When the Constitutional Convention met in Philadelphia over the sweltering summer of 1787, one question loomed as large as any other: should the government be headed by an all-powerful individual, a “national executive?”
Pennsylvania delegate James Wilson, a renowned jurist and legal scholar, called for the executive branch to be headed by a “single magistrate” who would fill the position with “vigor, dispatch, and responsibility.”
Two camps emerged. One side, recalling the failures of the weak Articles of Confederation, argued that the young country needed someone who had the power to enforce laws and engage in foreign policy. The other side, recalling the King from whom the country had just rebelled, countered that a single executive would “become an elected monarch, that cabals would develop to ensure his reelection, and that the presidential veto power would be abused.”
The Constitution they ultimately ratified did include a singular executive, but one whose powers would be checked by the other branches. Congress was given the authority to decide how the government spends money, the power to declare war, and the sole authority to write laws. In turn, the President was tasked with enforcing those laws.
It’s safe to say that the reality in recent years has not lived up to the plan. Successive presidents from both parties have usurped powers the Constitution reserves for the legislature, and Congress has done relatively little to push back.
The current administration has taken this to new levels: impounding funding that Congress appropriated to federal agencies; engaging in military action in Venezuela, Iran and other counties without congressional authorization; and attempting to rewrite laws through executive orders and regulatory changes (the ACHP’s radical rewrite of the regulations that implement Section 106 being a prime example).
For its part, Congress has not kept its side of the bargain. The two chambers meet less frequently, take fewer votes, and – beyond must-pass legislation or the occasional party-line mega-bill – write fewer laws. As the Brennan Center for Justice notes, “in 2025, Congress held 362 roll call votes, compared to over 1,000 in the early 2000s, making it the year with the second-lowest number of roll call votes in the last 25 years” (only surpassed by the year of COVID).
An example of this trend is happening as we speak. Despite plans to remain in D.C. for most of September, the House has now canceled much of its pre-election session, leaving a lot of unfinished business until after Election Day. Unable to come to agreement on major issues, and desperate to go home and campaign, the House essentially called it quits after just a week. (The good news is they did pass a continuing resolution that will keep government open into early December; the Senate already passed the bill, and the president is likely to sign it.)
Meanwhile, the Trump administration moves full-speed ahead with its agenda, including the construction of its White House ballroom, aided by a 5-4 Supreme Court decision that the National Trust for Historic Preservation lacked standing to challenge it. And late last week, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum announced that the administration would begin breaking ground for Trump’s “triumphal arch” near Arlington National Cemetery, despite the fact that final approvals have not been granted.
All of this means that it’s more important than ever for the CRM industry to speak up and remind both branches of their obligation to follow the law and the Constitution. Sitting back is simply not an option.
You can make your voice heard on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue in the coming weeks:
- There is still time to request a meeting with the White House Office of Intergovernmental and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), which is reviewing the ACHP’s proposal. ACRA met with them two weeks ago, and we strongly encourage firms to ask for a meeting. ACRA will provide tips and guidance, but your firm’s unique perspectives are indispensable in the effort to block the ACHP’s plan.
- Get ready to draft comments to the ACHP when they publish a formal notice of proposed rulemaking. Once the notice is public, ACRA will provide resources and guidance on submitting comments in its Section 106 Action Center.
- Bring your voice to Capitol Hill, from the comfort of your own office, by participating in ACRA’s Virtual Advocacy Week, September 14-18. ACRA will arrange your meetings and provide talking points/training beforehand. All you need to bring is your passion for CRM.
Tell Us: How Would SBA Size Standards Proposal Affect Your Firm?
As previously reported in ACRASphere, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) has proposed big changes to its size standards, which would redefine many more CRM firms as small businesses.
The SBA’s proposed rule would lead to staggering changes in the standards for small businesses across many NAICS codes, including NAICS codes used by CRM firms. For example, the size standard for NAICS code 541620, Environmental Consulting Services, would increase by 1453 percent, from $19 million to $295 million.
ACRA’s Government Relations Committee wants to hear from you about how this proposal would affect your firm. Please share your thoughts with us at info@acra-crm.org.