Do you feel there will be sincere moves to limit the powers of the US Executive branch in the future?

Question

After the Bush/Cheney corporate Presidency has run its course, will there be a movement in the future to find new ways to limit the powers of the Executive branch or do you feel there will be some talk about doing that but no significant action to actually do so?

Answer 1

Good Question Mid. But he's not out yet and has extended many questions toward staying in office until his war is over.
I for one have been very pro-active and my Congressman assures me that this is not unusual and that Regular americans are starting to wake up, about darn time. Yes, if we care enough to not let all of these deaths be in vain, we must stop this Imperialism and Barbarism and any other isms people don't want the people to know about. I wonder where Ken Starr is when we really need him.. We 60's Patriots have gotten a lot of crap over the years and we were right then and we are right now. They just call themselves "right" because they are liars....They are corruptors of our Constitution and terrible Neighbors. And if they come and get me in the night will somebody let my dogs out?

Answer 2

The powers of all three branches of government are outlined in the US Constitution. Congress has always tried to limit the Executive. Congress keeps writing news laws when they don't like rulings from the Supreme Court. Until recently, the Supreme Court has been legislating from the bench.
All three branches share guilt when it comes to overstepping their bounds.

Answer 3

There won't be much action but I believe the voting citizens would like to see it. Bush has corrupted the whole system.

Answer 4

no serious action will get through... the whole govt is corrupt and needs to be restructured by some sane and sensible humans... but thatll never happen.

power corrupts. period.

God help us.
cheers!

Answer 5

they are no longer likely to shrink govt ability, yet possibly they are able to hold it to pre-Patriot Act levels. they might desire to tug the troops out of Baghdad. The Shias and Sunnis will kill one yet another for a mutually as, then Iraq will finally end up chop up into many countries. The Democrats proportion Bush's lack of information of the priority in Iraq. you may no longer overthrow a rustic's government and attempt to impose a sparkling national government in its place and anticipate to steer clear of a Civil conflict. Governments carry onto their ability by way of fraudulent public kin schemes, specific interest payoffs, and the terror of the folk. it is how Saddam held onto Iraq, how the Soviets held onto Russia, how Hitler held onto Germany, and the way the Feds carry onto america. evaluate this state of affairs... If the federal government collapsed day after today and the UN (or another remote places ability) desperate that u.s. desires a sparkling national government to rule the entire u . s . a . and held elections for a central authority (which elected Fundamentalist Christians by using a plurality; who impose their morality rules on truthfully anybody else by using rigidity), what might ensue? does no longer u.s. grow to be Iraq, with an revolt of something of the inhabitants. that's what Bush did to Iraq by using insisting on a unmarried Iraqi government. If we would % to restoration the mess in Iraq, we could pull out and enable the Iraqis create their own small community governments. The Iraqi Civil conflict could end by using itself, devoid of our armed forces attempting to combat the two facets. you may no longer win a Civil conflict (and subsequently stabilize a rustic) by using waging conflict against the two factions.

Answer 6

During Reagan presidency he made sure that he had all of his powers at his disposal. He advised all presidents to do this to keep congress from stopping them from doing their job. This President was smart enough to listen to Ronny. Screw congress. they can't manage to build a damn fence and you want to give them power over the President? Bullshit.