N※N

Congress Must Reassert Authority Over the Expanding Presidency

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. ert-authority-over-the-expanding-presidency.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Tuesday, December 9th 2025 at 7:12 GMT by Los Angeles Daily News
      Locale: UNITED STATES

Why Congress Must Rein‑in the Modern Presidency
(Summary of the December 8 2025 Daily News article)

The Daily News piece, “Why Congress Must Rein‑in the Modern Presidency,” argues that the U.S. Constitution’s original balance of power has been increasingly tilted toward the executive branch, and that without decisive congressional action this shift threatens the very fabric of American democracy. Drawing on historical precedent, recent political events, and expert testimony, the article lays out a multi‑faceted case for restoring Congress’s statutory, oversight, and constitutional authority over the presidency.

1. A Brief Historical Context

The article opens with a concise historical survey, noting that the “modern presidency”—a term coined by scholars like Richard Neustadt—has grown out of the expanding reach of the executive office since World War II. Presidents have increasingly relied on executive orders, national emergencies, and the power of the purse to sidestep Congress. The piece cites President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, the post‑9/11 war powers exercised by Presidents Bush and Obama, and the record‑breaking use of executive orders by President Trump as part of a continuum that culminated in the current administration’s unprecedented use of emergency declarations and unilateral regulatory actions.

A link embedded in the article directs readers to a Smithsonian‑approved profile of the “Imperial Presidency” concept, which details how constitutional limits on executive power were eroded over decades. This side‑article underpins the argument that the current presidency is a direct outgrowth of that historical trend.

2. The Scope of Executive Overreach

The Daily News article catalogues concrete examples of executive overreach in the past decade:

1. Emergency Declarations and the COVID‑19 Response – The president’s invocation of the Defense Production Act and the National Emergencies Act to commandeer critical supply chains without congressional oversight.
2. Unilateral Regulatory Changes – The roll‑back of the Affordable Care Act’s “individual mandate” via an executive order, bypassing the legislative process.
3. Foreign Policy and Military Engagement – Authorization for use of military force (AUMF) provisions, which the president has invoked for operations in Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya without new congressional approval.
4. Immigration Policy – The “zero‑tolerance” policy and the use of Title 42 to close the border, enacted via executive orders that sidestepped the House’s immigration committee hearings.

These examples are tied to a linked study from the Center for American Progress, which quantified the number of executive actions taken each year and demonstrated a clear upward trend in the absence of legislative checks.

3. The Constitutional Argument

At the heart of the article is a constitutional argument that Congress has a “dual role” in both initiating and overseeing war, as well as in controlling the budget and appointments. The author points out that the War Powers Resolution (WPR) of 1973 was intended as a counterbalance, but its enforcement has been weak—Congress has rarely taken action to compel the president to withdraw troops or report back to Congress. A linked memorandum from the Congressional Research Service illustrates how the WPR’s procedural hurdles make it largely symbolic.

The piece also references a recent Supreme Court ruling on “executive privilege,” which reinforced the president’s right to refuse congressional testimony. The author stresses that such rulings erode the “checks and balances” framework, making it imperative for Congress to act legislatively.

4. Legislative Remedies and Congressional Strategies

The article outlines specific measures Congress could adopt to rebalance power:

• Re‑authorizing or Rewriting the WPR – Introducing clearer timelines and penalties for non‑compliance.
• Enhancing Executive Order Transparency – Mandating that all executive orders be published within 48 hours and requiring a congressional review period.
• Re‑instating the 1973 “War Powers” Act – With stricter reporting requirements and the ability to hold hearings on military engagements.
• Strengthening Budgetary Controls – Using the “power of the purse” to limit executive spending on foreign aid and national security.
• Confirming or Rejecting Key Appointments – Leveraging Senate confirmation hearings to scrutinize executive appointments, especially in the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security.

The article cites a bipartisan bill—drafted by Senator Ed Markey (D‑Mass) and Representative Tom DeLay (R‑TX)—that would require a 60‑day congressional review of any executive order that reallocates more than 10 % of the federal budget.

5. The Role of Public Opinion and Advocacy

Public opinion is portrayed as both a catalyst and a check on executive power. The article includes a link to a Pew Research Center survey showing that 67 % of Americans believe Congress should have a more active role in oversight of executive actions. It argues that civic engagement—through grassroots lobbying and public testimony—can pressure lawmakers to take the necessary steps.

A side‑article on “Citizen‑Driven Constitutional Reform” details how advocacy groups have successfully pushed for amendments to the Federalist Papers, urging Congress to revisit the “necessary and proper” clause in light of contemporary governance challenges.

6. Conclusion: The Imperative to Act

The Daily News article concludes by emphasizing that unchecked presidential power creates a slippery slope toward autocracy, erodes democratic accountability, and undermines public trust. It calls on Congress to act decisively, leveraging both its constitutional authority and its legislative tools to restore balance.

The author’s final plea is that Congress’s silence would signal acquiescence to executive overreach, while proactive legislation would reaffirm the foundational principle that the U.S. government is of the people, by the people, and for the people—ensuring that the modern presidency remains a service, not a sovereign.

Word count: 1,021 words.