It sounds like you are saying they should be independent of the elected President. If so, who are the accountable to and how?
What is this "will of the people" you are talking about? What people are you talking about? How do you infer their "will"?
This current president has been elected by 49.8 percent of the votes cast for president. Due to the electoral college, a Wyoming voter has 3.6 times the power of a California voter. His approval rating is already negative, and is policies poll negatively too[0]. What mandate does he have? What exactly is the will of the people and why has it changed completely in 6 months? What policy is right when the will of the people changes completely every six months?
[0] https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker
> If so, who are the accountable to and how?
To the courts? According to the laws and statutes voted by Congress?
I mean, have you ever educated yourself about your own political system before asking those questions? Shouldn't you have?
I'm not interested in discussing the current president, I am interested in your very different interpretation of the US government (which clearly lays out 3 branches of government).
> To the courts? According to the laws and statutes voted by Congress?
So in your view on how the government should run, after Congress creates a federal agencies, they don't have to worry about any election or democratic process. They only have to worry about the courts if they break the law? Who arrests or prosecutes the DOJ or the FBI? Who brings them to court?
> I mean, have you ever educated yourself about your own political system before asking those questions? Shouldn't you have?
I understand the US government, as designed by the US constitution very well. I am trying to understand this bizarre concept of "independent" federal agencies and why people should prefer that over our current system of an executive branch led by an democratically elected President. A government of agencies with permanent power, with no checks or balances or any reason to be concerned with what citizens care about sounds like a dystopian form of government. You haven't really convinced me that this "independent" style is preferable in anyway. All you really have done is just ranted on why you don't like the current President, but I bet you didn't care about these agencies "independence" from POTUS 44 or 46.
> A government of agencies with permanent power, with no checks or balances or any reason to be concerned with what citizens care about
Both of those sentences are lies.
But enjoy your return to the 1800's nepotism and patronage.
https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/faculty_scholarship/3595/
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/20/nx-s1-5302537/history-congres...
These two articles were literaly the first page results when you google "independent agencies us history", but you couldn't be bothered, so you choose to bother everyone here.
You need actual independent process. It takes real, sustained effort to create the culture where such processes thrive, where people are proud of their independence and their commitment to an ideal rather than an individual - and if a "populist" tries to assault them you need to actually defend them because they are the whole point of having a government by the people and not "Well these two rich guys decided..."