Should The United States And Congress Have The Power In The Area Of Foreign Policy?

957 Words4 Pages

The president of the United States and Congress have different roles and powers in the area of foreign policy. According to the Constitution, the president “shall have the Power, by and with the advice and Consent of Senate, to make Treaties … shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls” (Milkis and Nelson, 2016). The Constitution also states that Congress has the power to declare war. These are all Constitutional powers, powers that were given to the president and Congress by the Constitution. In foreign policy, Congress or the legislative branch should have the power to take lead in the area of foreign policy.
The Founding Fathers wanted a unilateral executive power meaning they wanted one person in charge of the executive branch. “Single executive would a source of ‘energy’” and “single executive was indispensable to controlling executive power” (Milkis and Nelson, 2016). The Founding Fathers found it important that one person should be in charge because one person is able to make decisions quicker rather than having a group of people debate and take more time. “The President speaks for the United States in the international …show more content…

“Truman genuinely feared that the Soviet Union and China intended to expand the sphere of communism throughout Asia” (“US Enters the Korean Conflict”). Truman was concerned that communism was going to spread throughout Asia and then into the United States. The president is allowed to send military troops when “acting urgently in what was judged to be a grave national emergency” (Sparkman, 1977). It is hard to determine what is considered a national emergency. But with the advice of Congress, they are able to define what situation is considered a national emergency. Foreign affair issues can be clearly defined with small interactions or given powers to