American Politics revision: separation of powers

Barack Obama’s worst defeat so far as President is a perfect illustration of the separation of powers and checks and balances in action.

A recent editorial on the American elections in the Times praised the American political system as the “most responsive in the world”. This flies in the face of traditional thinking, which suggests that the US constitution is too rigid and prevents government from governing. During the long hot summer of 1787, the Framers of the US constitution in Philadelphia designed into the US political system a separation of powers. Most text books suggest that the Framers were conscious of the need to prevent any one branch from having too much power, but they often fail to highlight that they were reluctant to offer the people too much power either. As Madison said “ambition must be made to counteract ambition” and for this reason the Framers built into the system a series of checks and balances.

Separating the executive and legislature means gridlock is almost inevitable in the American system thus raising questions about whether it performs effectively. This problem is further compounded when there is divided government, such as in the latter years of the Clinton and Bush presidencies. In 1996, for instance, the federal government came to a standstill as a result its inability to pass the budget. The different priorities of the President and Congress can mean that the mile and a half of Pennsylvania Avenue that separates them really is, as King says, a long way.

On Wednesday the Senate voted 90-6 to deny Obama the $80m he needs to shut down Guantanamo. This follows a similar defate in the House of Representatives. The intricate details of why Democrats opposed the commander in chief on this issue are not important here, but as the Times stated:

‘Under the separation of powers outlined in the US Constitution, Congress has control over almost all government spending. Thus, it can stop virtually any programme by refusing to provide money to carry it out.’

Thus students can use this when discussing the operation of the Constitution, or the power of the President.

This vote shows again that in terms of Obama’s relations with Congress, King’s comment is equally applicable.