Time magazine has a long piece (2/17/14) about beleaguered French President Francois Hollande. The headline is “Meet Monsieur Reform,” and the piece, by is a lengthy, rather predictable argument that his turn to the right is a good idea; or, as the subhead puts it, “The world needs France’s president to succeed in reviving his country’s fortunes.”
But it was hard to get past the very first paragraph:
French presidents don’t so much govern as reign from the splendors of the Élysée Palace. They have powers most democratic leaders only dream of, able to deploy their military or command nuclear strikes without first consulting the national legislature.
In France, the president can take military action without consulting the legislative branch?
What a weird place that must be.
La réforme constitutionnelle du 23 juillet 2008 a institué une nouvelle procédure d’information du Parlement sur les opérations extérieures (OPEX). Si le gouvernement décide d’engager une intervention armée, il doit informer le Parlement dans les trois jours. Un débat parlementaire peut être organisé mais sans vote. Si l’intervention extérieure se prolonge au-delà de quatre mois, le gouvernement soumet cette prolongation à l’autorisation du Parlement. En cas de désaccord entre l’Assemblée nationale et le Sénat, c’est l’Assemblée nationale qui a le dernier mot.
Depuis l’entrée en vigueur de cette disposition, le gouvernement a demandé trois fois la prolongation d’une intervention extérieure :
le 22 septembre 2008, sur l’engagement des troupes françaises en Afghanistan,
le 28 janvier 2009, concernant plusieurs théâtres d’opérations extérieures (Côte d’Ivoire, Kosovo, Liban, Tchad et République centrafricaine),
le 12 juillet 2011, sur l’intervention en Libye.
sorry my english is too bad to translate
Maybe Time understands the U.S. isn’t a democracy. How patriotic of FAIR to insist otherwise.
David G: Not how I heard this report. I think Peter Hart was being sarcastic by saying what a strange place France must be. He really meant that the US president can do the same thing. It was Time magazine being disingenuous, and its article should have been more poignant about this fact.
[Francois’ comment from Google Translate:]
The constitutional reform of 23 July 2008 introduced a new procedure for informing Parliament of external operations (OPEX) . If the government decides to initiate military action , it shall inform the Parliament within three days. A parliamentary debate can be organized but without a vote. If external intervention extends beyond four months, the government submits that extension to parliamentary approval . In case of disagreement between the National Assembly and the Senate, the National Assembly has the final word .
Since the entry into force of this provision , the government has asked three times the extension of an external intervention :
September 22, 2008 , the commitment of the French troops in Afghanistan,
January 28, 2009 , concerning several theaters of operations (Côte d’Ivoire, Kosovo , Lebanon, Chad and Central African Republic)
July 12, 2011 , on the intervention in Libya .
I do not see our president letting any constitutional directives of separation of powers hamper him in the least.And Im not talking military where they don’t AT ALL.Now I don’t know if the splendor of the white house rivals the french presidents digs.But them again Obama has Hawaii.Whenever he damn well feels.On our dime.Not a bad situation if you can get it.So where do we see the difference again?
Dear michael e. : )
Re; your question of what is the difference.
The difference is that Congress has more ways to stop the nation in its recovery tracks than France does in its nation. I understand that the French government actually listens to the People…although that very well could be rumor, as its very hard to tell from any media what is what anymore. : )
The difference, you ask? Well, much of Congress, especially the House, does not seem to be able to accomplish much, and they make $174,000 a year, and apparently many there feel that they may leave the city early, even while many Americans are without food, shelter, or health care, because, so many have no jobs. There have been jobs bills for building infrastructure, but apparently no House members have yet been killed by a collapsing bridge, so I guess imploding structures are not important to them.
It’s a very simple system really. Congress makes the laws, and the president person says yes or no.
The president person can suggest laws he would like, but if much of the Congress doesn’t know much or doesn’t much care, nothing gets done.
Maybe it would be a good idea for every one in Congress to telecommute. They would be closer to the People that they represent and get more work done, plus they would not be interrupted by those pesky lobbyists. : )
It would also be so much easier for the NSA to know everything that elected officials were doing too…because gosh, maybe they’ve missed some stuff. :)
Then, when elected officials took vacations, they really could have a real vacation, as long as they weren’t connected by phone, internet or drone in the sky. : )
I hope I’ve cleared up any confusions for you. : )
for michael e
The Elysée palace rivals the White House with La Lanterne in the Versaille grounds for the weekend and fort de Bregançon in the Riviera for the holidays.
The french république have also some paradisiacs islands : Guadeloupe, Martinique, La Réunion, Nouvelle Calédonie and Tahiti
Must have embraced Freedom FRIES!
Bruce
The French don’t care because for us the fries come from Belgium
.. and TIME is what passes for “Liberal Media”? That reminds me of NPR’s misnamed “All Things Considered” talking to a reporter for “The Economist” about the election of “socialist”Francios Hollande. one would think that “public” radio would have the decency to talk to a socialist about an elected allegedly socialist president , right?