If congress starves Bush of funds for the war, why not dissolve congress and hold new elections? He has the authority. Why wasn't this done to support the Vietnam War?
2007-03-20 11:09:34 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Okay. Please help me out here. I found this at Wik.
"...a legislature which refuses to cooperate with the executive, for example by refusing to vote a budget or otherwise starving the executive of funds, may be dissolved by the Head of State, leading to new elections."
What do yo make of it. And does anyone know of any other resources challenging this article?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_branch
2007-03-20 11:29:28 · update #1
Read the Constitution. Nowhere does it give the President the authority to dissolve Congress. It does give Congress the authority to pass the budget. It also gives Congress the authority to declare war. Congress gave Bush the authority to go to war in 2003. In 2007 it can take that authority away. The people spoke loud and clear in 2006! We'll get another chance in 2008.
Edit-- Your Wikopedia article is referring to a Parliamentary form of government such as Great Britain. Again read and study the Constitution. It's a great document. I provided a link.
2007-03-20 12:00:28 · answer #1 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Dissolve congress and hold new elections? Four months after elections were held? Subvert the will of the voting populace in favor of his own? That would basically make us a dictatorship, wouldn't it?
The president DOES NOT, in fact, have that power. If he tries to give himself that power, then it is time to reassess our leadership.
2007-03-20 11:14:38 · answer #2 · answered by Schmorgen 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
George Bush is President of the United States,not Secretary General of the People's Republic of America.He has no authority to dissolve Congress.Try again.
2007-03-20 11:25:15 · answer #3 · answered by Zapatta McFrench 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
We already fired a bunch of US Senators who weren't doing their jobs.
Now if the new batch could just do their jobs, we might still have a democracy, and save the country from folks who hate the Liberal principals this first great Democracy was founded on.
2007-03-20 11:41:07 · answer #4 · answered by No Bushrons 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You have the power to recall your Senator if you don't like what they are doing. And don't worry the Senate is evenly divided between Dems and Republicans so they won't pass any bills to cut off funding. They couldn't even pass that non-binding resolution.
2007-03-20 11:14:22 · answer #5 · answered by meathookcook 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
No he doesn't have the authority this isn't the third riech just yet honey
The article is a synopsis of ALL execitive branches and not specifically our own, in the U S of A the executive DOES NOT have that authority, your attempting to use specialized facets of International Law to apply here and that ain't how it works
2007-03-20 11:13:14 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 3⤋
The problem with both Vietnam and Iraq is not the lack of support at home, but the lack of motivation within our government to produce propaganda warfare as well as bullets to educate and manipulate the masses towards their own freedoms from communism and any other power we are at odds with.
2007-03-20 11:17:24 · answer #7 · answered by djkinsaul1 3 · 5⤊ 2⤋
The president has no such authority but I'm with you. I wish we could fire em all (House and Senate).
2007-03-20 11:14:47 · answer #8 · answered by aiminhigh24u2 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Luckily Bush doesn't have dictatorship status ... yet.
2007-03-20 11:14:45 · answer #9 · answered by J9 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
arrest and deport them
Lighten up- kidding
2007-03-20 11:14:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 5⤋