How exactly is Obama the head of government when the house of representatives is majority republican?
The republicans have a leader in the house of representatives so he literally is the *head of government* but doesn't hold the title even though all new legislation comes from him?
>>61821574
The speaker is essentially a moderator and the guy who presents shit at the house; hence the name. He also becomes president in the event that the current president and vice president are both unable hold office
>>61821574
Because the legislature isn't the entire government in the US. We have separation of powers.
the executive is not the legislature
the us government is not comparable, brit-successor pls
>>61821574
Executive orders, that's how Obama for example formed the "Antibiotics Task Force" to save antibiotics.
>>61821574
Because Congress doesn't sign laws into force, the President does.
>>61821656
>>61821682
then why Obama tries to push his own agenda and succeeds from time to time
>>61821656
>>61821682
you have weak separation of powers, basically giving the president a dictator stick he can swing from time to time
in effect laws are proposed and passed in the house of representatives just like a parliamentary system, republicans are the ones passing legislation in the US unless the democrats suck their dicks correct?
>>61821751
Wrong on a bunch of levels.
>>61821710
he can request a member of the house to introduce a bill and he can veto a bill
he cannot make them
>>61821751
incorrect
>>61821751
Lol, the executive branch is the weakest of the branches. Congress has the real power
>>61821797
No, the Supreme Court has the most power.
>>61821574
In America executive and legislative powers are separate, don't bother asking why it's fucking retarded and makes no sense
>>61821751
You need to remember that our government was set up by people afraid of government so it is designed to be slow, cumbersome, and difficult to consolidate power in any one branch.
Any law passed by both houses of congress needs the President's approval, or needs to pass with a 2/3 majority to override his veto.
The president has very limited powers and can't create laws, only act to enforce existing laws.
What's the difference between House of Representatives and the Senate? I mean, aside from the number of people.
>>61821847
house votes on the bills first and must pass them first before it goes to the senate
>>61821816
It's called checks and balances dipshit. It's a really, really simple concept.
>>61821847
The senate is made up of 2 senators from each state. The house is made up of 435 representatives and distributed to states based on population totals with each 10-year census.
Laws can be proposed in either chamber, but need to pass in both to be enacted.
>>61821842
The president can just go over the parliaments head with executive orders, and veto bills he doesn't like. If anything that makes it less secure against tyranny
>>61821883
It has less though if anything. Your executive can just choose to ignore the legislative
>>61821899
Any executive order is subject to review by the judiciary (third branch of government) and can be ruled to be outside the president's power to enact if it is ruled to be making law rather than enforcing law.
>>61821871
>>61821892
So Senate exists so that smaller states don't get screwed over by the bigger ones?
>>61821945
Exactly
>>61821945
Exactly
>>61821871
No, a bill can start in the Senate also.
>>61821847
House Reps serve 2-year terms and are from single member districts from their state. The number of reps a state has is roughly proportional to the size of its population.
Senators serve 6 year terms, with 1/3 of them being up for election every 2 years (ex: 33 on ballot in 2016, 33 in 2018, 34 in 2020). Each state gets 2 Senators regardless of population.
>>61821958
but Polish senate is a completely obsolete house that can only stall bills ineffectively
what's the difference
>>61821945
kind of
senators serve 6 year terms and looks out for the long run
representatives serve 2 year terms and looks for short gains
they are a part of the dual party power play
governors usually become senators and vice versa
>>61821911
That's not true you fucking idiot.
>>61821945
Senators represent entire states. Representatives represent only their single district.
>>61821574
Because Obama has the most power of any single politician in the government. The legislature is only one part of the government. They can keep Obama in check and vice versa.
>>61822047
>muh checks and balances
>>61822067
It's a real thing that gets used all the time.
>>61821990
The two legislative houses actually compete with each other in a fashion.
The senate views itself as the "upper" house even though there is no formal designation of superiority. Senators are expected to be better behaved and "wiser" than their counterparts in the House of Representatives. Its not a formal designation, but the culture of the two bodies is very distinct.
Very few presidents are elected from the ranks of the Representatives, but many presidents come from the ranks of Senators.
>>61822047
>They can keep Obama in check
How? What power does congress have over the president?
>>61821990
>>61822019
So, how does President's power compare to the Senate and the House?
>>61822090
The Legislative branch sets the government's budget despite what the president may want.
They also have the power to impeach the president if they feel his behavior is negligent (though that's more of an empty threat)
>>61822079
it's a memephrase coined so Americans can sleep at night, the same as "2nd amendment protects us from tyranny"
>>61822090
Power of the purse, control over treaties (in theory, not actuality), control over trade, etc. However, the president controls an immense bureaucracy and takes the lead in foreign policy (matters which the legislature often avoids), so the checks are less prominent than they should be.
