No. of Recommendations: 5
But back to the idea that “they have to stand for election” and therefore “impeachment” isn’t a “check”, the idea of impeachment exists precisely to remove an elected official within their term - and the reason it isn’t used more often is that the Founding Fathers did not foresee the “team” aspect of politics; the concept of “political parties” was something they entirely missed.
Yes, but for a completely different problem.
I don't think I was clear, but impeachment does not exist as a check on maladministration. It exists to check against the Executive violating criminal law. It exists to remove an elected official within their term for breaking a criminal law. It does not exist as a check against the Executive doing anything else bad.
This thread is about needing a 4th branch of government - transferring some of the power away from the Executive branch and having it instead wielded by someone else, like an independent agency. That's not a solution to the problem that impeachment exists to solve. It's trying to address the problem of the Executive wielding executive power in a bad way. That his appointees aren't doing their jobs properly, or that he's using his powers in a bad way to bad purposes. Solving the issued of "[a] President who is 1) above the law; 2) can hire and fire everyone under him at will; and 3) decide to withhold or spend appropriated funds as he sees fit with no real way to stop him other than impeachment is no longer a “coequal” branch." Of the eight agencies the OP author suggested making independent, seven of the eight have nothing to do with the criminal behavior of the President himself. They're being suggested to improve how executive power is exercise - the "hire and fire" or "withhold funds" or being "above the law" in terms of complying with the rules Congress has adopted on how the Executive is to behave.
The checks against that problem aren't impeachment. They're political and the structural limits on the Executive that exist because power is otherwise diffused and dispersed among different governmental bodies. And they've kind of worked, actually. For example, none of the three things the OP author mentioned are fully happening. The President ultimately acquiesced and complied with most of the Anti-Impoundment matters that he was threatening, he's been forced to climb down on some of his major policy positions by the courts (most notably with tariffs), and he hasn't just gone out and violated the civil service laws (but instead tried to work within them).
