I think we could all use a little refresher from our friends at School House Rock

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

[ProSense]

15. Always loved that.

Apparently, this is upsetting to some.

[Starry Messenger]

17. I miss those!

We need some new ones.

[Political Tiger]

2. So true!

I tried pointing this out in another thread because it appears people are under the impression that Obama can just walk in, snap his fingers and change whatever law he pleases, or create law. He can't. He doesn't have that power and with all the emotion over certain subjects I think people are forgetting that.

[backscatter712]

3. The bully pulpit is a powerful thing.

Bush was able to use the bully pulpit to browbeat Congress into passing the PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act of 2006, Kyl-Lieberman, several Iraq war funding bills, the TARP bailout, etc. etc. etc.

Hopefully, Obama will be able to use that same bully pulpit to browbeat Congress into doing something useful for a change.

[ProSense]

5. Yes, the bully pulpit is a powerful thing.

Bush didn't have to browbeat Congress into doing anything. He had the willing 49 Rubberstamp Republicans and some Democrats.

Obama will certainly use his pulpit. With a Democratic majority in Congress, he'll have an easier time. Still, Congress will have to come to consensus, and you can bet the Republicans will be obstructing and spinning every chance they get.

[stillcool]

30. Bush had the entire republican machine..

behind him. I can't imagine just how devastating the policies of this administration have been, that necessitated factions of the power brokers to support Obama. The "American" brand must have taken such a beating that it has affected the bottom line. I think that Obama is relying too much on the people of this country to involve themselves in pressuring their own representatives into passing legislation. That's not going to happen..the pressure will continue to come from corporate interests, not from any significant number of 'we the people'.

[HamdenRice]

4. Slight modification. The White House does indeed "write" legislation

"the President cannot write bills. He can propose a bill,..."

Anyone can write a bill, but you are correct that only a member of Congress can submit the bill to Congress.

As a matter of fact, all kinds of people, lobbyists, NGOs and others write draft bills, and many of them are adopted with little change.

The executive branch does indeed write a lot of legislation. Various departments, whose staff knows how legislation needs to be improved, often write legislation for Congress. The EPA, for example, often writes environmental legislation, and the Justice Department writes a lot of crime bills (like the infamous Patriot Act).

Often the president acts like Prime Minister, crafting major legislative initiatives and then submitting them to Congress -- a holdover of parliamentary political culture. This is especially true when a president is a former member of Congress, like Lyndon Johnson was, and perhaps like Obama may be.

But the president cannot prevent Congress from revising a bill before passage, at which point the president can only give it a thumbs up or thumbs down.

[Sensitivity]

6. This was certainly the approach on many recent administrations

[ProSense]

8. Yes, anyone can propose legislation.

Perfect example is the Clinton health care plan. It's a perfect example of what can go wrong when the executive branch tries to circumvent the legislative process.

[Captain Hilts]

7. You write them, then hand them to someone in Congress to propose them.

Sen. Robert Wagner of NY did a lot for the FDR White House in the '30s.

[JuniperLea]

9. I hope he uses "The Bush Powers"

But for good this time.

[ProSense]

11. I hope he returns to respecting the Constitution.

It would be the best thing to ensure a lasting Democratic majority.

[JuniperLea]

16. I agree... after he wields the ungodly powers

Bush put into action, to crush all he can that the Bush admin screwed up... then abolish all said powers.

[ProSense]

22. Yeah,

justice would be great. :)

[H2O Man]

10. As noted

above, Presidents can and do write proposed legislation. The best example for progressive/liberal democrats to consider when Obama takes office is when leaders of the civil rights movement pressure JFK and then LBJ to propose civil rights legislation.

[ProSense]

12. It's pretty clear in the text of the OP.

The President, or anyone, can propose legislation. The bill (on its way to becoming a law, the process) originates in Congress. It has to pass through the appropriate committee.

[H2O Man]

19. Perhaps you could

have corrected the first sentence.

[ProSense]

20. Perhaps, but I didn't believe it was necessary to repeat verbatim the text

that followed, which states it a lot clearer.

[Onlooker]

13. Good right wing talking point, if you change "Obama" to "Bush"

The President may not write the laws, but exerts so much influence and has so much power that he all but writes the laws when he so chooses, such as the Patriot Act.

[ProSense]

14. Facts are right wing talking points?

Bush didn't write (LOL) the Patriot Act, which is a law that pulled together language from numerous sources.


On edit: Bush didn't write any laws, he just broke them.

[damntexdem]

18. Well, not legally, and not unless he's Dubya.

[LiberalFighter]

21. 98.9% of the people that don't vote don't understand how a bill is created and pass.

Not more than 50% of the people that do vote know either.

[ProSense]

23. Yup. n/t

[acmavm]

24. Yeah, you're right. The bush** admin isn't responsible for any of the crap

that's come out of the House and Senate. Why, just because they got every conniving, illegal, immoral, unethical action or program or law or funding they ever wanted, it's nothing to do with bush** and his admin. They were just very lucky, right?

[ProSense]

25. Writing laws has nothing

to do with breaking them.

[acmavm]

26. What laws did they break? The House and Senate went along with the

spying on the American people (bush**/Cheney/neocon policy in case you missed it). They went along with the IWR. They went along with the tax breaks. They went along with policies of extraordinary rendition and torture. They went along with the fucking 'bailout'.

So, what have they don't for the country? What haven't they done to further the criminal enterprise known as the bush** administration?

[ProSense]

27. Well, if you don't think Bush and Cheney broke any laws, you need to do some reading.

Start here and here.

[acmavm]

31. Where in the name of anything that makes any sense did you ever get the

idea that I don't believe that bush** and cheney broke any laws? That's ridiculous. They just had a WHOLE BOATLOAD of accomplices.

[Occam Bandage]

28. Incorrect. He cannot write statutes, but statutes are not the only source of law.

Executive orders and regulations are both law, and both are issued by the executive branch. Sure, he may not single-handedly be writing EPA regulations, but given the strength of the modern President, he might as well be.

[ProSense]

29. Executive orders are not laws.

Like signing statements, they have no Constitutional basis. They are supposed to comply with existing law. That is why certain exectuive orders have been deemed unconstitutional or illegal.

U.S. Presidents have issued executive orders since 1789. Although there is no Constitutional provision or statute that explicitly permits executive orders, there is a vague grant of "executive power" given in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution and the statement "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed" in Article II, Section 3. Most executive orders are orders issued by the President to US executive officers to help direct their operation, the result of failing to comply being removal from office.

<...>

Critics have accused presidents of abusing executive orders, of using them to make laws without Congressional approval, and of moving existing laws away from their original mandates....

link

Clause 4: Caring for the faithful execution of the law

The President must "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Some Presidents have claimed the authority under this provision to impound money appropriated by Congress. President Jefferson, for example, delayed the expenditure of money appropriated for the purchase of gunboats for over a year. President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his successors sometimes refused outright to expend appropriated money. The Supreme Court, however, has held impoundments without Congressional authorization are unconstitutional.

link