William_T._Bianco,_David_T._Canon]_American_Polit

(nextflipdebug2) #1
The president’s job description 429

presidential authority only once, to limit the duration of a deployment of Marines in
Lebanon on a peacekeeping mission.^14 Moreover, although it has been in effect for
nearly 40 years, it has never faced Supreme Court review. Some scholars have even
argued that the resolution actually expands presidential power because it gives the
president essentially unlimited control for the first 90 days of a military operation—
and in many cases, 90 days is more than enough time to complete military action
without getting Congress involved.^15
Even with its limitations, the War Powers Resolution has shaped presidential decisions
regarding the use of force. Threats by members of Congress to invoke the War Powers Act
were one factor in President Obama’s 2011 decision to curtail American involvement in the
NATO-led mission to end the Libyan civil war. The impact of the War Powers Act is also
evident in the fact that presidents often consult with congressional leaders or try to gain
congressional approval before committing troops to battle. It is important to remember,
too, that the act is not the only tool available to members of Congress who disagree with
a president’s policy: they can curb a president’s war-making powers through budget
restrictions, legislative prohibitions, public appeals, and, ultimately, impeachment.^16

Treaty Making and Foreign Policy


Treaty-making power is shared between Congress and the president: presidents and
their staff negotiate treaties, which are then sent to the Senate for approval. (Many need
the support of a two-thirds majority of senators to be approved, but some only need
a simple majority.) However, the president has a first-mover advantage in the treaty-
making process. Congress considers treaties only after negotiations have ended; there
is no way for members of Congress to force the president to negotiate a treaty or limit
its scope. That said, the need for congressional approval often leads presidents to take
account of senators’ preferences when negotiating treaties, which often results in
significant compromise between the two branches.
Presidents have two strategies for avoiding a congressional treaty vote. One is to
announce that the United States will voluntarily abide by a treaty without ratifying it.
In the case of the 2015 Paris Climate Accord, one of the reasons why President Obama
supported voluntary targets for reductions in greenhouse gases was that such an
agreement did not require Senate approval. Of course, this strategy allowed Obama’s
successor, Donald Trump, to unilaterally withdraw from the accord in 2017.
It is also possible to structure a deal as an executive agreement between the
executive branch and a foreign government, which does not require Senate approval.
This strategy was followed in the case of the deal between the United States, its allies,
and the Iranian government to curtail Iran’s nuclear weapons research program. In this
case, Congress passed (and President Obama signed) a law giving members 30 days to
review the deal and the opportunity to pass a resolution rejecting it. The deal ultimately
went into effect, although Donald Trump ended U.S. participation in early 2018.
The president also serves as the principal representative of the United States
in foreign affairs other than treaty negotiations. Presidential duties include
communicating with foreign leaders, nongovernmental organizations, and even
ordinary citizens to persuade them to act in ways that the president believes are in the
best interest of the United States. For example, in March 2016 President Barack Obama
traveled to Cuba, where he toured Cuba’s capital, Havana, watched a baseball game
between American and Cuban teams, met with Cuban dissidents, and gave a speech on
Cuban television that criticized the regime for human rights violations. While speeches
and baseball games have no direct effect on policy, they can raise public awareness of
their government’s shortcomings and perhaps increase pressures for change.

executive agreement
An agreement between the executive
branch and a foreign government,
which acts as a treaty but does not
require Senate approval.

Full_13_APT_64431_ch12_418-453.indd 429 16/11/18 10:33 AM

Free download pdf