>>61822082
The Senator actually has more power than the House. The Senate can ratify treaties while the House can't. The House can vote to impeach a President or government official, but the Senate is the one that gets to perform the trial, convict, and remove them from office.
>>61822112
The President has more administrative power. Congress has more lawmaking power.
>>61822112
The president can not make new laws. He can only act to enforce existing laws.
Much like a police officer can't make new laws, but enforces existing ones.
The president appoints judges (though the appointments are for life, so they are independent once appointed)
The president is commander of the armed forces, but only the Legislature can declare war.
>>61822131
It's something that literally gets implemented every single year you dumb Slav cunt.
>>61822194
funny that of all things you chose to insult my linguistic group
>>61822131
The judicial branch is evidence to the contrary.
>>61822090
they can impeach him and they can veto his veto
>>61822112
most of president's task is involved with his cabinet in regulating rules and laws
the senate and the house have special committees that looks out for different parts of the system
>>61822208
Funny that you talk about things you know fucking nothing about you post-communist shitstain.
>>61821574
The system doesn't work because separation of executive and legislative powers is entirely superfluous. Parliament is already divided in two so that anything proposed in the lower house is checked by the upper. Combining the two is just much more efficient and cuts unnecessary bureaucracy. Most importantly it helps prevent political deadlocks which constantly cripple the US.
Although to fix that they'd also have to get rid of laws allowing random dickheads to "filibuster"
Its not a perfect system by any means.
It is designed to be cumbersome and difficult to consolidate power in any one single branch.
With all its faults, it has worked out fairly well and we're stuck with it because changing it is nearly impossible by design.
>>61822249
you seem needlessly wound up
it's not like you giving a shit about politics affects in anyhow
>>61822292
filibuster is suppose to force a compromise
it is working as intended
>>61822292
You're talking about deadlocks when you just had a double dissolution. Hilarious.
>>61822142
Being able to initiate revenue bills is far more important than being yesmen to the president or holding an empty threat.
>>61822318
It's anti-democratic for 1 guy to stop passage of a law that has the support of everyone else.
>>61822329
No we haven't? Please don't talk about stuff you don't understand
>>61822331
That doesn't make any sense.
>>61822351
The House initiates all bills for raising revenue which grants them far more importance and strength than the Senate.
>>61822350
Yes, you fucking did.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-05/election-2016-new-senate-terms-explained/7571406
> But, in the weekend's double dissolution election, all senators were up for a vote.
>>61822292
>>61822318
filibuster is actually not a law but simply a procedural rule adopted by the Senate. At any time, the Senate could do away with the filibuster rule, but they don't because both parties want to maintain it so they can use it when they are in the minority.
>>61822168
>>61822180
>>61822235
So how much legitimacy is there to people blaming the President for everything wrong that government did during his term?
>>61822370
And the Senate can change anything about the bill and throw it right back to the House because the same version has to pass both houses.
>>61822350
they can vote for closure of a filibuster at 60%
so no he can't just talk out of a vote, unless there are not enough senators to vote on a closure which usually happens
>>61822350
And it's democratic when Congress is able to override that veto.
>Please don't talk about stuff you don't understand
irony
>>61822350
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/malcolm-turnbull-has-called-for-a-double-dissolution-election-for-july-2-2016-5
>>61822410
But the House controls what is drawn up to begin with. The ball is in their court and the Senate has to play along.
>>61822391
quite a bit
the wars for example were not congressional actions
or the bills the president introduced, he cannot make them but he can get behind them
say the no one left behind bill by gwb, he didn't make it but it was his thing, people attribute it to him
>>61822391
Truthfully, very little.
The president actually has very little power to force things along. The role is more of a leader, planner, and coach.
The president can make speeches and ask for laws to be passed, but he has no power to make them other than persuading others to do it.
>>61822391
Some. Blaming the President for administrative stuff, like executive departments and agencies can be legitimate. Blaming the President for Congress not getting shit done or for the overall economy or whatever is bullshit.
>>61822292
If there's a significant majority, the filibuster can be stopped with a cloture. It's a fair system that allows for cooler heads to prevail.
>>61822383
And that is anti-democratic because?
>>61822439
Not after the first draft. The Senate can just demand their version of a bill be passed.
>>61822249
pooland BTFO
>>61822476
>>61822419
>>61822413
So why not just have somebody say they don't want something to pass instead of forcing them to talk for hours on end?
>>61822450
>quite a bit
>>61822458
>Truthfully, very little.
