Latest news with #executiveBranch
Yahoo
02-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Editorial: Congress must reclaim war power
Editor's note: This editorial originally ran in fellow CNHI paper the Joplin, Missouri, Globe. Congress has been dropping the ball for years. It needs to reclaim its authority among the three branches of the federal government; in fact, the Constitution lists the legislative first among equals for a reason. It first lays out the duties and powers of the legislative branch, then outlines the authority and responsibilities of the executive and judicial branches. Intended to be the branch that most closely represents the will of the people, it instead has been captured by partisans beholden to party and president. With the power to challenge even controversial rulings by the Supreme Court through legislation or proposing amendments to the Constitution, it instead seems to duck its responsibilities and give away its power. The founders implemented a government of divided authority and responsibility — divided power between not just the three federal branches but also the states — to limit the risk of runaway government. Congress' tendency for years now has been to cede its power to the other branches. Legislation written to counter questionable rulings by the high court has all but stopped, and we haven't seen a constitutional amendment proposed in generations. Lawmakers have been actually energetic in giving away their power to the executive branch, actively writing laws that hand over their authority to increasingly imperial presidents. After all, bearing the responsibilities of the legislative branch carries much more risk than posturing and bloviating while dodging those things for which a Congress member might be held to account. As we said in an earlier editorial about Congress yielding its tariff authority to presidents, 'How the nation drifted is a long and legal story, but most Americans recognize that central to that story is the failure of members of Congress to get in the game.' Though game is really much too gentle a term for Congress yielding its most deadly authority — the constitutional power to declare war and to establish, regulate and fund the instruments of war. The recent action by President Donald Trump in bombing Iran without congressional approval — regardless of whether history ends up showing the action vindicated — is just the latest example of Congress abdicating its authority. U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 8: 'The Congress shall have Power To … declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; To provide and maintain a Navy; To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces …' The founders separated the war powers for a reason, making the president the commander in chief of the armed forces when they are called into action — a power to carry out a war Congress declares. While we understand the occasional modern need for rapid emergency action, the president's authority should not extend to singular action without Congress. Congress granted the president the authority to make rapid strikes in emergencies but requires Congress, or at least key members with national security oversight, to be informed beforehand. and lawmakers retained the right to review and end such conflicts. Presidents over the years have continued to stretch this power beyond the scope of the original law and to call things emergencies for which they rightly should have sought approval. It is time for lawmakers to revisit Congress' use of force authorization, to tighten and redefine it and insist that no executive have the unilateral power to launch a war.
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House budget provision exempts executive branch from following court orders
A two legged stool cannot stand. Neither can a democracy with only two branches. I read with horror the Journal Sentinel article, 'House bill could neutralize court orders' (June 2). In the 1,000+ page 'big beautiful bill' is a provision that would exempt the executive branch from following a court's orders. This means they would be above the law! The courts would live out a Shakespeare quote 'being full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.' There would be no guardrails or accountability for the executive branch; one leg on our stool of democracy would be gone. Regardless of your political affiliation, this should concern you. I'm troubled that another leg of our democratic stool, the legislative branch, are not up in arms about this provision, but though their timidity, ignorance or fear have not stood up and provided a strong statement that this shall not pass. Letters: Real issue behind need for retail lockboxes ignored. Don't make excuses. We the people need to demand that our elected representatives do what is right for all Americans. We can disagree and debate, but we all live here. When it is no longer 'we the people' but an elite group of self interested people making the rules, America as we and the whole world know it will be gone. Glenn Luedtke, Franklin Here are some tips to get your views shared with your friends, family, neighbors and across our state: Please include your name, street address and daytime phone. Generally, we limit letters to 200 words. Cite sources of where you found information or the article that prompted your letter. Be civil and constructive, especially when criticizing. Avoid ad hominem attacks, take issue with a position, not a person. We cannot acknowledge receipt of submissions. We don't publish poetry, anonymous or open letters. Each writer is limited to one published letter every two months. All letters are subject to editing. Write: Letters to the editor, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 330 E. Kilbourn Avenue, Suite 500, Milwaukee, WI, 53202. Fax: (414)-223-5444. E-mail: jsedit@ or submit using the form that can be found on the on the bottom of this page. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Congress is absent, guided by timidity, ignorance and fear | Letters
Yahoo
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
House budget provision exempts executive branch from following court orders
A two legged stool cannot stand. Neither can a democracy with only two branches. I read with horror the Journal Sentinel article, 'House bill could neutralize court orders' (June 2). In the 1,000+ page 'big beautiful bill' is a provision that would exempt the executive branch from following a court's orders. This means they would be above the law! The courts would live out a Shakespeare quote 'being full of sound and fury but signifying nothing.' There would be no guardrails or accountability for the executive branch; one leg on our stool of democracy would be gone. Regardless of your political affiliation, this should concern you. I'm troubled that another leg of our democratic stool, the legislative branch, are not up in arms about this provision, but though their timidity, ignorance or fear have not stood up and provided a strong statement that this shall not pass. Letters: Real issue behind need for retail lockboxes ignored. Don't make excuses. We the people need to demand that our elected representatives do what is right for all Americans. We can disagree and debate, but we all live here. When it is no longer 'we the people' but an elite group of self interested people making the rules, America as we and the whole world know it will be gone. Glenn Luedtke, Franklin Here are some tips to get your views shared with your friends, family, neighbors and across our state: Please include your name, street address and daytime phone. Generally, we limit letters to 200 words. Cite sources of where you found information or the article that prompted your letter. Be civil and constructive, especially when criticizing. Avoid ad hominem attacks, take issue with a position, not a person. We cannot acknowledge receipt of submissions. We don't publish poetry, anonymous or open letters. Each writer is limited to one published letter every two months. All letters are subject to editing. Write: Letters to the editor, Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 330 E. Kilbourn Avenue, Suite 500, Milwaukee, WI, 53202. Fax: (414)-223-5444. E-mail: jsedit@ or submit using the form that can be found on the on the bottom of this page. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Congress is absent, guided by timidity, ignorance and fear | Letters
