Research Checks and Balances in the Trump Presidency

Your Name
Course No.
Professor
11th, December 2017
CHECKS AND BALANCES IN THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY
1.0 Introduction
The Federal Constitution of the United States has been framed such that all the three arms of government checks on the excesses of the other. These three arms are the executive, legislative and judicial arms. The framers of the American constitution envisaged a scenario where an office bearer of the presidency could overly exercise presidential power, and so are the other arms of government (Balkin 2013). Therefore the constitution has distributed power upon the three branches through a system referred to as checks and balances. This system has been effective since the founding of the American constitution. The system of checks and balance works such that the president can veto a congressional vote, and if he oversteps his constitutional mandate, congress can clip his powers through an impeachment motion (Hayes 2013). On the other hand, the legislature can also limit presidential powers through a judicial review where a Supreme Court justice can declare any law or executive order signed by the president as unconstitutional (Balkin 2013). Likewise, in the event that congress passes a bill that the president deems not fit for the nation, he can veto since all bills must get a presidential ascent before becoming law. The executive also checks on the powers of the judicial arm through appointment of justices. This essay reviews checks and balances under Trump’s presidency. More specifically, the essay will focus on Checks and Balances and Healthcare.
Checks and Balances In The American Constitution
Although the executive would have acted against their interest, the legislature acted in the best interest of the American people. The checks and balances ensure that for the senate to pass any legislation, it should pursue a consultative approach to get the necessary support required for enactment (Balkin 2013). This protects the interests of Americans by ensuring that both the republican and democratic senators participate in the process. Although this was the envisaged scenario by constitutional framers, it can sometimes be defeated through executive veto power. Thus the balance of power ensures that all legislations passed in the Senate and later signed by the president actually represent the interest of the American people (Hayes 2013). The republican HFCA would have nullified the Obama care mandate that every American should have healthcare coverage. Indeed, HFCA would have thwarted the dream of American to getting universal health care coverage. Its failure was an indicator that the constitutional doctrine of balance of power and checks and balances was effective in limiting presidential powers thereby protecting the interest of Americans (Balkin 2013). A congressional budget office report indicated that the repeal of affordable Care Act through legislation of HFCA would have rendered over 16 million Americans uninsured. Moreover, it also estimated that enactment of HFCA would have increased insurance premium by 20%. Besides, HFCA excludes Medicaid cuts which would have hurt millions of Americans currently on Medicaid.
Checks and balances are meant to protect the interest of the American people by ensuring that a tyrannical leadership does not arise in America. The senate republicans were unable to pass HFCA because vast majority of legislators felt that it did not represent the interest of Americans. Had the bill passed through the senate, it would still have to go to the House of Representatives who could as well have rejected it. The checks and balances system ensures that both houses that comprise congress exercise equal legislative power and that for a bill to become law, it must not only pass through Senate, but it must get a presidential assent (Balkin 2013). Still, if HFCA would have been passed in both houses and signed into law, millions of Americans who rely on Obama Care for coverage would have lost coverage. This system has played an important role in protecting the rights of the American people since its founding. This system has ensured that none of the three branches of government has excess powers as one arm of government is checked by the other two arms (Hayes 2013). Still, each branch of government checks the powers of the other arm thus ensuring equal distribution of power since the American people have entrusted the government with their sovereign power, thus checks and balances ensures that no single arm of government misuses this power.
Checks and balances play an important role in the legislation process. The American constitution vests all legislative power in the legislative branch of government. Thus it’s the legislative arm that proposes new bills. Once the bill has been proposed, it’s then voted by congress after which it’s then forwarded to the executive arm for assent (Federal Information, 2012). The president has power to veto any legislation passed by parliament if he feels that it does not represent the best interest of American people. If the president dissents, the bill is returned back to the legislative arm, where if it receives a two thirds vote, it will override the executive veto and become law. However, if any Citizen feels that the law is inappropriate or unconstitutional, they can file law suits in the judicial arm which would then make a determination on its constitutionality (Hayes 2013). Thus through these checks and balances, all arms of government are involved in the law making process. However, if the sovereign legislative power was vested in one arm of government, legislations that do not represent the best interest of the people, in whom rests sovereign power would have been passed. Thus checks and balances ensure that all arms of government fully participate in the legislative process (Hayes 2013).
The American constitution vests certain powers upon the legislative branch. Besides its legislative mandate, it also checks the excess of the presidency...