By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Waelti: Checks and balances are effective when used
John Waelti

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Students are taught early on how American founding fathers recognized this truth and attempted to check it through a system of government with three co-equal branches, each branch equipped with powers to check the power of the others. The desire to preserve power was believed to prevent one branch of government from granting excessive power to another.

As not every contingency can be anticipated and accounted for in statutes, the system also depends on unwritten norms of behavior to make the system work. In addition, a constitutionally guaranteed free press would keep the citizenry informed of what the three branches of government were doing.

Prevention of the corruption of power depends then, on the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government each checking the power of the others. It further depends on the honorable exercise of unwritten norms and an active free press. No system is perfect. While progress toward the nation’s highest ideals has endured its share of fits and starts, American institutions have produced many successes. 

Nevertheless, it is no exaggeration to assert that the preservation of American institutions requires constant vigilance. There currently are too many ominous signs on the horizon to assume we can take such preservation for granted.

Central to balance of power is interaction of Congress and the president in legislating, and executing the law. We expect a Republican branch of Congress to support a Republican president and to tangle with a Democratic president, and vice versa. But when a president engages in an excessive power grab, we expect a Congress, including one of the same party, to check the power to that president.

But that is definitely not happening. With election of Trump, the Republican Congress has totally abdicated its power to check the excesses of this president. This was highlighted by then House Judiciary Committee Chair Devin Nunez, acting as the President’s defender in chief, totally abdicating oversight responsibilities. Trump’s critics in the Senate were limited to those few who were leaving the Senate, such as Tennessee Senator Corker and Arizona Senators Flake and McCain.

Trump has violated norms, including denouncing election results. Prior to the 2016 election, he insisted his potential loss would prove the system was rigged. When he won the Electoral College, but lost the general vote count, he insisted it was only because of millions of fraudulent votes.

Trump violated the accepted norm of acknowledging the legitimacy of political opponents. Instead of acknowledging Hillary Clinton’s long public service as Secretary of State, he revved up his supporters with the chant of “lock her up.” This is the stuff of banana republic tin pot dictators. On this, the media gave him a free pass.

Trump has nominated, and the Republican Senate has confirmed, a long list of incompetent, unqualified, and outright corrupt, cabinet and other high level appointees.

Trump has attacked the judiciary system. While all presidents have had occasional disagreements with judicial decisions, none have attacked the very legitimacy of the system. And surely, none have advocated “getting rid of the judges,” as Trump has recently done.

Trump has attacked the media as no president has before. 

While all presidents have objected to treatment they have considered “unfair,” no previous president has attacked the free press as “enemy of the people.” It is quite clear Trump would throw unfriendly reporters in jail if he could get away with it. As he can’t yet get away with that, he has, to cheers of adoring crowds, settled for urging harassment of journalists. He celebrated the violence exercised against a reporter at a rally in Montana.

Congressional Republicans are ominously silent regarding Trump’s antipathy, open hostility and explicit celebration of violence toward journalists.

The latest instance of collapsing checks and balances is Attorney General Bill Barr’s coddling of the President. The AG is supposed to serve the public at large, not the president. Yes, a Republican president will appoint a Republican attorney general, and one whose general political philosophy is in line with the President’s — fair enough. But the AG is supposed to follow the law rather than act as the president’s defender in chief.

Barr’s refusal to submit Special Council Mueller’s original unredacted report to Congress further strengthens presidential power and inhibits the ability of the Congress to conduct its oversight responsibilities.

Barr’s further accusation of FBI “spying” on Trump further illustrates his lack of objectivity and is evidence of his willingness to protect Trump from scrutiny.

While the president is not legally obligated to share his tax returns with the public, not to do so is a violation of existing norms. But the law is clear; he is obligated to submit his tax returns to the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. Treasury Secretary Mnuchin is stonewalling this lawful request.

In short, Trump is saying, “This is the way I interpret the law — so what are you going to do about it?” Thanks to a supine Congress, he is getting away with it.

Checks and balances on excessive presidential power exist, but they are meaningless if those who hold power to exercise them refuse to do so.

 It’s clear why Senate Republicans refuse to check powers of the president. Trump threatens to encourage a Republican primary opponent to take down any Republican who stands up to him.

The ultimate remedy is in the hands of the electorate. It would take political courage for a Republican senator to stand up to Trump’s attacks on American institutions, but it is unclear whether voters will reward that type of political courage. 

Meanwhile, as Trump is successfully chipping away at checks and balances and ignoring long accepted norms of presidential behavior, those who hold remaining powers of checks and balances are steadfastly refusing to exercise them. 


— John Waelti of Monroe, a retired professor of economics, can be reached at jjwaelti1@tds.net. His column appears Saturdays in the Monroe Times.