>>61822470
>Some.
I love living in a democracy.
>>61822391
You can (usually) blame presidents for
>foreign policy
>executive actions
>military affairs
>some legislation (executives can whisper in a congressman's ear and have some associated bills)
>>61822480
Not what was said you illiterate shit. You bitched about deadlocks and non-functioning government and you literally had to dissolve yours because it wasn't doing anything. Don't whine about dysfunction when you have the same problem.
>>61822488
And the House has the luxury of refusing and drawing up a different bill. As I said, the ball is in their court.
>>61822555
Only on the first draft and only on spending. Literally that simple.
>>61822127
>The Legislative branch sets the government's budget despite what the president may want.
So why did the Republicans freak out about the Government shutdown a year ago and blame Obama? From what your saying, it sounds like it was their fault for setting the budget to go above the debt limit and then not approving a raise in the debt limit.....they controlled congress at the time, right?
>>61822510
bills needs to be voted after they are introduced
if you filibuster there is a timed out, it's just easier
>>61822562
>only on the first draft
They could just kill the bill and draw up another one if they feel like it. The Senate doesn't have that luxury.
>only on spending
Oh right, spending's not important at all, my bad.
Literally that simple.
>>61822530
>You bitched about deadlocks and non-functioning government and you literally had to dissolve yours because it wasn't doing anything
The double dissolution solves the issue though, so what's your point? A government deadlock would not be easily fixed like that in the US
>>61822571
It was their fault. The public overwhelmingly blamed them for it (which was objectively correct).
>>61822575
No I'm saying why make them talk for hours, instead they could just say "I'm going to filibuster this",
>>61822518
Military action is a tricky one.
Technically, the President can order troops into action, but only congress can decide to pay anything above costs already approved by budget. Technically, if congress did not approve of the use of force by the military, they could choose to not pay any additional money required to keep the operation going.
>>61822585
Drawing up another bill does nothing at all if the Senate rejects it. Having the "first move" has no serious advantage when the exact same version of a bill has to pass both houses. It can be an infinite stalemate and neither house has the power to break it.
>>61822587
It doesn't at all guarantee that it gets solved.
>>61822615
because it is still a parliamentary debate and most of the time they only filibuster when not all of the senators are present
>>61822391
That's a really good question, and you can see by the varied responses it isn't an easy one to answer. It all depends on how much non-direct influence people think he has over the legislative process. Some think he has a lot, and thus blame him for the issues in congress. Some think he has very little, and don't blame as much.
>>61822571
Think of it this way..
the president is responsible for enforcing laws, including food safety laws. So he says he's hired 5 people to do meat inspection. Congress thinks that's too much and they refuse to pay for 5 people.
The president says, "hey, we already have five people doing meat inspection, they need to get paid".
Congress says, "fuck you, no one's getting paid, you don't need five people to do that. You should only hire 3 people."
Then its a contest of wills to see who gives in first.
Hope that cleared it up.
>>61822571
Everyone in the US pretty much blamed congress. The only sane way to put blame on Obama for that type of shit is that he has done an incredibly poor job of fostering a climate of cooperation between the two parties. He'll claim the Dems supported bipartisan measures, but really all they did was make their bills as usual and put them to vote and say "The Republicans blocked it."
>>61822641
In order to form government in Australia the Governor General has to recognize a party has the stability to control the country. In effect this mean they need to have enough of a majority in parliament to pass at least supply and confidence. Otherwise the government is dissolved and another election is held. This continues until a party has enough of a large enough to majority to control the government effectively.
who the hell passed obongo care if the house is republican majority?
>>61822786
There wasn't a Republican majority at the time. The Democratic party had the majority in the Senate.
>>61822786
Both the House and Senate were controlled by Democrats at the time
>>61822845
so can't republicans repeal this shit now then and repeal welfare too?
>>61822872
No, because the President can just veto the repeal bill (and has on several occasions) and Republicans can't get the votes to override him.
>>61822845
How often do you have independents in the Congress?
>>61822872
PPACA replaced medicare and medicaid
if the repeal it they will have to introduce something else, lots of work
>>61822872
>>61822903
In order to really move shit along, you need 1 party to control both houses of Congress and the Presidency simultaneously.
>>61822310
>we're stuck with it because changing it is nearly impossible by design.
Unless you go with extra-systemic means, which a lot of founding fathers and their contemporaries advocated keeping as a back pocket.
>>61821627
There's never been a a speaker who became president, whenever voted as one after or inherrited, has there?
>>61822923
There have been independents in Congress on and off for a bit, but they're typically in very very small numbers, and end up partially associating themselves with a political party anyway just so they can have more sway.
>>61822923
These day, not often. 1 is from Maine, the other from Vermont switched to being a Democrat. And here, "Independent" doesn't refer to a party with that title, it refers to being unaffiliated.
There have been Congresses in the past with as many as 7 parties represented.
>>61822971
in order for that to happen the president would have died and vp died before he was sworn in
so no
>>61822928
Don't forget you need 2/3 majority in the Senate to avoid filibusters. That's why the dems didn't steamroll things through when they had a simple majority. The repubs kept filibustering or just threatening to do so on each and every bill, even routine things.
>>61823029
Yeah, but i mean, no president has been a former speaker, right? Seems like a last stop job.
>>61822971
Yeah, it happened once. The guy who replaced Nixon (Ford? I forget) was the speaker. I don't remember what happened to the Vice President. I think he stepped down prior for crooked behaviour or something like that.
>>61823046
james polk was a president who was a former speaker of the house, and the only one so far.
>>61822971
Speaker is 3rd in line for the Presidency in the order of succession (1. President, 2. Vice President, 3. Speaker of the House).
James K. Polk is the only Speaker of the House who was ever elected President (which has nothing to do with the order of succession).
>>61823043
Filibustering is such bullshit. I wish it would be illegal.
t. pro gun but I just hate that shit.
>>61823046
polk was speaker before becoming president
>>61822923
Almost never.
The system wasn't built around the idea that there would only be two parties, but that's how it evolved. It is practically impossible to be elected if you're not one of the two parties, and once you are elected, you will have no support from them.
This is the largest weakness of the system, but it is not formally codified, merely tradition and how things developed over time.
>>61823050
No. Ford was House Minority Leader.
>>61823043
It's 60, not 2/3.
>>61823097
>>61823094
>>61823084
I see. Kinda suprising there's not more. One would think such a esteemed title would be a springboard for further political career.
>>61823096
I'm prone to agree
>>61823144
Thanks for the correction.
>>61823167
they are elected every 2 years
they go very quickly
>>61823167
Being a governor is actually the most similar job to being President.
>>61823167
The position actually has quite a bit of power.
The speaker literally controls the debate in the House by calling on people who wish to speak and enforcing the rules of order. Outside the formal duties, the speaker leads their party's representatives and this allows them to set the agenda for what bills are introduced.
>>61823246
True. That's why so many presidents have been governors, particularly of large states.
>>61823256
It's also the party leader for the party not in control of the White House.
>>61823298
17 Presidents have been governors.
>>61821574
Our government has three branches.
>>61821911
And if they do this, the legislative and judicial branches have the power to impeach him
>>61823411
The judicial branch has nothing to do with impeachment.
>>61823114
>This is the largest weakness of the system, but it is not formally codified, merely tradition and how things developed over time.
This is easily fixed by switching to an Alternative or Proportional voting system though
>>61823511
End result is basically the same. Coalitions of some variety. The major American parties are already essentially coalitions whereas a lot of Europe for example has the pieces of a coalition separated out into different parties. Legislative votes are still yes/no.
Good civics discussion.
I'm off to bed.
Remember to vote early, and vote often.
>>61823569
Coalitions still receive more input and have to respect the agenda of other parties
>>61823605
To some extent. The spectrum of opinion in one of are parties is much wider than the spectrum of opinion in any one party I a multiparty parliamentary system.
>>61823639
True but the issue no single member can dissent without backup. In a single part the loss of one member can be minor. A member pulling out of a multi-party coalition is crippling and ensures that the largest party in the coalition can't ignore the smaller parties.
>>61821847
It's supposed to be like Lords/Commons.
Senators have 6-year terms, and there are 100 of them. Every state has 2 senators, regardless of size. There are many fewer senators, so they each have more power than a Representative.
Representatives have two year terms, and there are 435 of them. These representatives are dolled out to the states in accordance to population.
>>61823703
That sort of already happens within the Republican Party with the Tea Party people. Not quite the same, but similar.
>>61823411
That's why they have chosen to just give him free reign even when he is guilty of several hundred (probably) counts of high treason.
>>61821574
>Parliament baby trying to understand how a federal system works
Hopeless...
The only problem with the President is that everyone thinks just voting the president will solve the problem, and forgets to vote for Congress, meaning Congress members are all voted in by old people because Americans are generally too dumb to realize a lot of power resides in Congress
>>61823167
Speaker is a bit of a shit job. Very few people actually want to be speaker because in practice it involves getting your party to unite and agree on stuff.
I do not envy any speaker of the current Republican controlled house.
