It can be fun to dig into the definitions and origins of words. For example, take the word executive.
executive
Function: adjective
1 a : of or relating to the execution of the laws and the conduct of public and national affairs b : belonging to the branch of government that is charged with such powers as diplomatic representation, superintendence of the execution of the laws, and appointment of officials and that usually has some power over legislation (as through veto) -- compare JUDICIAL, LEGISLATIVE
2 a : designed for or relating to execution or carrying into effect <executive board> b : having administrative or managerial responsibility <executive director>
3 : of or relating to an executive <the executive offices>
Function: noun
1 : the executive branch of a government; also : the person or persons who constitute the executive magistracy of a state
2 : a directing or controlling office of an organization
3 : one that exercises administrative or managerial control
The first definition outlines the responsibilities of the executive branch of our government: execution of the laws.
Continued...
The definition of the word further identifies the responsibilities of an executive.
- Conduct of public and national affairs
- Diplomatic representation
- Superintendence of the execution of the laws
- Appointment of officials
- Has some power over legislation (as through veto)
Does this definition describe what the Bush Administration has done running the executive branch of our Country?
Conduct of public and national affairs
To some degree, Bush does conduct public and national affairs, although he was absent in August 2001 when terrorists were finalizing their plans for 9/11 and again in 2005 when a category 5 hurricane was heading towards the Gulf Coast, ultimately destroying the city of New Orleans.
Diplomatic representation
The Bush Administration is seriously lacking in this category. They refuse to engage Iran. They have largely ignored North Korea, with the exeption of some meaningless six-country talks. They have angered many of our allies around the world with the illegal and unethical invasion of Iraq. Hell, Bush appointed John Bolton, a man with no diplomatic skills, as our cheif dimplomat to the United Nations. In six short years, Bush has turned the United States into a country that is widely hated around the world, a complete and utter failure of executive diplomatic responsibilities.
Superintendence of the execution of the laws
Ever hear of Habius Corpus? The Fourth Amendment? FISA? Bush has completely ignored this aspect of his responsibility.
Appointment of officials
Bush, for the most part, fulfilled his executive responsibility to appoint officials, albeit many of them unqualified or idiologically biased.
Has some power over legislation (as through veto)
In six years, Bush has only vetoed one piece of legislation: Stem Cell Research. Instead he has issued signing statements "interpreting" what the laws say. For example, a law written by Congress might say that a warrant is required to open a someone's mail, and Bush might add a signing statement saying that he CAN open said mail without a warrant. I think this fails the "some power" part of the definition and changes it to "absolute power".
Based on Webster's definition of "executive", Bush has been a huge failure. Additionally, while reading the definition of "executive", I couldn't help but notice the reference that says:
compare JUDICIAL, LEGISLATIVE
So I decided to look up those words too.
judicial
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin judicialis, from judicium judgment, from judex
1 a : of or relating to a judgment, the function of judging, the administration of justice, or the judiciary <judicial processes> b : belonging to the branch of government that is charged with trying all cases that involve the government and with the administration of justice within its jurisdiction -- compare EXECUTIVE, LEGISLATIVE
2 : ordered or enforced by a court {a judicial sale}
3 : of, characterized by, or expressing judgment : CRITICAL 1b
4 : arising from a judgment of God
5 : belonging or appropriate to a judge or the judiciary
Hmmmm... It seems to me that Bush has tried to take on some of the responsibilities of the judicial branch too. For example, locking up people without any charges, legal representation or a trial. (see Jose Padilla) Bush has acted as judge, jury and executioner, which are not his responsibilities as an executive.
legislative
Function: adjective
1 a : having the power or performing the function of legislating b : belonging to the branch of government that is charged with such powers as making laws, levying and collecting taxes, and making financial appropriations -- compare EXECUTIVE, JUDICIAL
2 a : of or relating to a legislature <legislative committees> b : composed of members of a legislature <legislative caucus> c : created by a legislature especially as distinguished from an executive or judicial body d : designed to assist a legislature or its members {a legislative research agency}
3 : of, concerned with, or created by legislation {legislative courts}
legislate
Function: verb
Etymology: back-formation from legislator
intransitive verb : to perform the function of legislation; specifically : to make or enact laws
As an executive, Bush is reponsible for legislative oversight via the use of a veto. However, he has gone much much further than that... especially under the Republican-controlled Congress. The main function of the legislature is to make laws, and the Bush Administration has basically told Congress which laws to write. Some examples are the Dooh Nibor tax codes, Social Security privatization, military authorization, federally funding religious organizations, restrictions on stem cell research, ..., etc. I know what many of you are thinking. A president should have some input on legislation because he/she might need laws passed in order to run the country. But Bush has done too much legislative work. Hell, his V.P Dick "Elmer Fudd" Cheney had an office in the Capital until the Democrats took over this month. And let's not forget his use of signing statements to make his own laws. I'd say that Bush has been more effective as a legislator than as an executive... which brings me to my final point.
Bush was elected (sort of) as the chief executive of the United States, but has failed because he has taken on too many other responsibilities, namely judging and legislating. Not only has he exceeded his Constitutionally mandated duties, but he has also failed in the duties that are afforded him. Just look at the word "executive" and consider its root or origin: EXECUTE
execute
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French executer, from execucion execution
transitive verb
1 : to carry out fully : put completely into effect <execute a command>
2 : to do what is provided or required by <execute a decree>
3 : to put to death especially in compliance with a legal sentence
4 : to make or produce (as a work of art) especially by carrying out a design
5 : to perform what is required to give validity to <execute a deed>
6 : PLAY <execute a piece of music>
Bush has failed to live up to the first two definitions of the word: to carry out fully : put completely into effect & to do what is provided or required by. He has done the third definition... somewhat: to put to death especially in compliance with a legal sentence. But I do not think that's what the writers of the Constitution intended. Perhaps we would be stronger as a country and Bush would have an approval rating higher than the 20s and 30s if he actually did his job as an executive and did not try to do everyone else's job too.