Would both parties agree that the Presidential "directives" power should be limited....

[techs]

Republicans were pissed at what Clinton did. And Dems are pissed at what Bush is doing.
So, should there be a law passed limiting the directives power of lame duck Presidents for the roughly 75 days when they are lame ducks?
If they want to issue these regulatory directives let the voters see what they are before the election?

 

[ElFenix]

sounds fine to me. they way bush is doing it makes it much more difficult to change than what clinton did. they both just did it as red meat for their bases.

we should probably move up inauguration day again. the brits manage to have the next pm in power as soon as the votes are counted, iirc. of course, we don't have a full shadow-government like parliamentary systems do.

 

[Gunslinger08]

I think the powers granted to the President should be more in line with those actually granted by the Constitution, at all times.

 

[Dari]

The Office of the Presidency was never meant to be as powerful as it has become in the last 108 years. Congress was supposed to be the most powerful body.

 

[winnar111]

Starting with Obama, maybe.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Dari
The Office of the Presidency was never meant to be as powerful as it has become in the last 108 years. Congress was supposed to be the most powerful body.

Why the time frame?

I think that as Congress has become more of a professional body rather than citizen representatives, they have past the torch of responsibility

 

[StageLeft]

No, there's no point to this, they will simply issue their directives earlier.

I do think that the pardons they do at the end are stupid, but then pardons are overall stupid to me, or perhaps they could be revised to require a majority vote by the supreme court or something.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: joshsquall
I think the powers granted to the President should be more in line with those actually granted by the Constitution, at all times.

This.


And to the OP - no. The President is The President until the day he leaves office.

 

[bozack]

Nope, they have until next year. As Skoorb said if it is changed the only thing that would change is the timetable.

 

[fskimospy]

Well if they do the directives earlier that means they have to take the political heat for doing them. There are tons of things that presidents wouldn't do if they thought they would suffer at the ballot box that they do as a lame duck. EDIT: Therefore changing the timetable is a really good idea. It will probably keep some of the worst out of there.

As always, I'm all for limiting executive power. It's still completely out of control.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Well if they do the directives earlier that means they have to take the political heat for doing them. There are tons of things that presidents wouldn't do if they thought they would suffer at the ballot box that they do as a lame duck. EDIT: Therefore changing the timetable is a really good idea. It will probably keep some of the worst out of there.

As always, I'm all for limiting executive power. It's still completely out of control.

Given that the president does not have to run for a second reelection, the moment that they are reelected, the pardon are no longer subjected to political repercussion.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Well if they do the directives earlier that means they have to take the political heat for doing them. There are tons of things that presidents wouldn't do if they thought they would suffer at the ballot box that they do as a lame duck. EDIT: Therefore changing the timetable is a really good idea. It will probably keep some of the worst out of there.

As always, I'm all for limiting executive power. It's still completely out of control.

Given that the president does not have to run for a second reelection, the moment that they are reelected, the pardon are no longer subjected to political repercussion.

Think of this past election, though; if it was known that after Nov 4 Bush could not really do anything and he went on an executive rampage for the week prior, pissing a bunch of people off, it would have hurt McCain.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That law would be completely Unconstitutional.

One may say that a President has a certain power or he does not. If he doesn't, then he doesn't. If he does, then it's not because Congress granted him the right and they haven't the Constitutional authority to curtail a Presidential power granted by the Constitution. I'm of the first school. He doesn't have as much power as has been exercised, however it's not that something magical happens at some time frame.