Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why is Obama supposed to come up with a stimulus plan?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:29 PM
Original message
Why is Obama supposed to come up with a stimulus plan?
Edited on Mon Jan-12-09 06:35 PM by Kurt_and_Hunter
There's no rule that says the executive is supposed to think up all the legislation.

Congress is the preeminent power in our government. (The three co-equal branches was cooked up by by some grade-school civics textbook author... Congress is pre-eminent by design.)

The executive is required to submit a budget once a year but it doesn't follow the executive's role is writing all the legislation for congress to sign-off on. Congress could have, and probably should have taken the initiative and drafted their own damn plan. It is not just their right, it's their responsibility.

This is tough to say because I have little respect for Congress as it is rather than as it was intended to be, but institutionally they are supposed to lead not sit around waiting by the fax machine hoping some good ideas show up.

(One of the things I most desire from Bush leaving is a dramatic weakening of the executive branch.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. Because he is our messiah. He is singlehandedly going to fix the economy, send Bush to prison,
stop Israel, etc etc. I joke, but in all seriousness, when everyone else stops doing their job, one person has to do it all. Congress/Senate hasn't done anything much for us in years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. Because he has a mandate and the bully pulpit.
Also, he is not Harry Reid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vincardog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
3. Because he is the head of the Democratic party and the Democratic party is in the majority
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jody Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. I agree with "dramatic weakening of the executive branch." n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. It's high time
That all branches were reigned in and limited to their respective roles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. I imagine the thinking behind this

Is due to the fact that the President is the only leader who represents the entire nation as a whole. In any event, it's been done this way for decades. The New Deal programs didn't originate with the Congress but with Roosevelt.

It also probably saves time by getting the President and the Congress on the same page, so to speak so they don't need to spend their time overriding vetos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurt_and_Hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Yes, we have been on a war-footing continually since 1933
I find it all rather sinister. There is always a crisis that demands a unitary executive. But there always will be a crisis because the world is a crisis generating machine.

Why did Bush getting into office mean we should have tax cuts? The president doesn't set tax rates. And so on...

But we have had an imperial presidency for a while and we will for a while longer. (Probably forever.)

Given the state things are in we need central leadership today as a practical matter. But I don't see how that will ever change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 06:43 PM
Response to Original message
6. Wouldn't congress need to see his budget first?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
9. Information.
The prez has access to various departments that collect and analyse information; he has access to complete tax information, commerce information, and is in charge of the agencies that produce most of the economic reports. They are his extended staff. Congress has a more limited staff, and has to request the information they want from the executive branch. While there's a CBO and a few other agencies, their staff resources are more limited.

Leadership is also at issue. Congress can't lead as well as the president can, simply because it speaks with 545 voices (if I did the arithmetic right). Some are pointless--no offense intended for their constituencies, but new reps from places like Idaho just don't get the attention in the national media that established reps from places like California or NY do.

Moreover, each representative represents his constituency, his state or district. None of them represent so much as two states. That creates problems.

Execution is also a problem: The prez is the only person in charge of executing it, having, as he does, the executive branch under him. Therefore he gets a say in the legislation, because he can veto it. If he doesn't like it, he can impede it--most budgets don't *require* that every cent be spent, and even if they did, there are ways around it.

That said, the prez proposes, and the Congress disposes. Don't assume that it'll pass with no changes--or, rather, don't assume that Congress won't have a large say in what gets included. Obama will negotiate with Congress, spec. the dems, because he wants it to pass, and because certain reps/senators will have very determined ideas as to what should be included.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fire1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
10. Cause he's the smartest muthafucka in the room! LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-12-09 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. We voted for him because of his ideas, not because he'll submit a budget.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC