<P> Johnson's impeachment was perceived to have done great damage to the presidency, which came to be almost subordinate to Congress . Some believed that the president would become a mere figurehead, with the Speaker of the House of Representatives becoming a de facto prime minister . Grover Cleveland, the first Democratic President following Johnson, attempted to restore the power of his office . During his first term, he vetoed over 400 bills--twice as many bills as his 21 predecessors combined . He also began to suspend bureaucrats who were appointed as a result of the patronage system, replacing them with more "deserving" individuals . The Senate, however, refused to confirm many new nominations, instead demanding that Cleveland turn over the confidential records relating to the suspensions . Cleveland steadfastly refused, asserting, "These suspensions are my executive acts...I am not responsible to the Senate, and I am unwilling to submit my actions to them for judgment ." Cleveland's popular support forced the Senate to back down and confirm the nominees . Furthermore, Congress finally repealed the controversial Tenure of Office Act that had been passed during the Johnson Administration . Overall, this meant that Cleveland's Administration marked the end of presidential subordination . </P> <P> Several 20th - century presidents have attempted to greatly expand the power of the presidency . Theodore Roosevelt, for instance, claimed that the president was permitted to do whatever was not explicitly prohibited by the law--in direct contrast to his immediate successor, William Howard Taft . Franklin Delano Roosevelt held considerable power during the Great Depression . Congress had granted Franklin Roosevelt sweeping authority; in Panama Refining v. Ryan, the Court for the first time struck down a Congressional delegation of power as violative of the doctrine of separation of powers . The aforementioned Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, another separation of powers case, was also decided during Franklin Roosevelt's presidency . In response to many unfavorable Supreme Court decisions, Roosevelt introduced a "Court Packing" plan, under which more seats would be added to the Supreme Court for the president to fill . Such a plan (which was defeated in Congress) would have seriously undermined the judiciary's independence and power . </P> <P> Richard Nixon used national security as a basis for his expansion of power . He asserted, for example, that "the inherent power of the President to safeguard the security of the nation" authorized him to order a wiretap without a judge's warrant . Nixon also asserted that "executive privilege" shielded him from all legislative oversight; furthermore, he impounded federal funds (that is to say, he refused to spend money that Congress had appropriated for government programs). In the specific cases aforementioned, however, the Supreme Court ruled against Nixon . This was also because of an ongoing criminal investigation into the Watergate tapes, even though they acknowledged the general need for executive privilege . Since then, Nixon's successors have sometimes asserted that they may act in the interests of national security or that executive privilege shields them from Congressional oversight . Though such claims have in general been more limited than Nixon's, one may still conclude that the presidency's power has been greatly augmented since the 18th and 19th centuries . </P> <P> Many political scientists believe that separation of powers is a decisive factor in what they see as a limited degree of American exceptionalism . In particular, John W. Kingdon made this argument, claiming that separation of powers contributed to the development of a unique political structure in the United States . He attributes the unusually large number of interest groups active in the United States, in part, to the separation of powers; it gives groups more places to try to influence, and creates more potential group activity . He also cites its complexity as one of the reasons for lower citizen participation . </P>

Who has the constituional authority to make laws for washington dc