The Constitution, Shared Power, and Foreign Policy

The Constitution, Shared Power, and Foreign Policy

The founding fathers set up the United States Constitution in a way that no one branch would have too much power. Each branch is supposed to work with each other to make decisions. The decisions made by the U.S. form its foreign policy. When the Legislative and Executive branches work together, rash decisions can be eliminated, and the foreign policy is a somewhat accurate representation of the views of American’s.

The United States foreign policy has changed over time. It began with an attempt to compromise with Great Britain. That did not work and the U.S. went to war. After winning its independence, Americans stayed out of most foreign affairs and concentrated on expanding the new country. When the Spanish colonies in Latin America declared their independence, the U.S. created the Monroe Doctrine. It was a policy to keep out all European powers in the newly independent Americas. The doctrine allowed the United States to interfere with any hostilities the new states had with Europe. The U.S. continued to expand after this, partly because of a war against Mexico and a dispute with Britain and Russia concerning the Oregon Territory. The U.S. won both of these, and it greatly increased in size as a result.

As the country grew in size and power, its interests grew further from home. Americans found themselves conquering Cuba and Puerto Rico and occupying Hawaii and the Philippines. The U.S. also wanted to gain more trade power throughout the world; therefore, they demanded that Japan open up for trade and fought for influence in China. The U.S. entered World War II after it was attacked by Japan, and after the war, America became one of the five permanent members of the United Nations. After World War II, American foreign policy switched to stopping the spread of communism. This view got the U.S. involved in the Cold War, Korean War, and Vietnam War. Since the Vietnam War, the United States has been involved in almost every major conflict around the world. Some examples are the U.S. invading Panama in 1989, the Gulf War in 1991, and the 2003 “War on Terror” in Iraq.

Many people argue about the U.S. being involved in so many conflicts over the past two decades. The primary debate is about who should have the authority to declare war. Some think the President should have sole power to decide because there is not time for Congress to debate the issue. Others think Congress should decide because Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution states, “Congress shall have Power to declare War.” Still others think the President and Congress should jointly decide the plan of action. The President can quickly deploy troops if needed and then Congress must authorize the war shortly after. This view runs parallel with the War Powers Act (WPA) which Congress passed in 1973 because the Vietnam War had failed miserably. The WPA states that the President should speak to Congress before doing anything, but he has the power to send troops wherever he wishes for sixty days. If the President determines that troops cannot leave yet, he must submit a written explanation to Congress. If Congress does not authorize the troops after this time period, they must be withdrawn.

There has been a precedent set that the President does not have to follow this law. Either the President blatantly ignores it, or he uses a fancy description to say the situation is not war. This precedent has given Congress little power. Members of Congress have taken the President to court over the matter a few times, and each time, the Supreme Court has decided that only individual members had a conflict with the issue, not the entire Congress. Ultimately though, Congress has all the power. If they were to stop passing funding bills, the war would eventually stop.

To prevent major disagreements, the Legislative and Executive branches need to work together when deciding whether or not to go to war. The two branches would then be more willing to work with each other when the war does not go so well, like the War on Terror. Instead of arguing back and forth about progress in Iraq, the two could determine a plan of action for a successful end to the war. To fix these problems, either the President needs to be more willing to work with Congress, or Congress needs to take back some authority by using the power it has. For example they could stop passing bills the President wants. If the U.S. government were more willing to work together on issues inside and outside its borders; the United States would be better “united” and would have a better chance of surviving in the future.

Grade Received: A