"Coordinate" is not "coequal"

When Nancy Pelosi claimed Congress was the "superior" branch of government the right-wing media went nuts: Pelosi claims Congress is a 'superior branch' of government, as clash with White House intensifies (FOX, )

“I think we’re a superior branch, quite frankly,” Pelosi said. “We have the power to make the law and the president enforces the law. So we have a big role. We’re closest to the people and we have a big role to play.”

Click to expand...

The article then went on to opine

Despite Pelosi’s opinion, the U.S. Constitution, in its first three articles, defines three distinct branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial. The separation of powers also creates a system of checks and balances to ensure all three branches are coequal.

Click to expand...

I have previously expressed the view that Pelosi is right, and FOX is wrong. Congress is the superior branch, and the other branches are "coordinate" not "co-equal". Of course, the framers happen to agree with me (and Pelosi), and so does National Review. Congress Is Not a Coequal Branch of Government — It’s Supreme (by Jay Cost).

What is the distinction between "coordinate" and "coequal"? "Coordinate" infers an effort to "bring the different elements of (a complex activity or organization) into a relationship that will ensure efficiency or harmony." It does not mean "of equal power." It can also mean "equal in rank, quality, or significance", like the "branches of service" (e.g., "Admiral" vs "General"), but in the Constitution it doesn't. Where did the concept of "coequal" come from, then. Surely the framers said that, right? Um, no.

As the National Review author put it, "The notion of coequality of the branches is a myth that has been popularized over the past half century, during the rise of the imperial presidency, as a way to boost the executive’s standing in the eyes of the public." It is a long, but effective, con. That is not the way the framers understood it:

The Framers were cognizant of this. In Federalist 51, Madison justifies bicameralism in terms of maintaining congressional supremacy. “It is not possible to give” the judicial and the executive branches “an equal power of self-defense” against the Congress, because that would undermine the republican quality of the government, where ''the legislative authority necessarily predominates.”

Click to expand...

This posted early, but go ahead and comment. I'll have more later.

We have not talked about this yet... :roll:

OrphanSlug said:

We have not talked about this yet... :roll:

Click to expand...

As far as I was aware, there is not a thread on the topic. It has been raised in other threads (I did so myself). I thought it deserved its own discussion.