Mail & Guardian
29-05-2025
- Business
- Mail & Guardian
GNU cabinet: Too many chiefs, not enough service
DA leader John Steenhuisen and ANC leader and South Africa's president, Cyril Ramaphosa. The government of national unity has 43 deputy ministers. If that number was trimmed, R100 million a year could be saved. Photo: GCIS In a time of service delivery failures, South Africa must take a hard look at its executive. Not just the quality of leadership but the sheer quantity of members. At a time when citizens are told to tighten their belts, and government departments are urged to cut spending, the executive branch remains bloated, inefficient and largely shielded from scrutiny. With the Each deputy minister earns more than R2 million a year, plus travel allowances, housing and VIP protection, yet they carry no constitutional executive authority. They are not members of the cabinet and cannot stand in for ministers unless the president appoints a sitting minister to act in a colleague's absence. The constitutional provision (section 93) clearly states that deputy ministers exist only to assist ministers — which often means reading speeches, attending ceremonial events and occupying symbolic roles during outreach initiatives. This raises the question — why are South Africans paying The cabinet appointments have amplified this contradiction. Many of the 43 deputies appointed in July 2024 are not technocrats but rather political appointees, placed to appease alliance partners and opposition factions — not to drive service delivery. The minister of cooperative governance and traditional affairs, for instance, now has two deputies, despite municipalities being largely in financial ruin, with 66 out of 257 municipalities deemed dysfunctional by the auditor general. This redundancy of roles is not only expensive, it is unjustifiable in the face of mounting austerity. The auditor general's 2023-24 Municipal Finance Management Act report highlights R22 billion in irregular expenditure, most of it from departments overseen by ministers with deputies. If anything, the proliferation of deputies has correlated with increased mismanagement, not improved outcomes. This is not an isolated critique. In 2015, then president Jacob Zuma appointed a similarly oversized cabinet — 35 ministers and 37 deputy ministers — attracting widespread criticism. Even then, commentators noted that countries with larger populations and GDPs, such as China (20 ministers) and Russia (23 ministers), operated more efficiently with leaner executives. So what exactly do South African deputy ministers do? There is no legally binding list of responsibilities for deputy ministers. They are not assigned key performance indicators in the same way that In fact, many remain largely invisible until public scandals or parliamentary debates put them in the spotlight. One notorious example was the 2013 revelation that then deputy minister of agriculture, Bheki Cele, had racked up hundreds of thousands in travel claims without attending a single provincial outreach session. And when they're not invisible, they're interchangeable. Deputy ministers are reshuffled frequently — with few, if any, consequences tied to performance. In the July 2024 cabinet reshuffle, more than a dozen deputy ministers were retained or reappointed despite having little public record of being effective. This creates deadweight politics — where individuals are paid handsomely to exist in government without contributing meaningfully to its function. It's not that all deputy ministers are ineffectual. Some work hard behind the scenes. But without transparency, reporting or structured oversight, we cannot separate the active from the idle. The National Development Plan calls for a professionalised public service, where merit and delivery are prioritised over political accommodation. The current system of deputy ministers flies in the face of this ideal. Moreover, at the provincial level, governments function without deputy members of executive councils. Departments are managed by one MEC and a team of civil servants. So why not replicate this model nationally? The government's own spending reviews have previously flagged the costs of the executive. In 2020, the Cutting deputy ministers might not fix South Africa's budget deficit overnight, but it sends a powerful signal — we are serious about governance reform. We are serious about performance. We are serious about value for money. It would also strengthen the credibility of the government in the eyes of citizens, who are increasingly disillusioned. According to the 2023 Afrobarometer survey, only 23% of South Africans trust the president to do what is right. Among young people, this number is even lower. When people protest over poor service delivery, they don't demand more deputies. They demand water, sanitation, jobs — and leaders who show up, account and deliver. The existence of 43 deputy ministers, many of whom are redundant, sends a clear message — the state exists to serve political interests first, public interests second. It doesn't have to be this way. The Constitution gives the president full discretion over whether to appoint deputy ministers. There is no legal obligation to do so. If President Cyril Ramaphosa wants to lead a truly efficient and ethical GNU, he must start by trimming the fat. A smaller, smarter cabinet is not a political risk, it's a governance necessity. Cutting down on deputy ministers is not just about saving R100 million annually, it's about restoring the integrity of the executive. It's about showing citizens that the government will lead by example. It's about building a leaner state capable of delivery, not just diplomacy. South Africa deserves a cabinet that works — not one that coasts. Dr Lesedi Senamele Matlala is a public policy and digital governance lecturer at the University of Johannesburg, at the School of Public Management, Governance and Public Policy.
E&E News
22-05-2025
- Politics
- E&E News
Judge suggests Trump layoff plans ‘usurp' Congress' power
A federal judge in California said Thursday that critics suing over the Trump administration's layoff plans are likely to succeed in their claims that the executive branch has overstepped its authority. During a hearing Thursday before the District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge Susan Illston rebuked the Trump administration's early moves to conduct mass layoffs and said she is inclined to extend her order that temporarily blocked the administration's federal layoff and reorganization plans. 'My conclusions may change, but the evidence before the court today strongly suggests that the recent actions of the executive branch usurp the constitutional powers of Congress,' Illston said. Advertisement Illston thwarted the Trump administration's plans for mass layoffs across the government earlier this month when she issued an order temporarily pausing the administration's layoff plans at environmental agencies and other departments.
