can Congress restrain the president in foreign policy making?
This Question has been solved and asker verified All Experts Exchange premium technology solutions are available to subscription members.
Experts Exchange has been collecting answers to technology questions since 1996…3 million and counting! If you have a question, chances are we already have your answer.
If you can't find the exact answer you're looking for, ask our exclusive community of 50,000 experts. You’ll get a personalized answer from a trusted professional.
Thousands of free tech tips, tricks, how-to’s and tutorials are available in our peer reviewed articles section. See for yourself how smart our experts are, no login required.
Save solutions to your questions, answers you’ve discovered through searching plus helpful articles in your personal knowledgebase for easy future access.
Access the answers to your technology questions today.
30-day free trial. Register in 60 seconds.
Members of the expert community talk about why the experience at Experts Exchange is different than what you will find anywhere else.
Try it out and discover for yourself.
30-day free trial. Register in 60 seconds.
Join the community of experts here and help other tech pros by answering question in your area of expertise. You can earn FREE access to all Experts Exchange's premium features and resources.
foreign policy making is supposed to be a partnership. Mostly it is made by the president as the commander-in-chief. However, congress has a say in important matters. For example, Congress can restrain president in funding and waging wars and signing treaties. However, arguments still go on regarding who has the power to control the other.
Please check these sites:
http://www.fpc.state.gov/6
http://www.populistamerica
http://www.brockfc.com/who
and
http://goliath.ecnext.com/
veto threats as a policy tool............
Interesting, since my answer is Yes,
Treaties must be approved by congress, so the President cannot commit us to (some) things without approval.
Congress must also approve funding. And as in the case of the current war in Iraq, congress must approve troop deployments (that meet certain conditions).
Yes, a President can do a lot of stuff "Off the books", or "Under the radar", but major foreign policy operations con only be done with the consent of congress.
The difference between the US system and that of the other G7 countries - ie: Western Europe and Japan, is that the "foreign minister" has no political mandate for his/her actions. The Secretary is NOT elected into the position, he is simply appointed. In the other countries the person is first elected to parlement and then appointed to the ministry. This means that foreign policy has to be continually "justified" in front of parlement literally on a day-to-day basis. In America the policy may be questioned by a House committee, but since neither the Secretary nor the President are answerable to this committee (that is to say without a major confrontation) the House/Senat tends to go along with that which has already been decided. In the other countries there is considerable more parlementary influence on the process of forming policy.
The question asked whether Congress could "restrain" executive foreign policy making, which to my mind implies effecting it in some way during it's conception. And IMO the answer is No.
It is interesting to note how the American system has retained parts of the British system from the time of the revolution. Then the "Kings ministers" were chosen largely from the upper classes sitting unelected in the House of Lords. Over the years the British system now has all ministers sitting in the elected Commons. The American system chose the "Presidents Ministers" on the same principle of unelectedness, probably on the basis of the best man for the job or political favours. It was also thought that the "Federal"-side would be small, the important things taking place at the State level. This is still to be found in the Republican tradition of "small and unobtrusive government". That this concept no longer applies can be seen in the number of "civil servants" which Obama has to appoint - over four thousand I believe. In Britain, France and Germany hardly any changes occurr when the government changes.
Business Accounts
Answer for Membership
by: WaterStreetPosted on 2008-11-22 at 15:29:15ID: 23022761
"can Congress restrain the president in foreign policy making?"
There are a number of things that Congress must provide approval for -- things that require certain actions and funding.
But policy is a plan, or an approach to something. Congress cannot block that, except to the extent that its implementation requires congressional approval.
The simple answer is no, except it can restrain certain implementations of the policy.