Why people will always find the executive branch more interesting than the other two branches

"If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send one hundred and fifty lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, and talk by the hour?"

- Thomas Jefferson

In every society that I know of, people are fascinated by power - whether their own power, or someone else's. Even in democratic societies, people fear the power of governments; and those who have to live under totalitarian regimes live in still greater fear. People in these countries usually take great care not to offend their governments, of course, because retribution from these governments can be so terrible and swift. Obviously, the governments of more democratic countries don't possess anything like this degree of internal power, of course, but they do possess a great deal of external power that makes them a force to be reckoned with. Nowhere is this more true than the United States, I think, where the resources at the government's disposal (military and otherwise) make it more powerful than any other.

The Pentagon, the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense

People do find the executive branch (including the police and military) more interesting

All three branches of our government have power, of course, but I think people are more fascinated by the executive branch than either of the other two. There have been movies about the legislative branch (such as "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington"), and there have been movies about the judicial branch (such as the John Grisham movies). But for every movie about one of these two branches, there is another movie about the federal police force or the United States military (parts of the executive branch), and some movies even focus on the White House itself.

Headquarters of the United States Department of Justice, or "DOJ"

Many "legislative branch" stories also involve the president somehow

What's more, some of these "legislative branch" movies also involve the president somehow, often because of the president having power to veto Congressional laws. Even when the veto is not relevant, the executive branch can still be an important character, as in Steven Spielberg's "Lincoln" - a movie partially about the famous president, but also about the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment in the House of Representatives, among other things. It would thus seem to qualify as a Congressional movie in my book, but it also has a clear focus on the president as well - who is, of course, the main character of the movie. Though the president is not directly involved in this constitutional amendment process (described here), the president's indirect influence upon it is enormous. Thus, Lincoln's support was crucial to getting the amendment passed. This movie about the legislative process thus is also something of an executive movie, where one of the key characters is the president himself.

United States Capitol, the building where the Congress meets

Many "judicial branch" stories also involve public prosecutors from the executive branch

And while it's true that some judicial movies decide to focus on civil cases (such as the John Grisham movies, which are quite popular), many "judicial movies" are also executive movies; because they often involve public prosecutors who represent the executive branch. Even when these movies focus on the defense side (such as the Perry Mason TV show), the involvement of "the people" on the other side is a key component in the movies' drama; and there would seem to be no need for a defense side without the executive branch's decision to prosecute in the first place. On the other side of the table, a spokesperson for the executive branch is usually the protagonist in a show focused on the prosecutors, since all public prosecutors are part of the executive arm. Whether they are good guys or bad guys, the prosecutors are often major characters in these stories; and so the presence of the executive branch is both strongly felt and dramatically important.

Supreme Court of the United States

Why is this, you might be wondering? Why does the executive branch usually excite so much more interest than the legislative branch or the judicial branch?

Why do people find the executive branch so much more interesting? (My own list)

Here are a few reasons that I can think of - which are probably not comprehensive, but which may be a good starting point for this discussion.

• In presidential stories, one individual makes for a simpler focus
• In presidential stories, one individual makes for higher visibility, both at home and abroad
• Diplomacy towards foreign nations makes the executive branch in general (and the president in particular) an international symbol of the country
• In stories about international treaties involving the United States, the president is the only American citizen whose consent is required for all of these treaties (since unless there is complete unanimity, some of the Senators involved will inevitably be outvoted)
• In presidential stories, more power is concentrated in the president than in any other person
• In many "legislative stories," the president has more influence over the legislative process than any other person does (since he has veto power over many of the laws they pass)
• In many judicial appointments, the president is the only individual whose consent is required for all Supreme Court appointments (since unless there is complete unanimity, some of the Senators involved will inevitably be outvoted)
• By its very nature, the executive branch can act quickly, and make decisions with little or no debate beforehand
• In stories about the police force, the executive branch has the authority to threaten - or, at times, even use - deadly force
• In military stories, the president is the commander-in-chief of the military, and the entire military is thus a part of the executive branch
• In many courtroom dramas, the executive branch's involvement in these proceedings is what makes them interesting (as described before) - whether one dramatizes the prosecution side, or the defense side
• In presidential stories, the consequences of a vacancy or disability are much more serious than when any individual Congressperson or Senator dies (since the legislature can temporarily continue its business without these members, but the executive branch needs to enforce the laws continuously without interruption)
• In my opinion, the president and vice president are the only offices that the entire nation can vote on (since no state can vote on another state's Senators, and no Congressional district can vote on another Congressional district's Representatives)

The executive branch isn't necessarily the most important, of course ...

None of this means, of course, that the executive branch is necessarily the most sympathetic; or even that they are always the "good guys" at any particular time or place. It doesn't even mean that they are the most "important" of the three branches of government, since many important things happen in the legislative and judicial branches as well. This is true, I think, even when the executive arm is not directly involved in their proceedings, as in civil cases like those depicted in John Grisham stories. (I should acknowledge that all departments of government must be watched, even when the sheer number of people involved makes their stories more complicated to follow.)

The White House, where the President of the United States lives

... but it would seem to be the branch that the people are interested in the most often

What I am saying is that the people will always find the executive branch more interesting than the other two, and will tend to prefer those stories with executive action over stories with legislative talk, or judicial civil procedures.

Footnote to this blog post:

In the Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton wrote that "Energy in the Executive is a leading character in the definition of good government. It is essential to the protection of the community against foreign attacks; it is not less essential to the steady administration of the laws; to the protection of property against those irregular and high-handed combinations which sometimes interrupt the ordinary course of justice; to the security of liberty against the enterprises and assaults of ambition, of faction, and of anarchy." (Source: Federalist No. 70)

If you liked this post, you might also like:

The president enforces the laws, commands the military, and conducts foreign diplomacy

The tyrannical police state: The worst nightmare of the Founding Fathers

Actually, the death penalty is constitutional (as the Fifth Amendment makes clear)