Final answer:
Dividing military power between the President and Congress in the United States promotes cooperation and compromise, prevents unilateral actions in foreign policy, and upholds the system of checks and balances. This separation of powers is essential for civilian control over the military and ensures that decision-making rests with elected officials who share authority.
Step-by-step explanation:
The effect of dividing military power between Congress and the President in the United States is a fundamental aspect of the country's system of checks and balances. Dividing control encourages cooperation and compromises between the executive and legislative branches, especially during periods of divided government when the presidency is controlled by one party and one or both chambers of Congress by another. This balance is meant to prevent unilateral action by the President in foreign affairs, illustrated by measures such as the War Powers Act of 1973, which requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of military deployment and limits the duration troops can remain without Congress's approval.
Historically, presidents like Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton managed to navigate these challenges effectively, even with opposition control in Congress. However, the capacity for effective governance under such conditions varies depending on the relationships and political climate between Congress and the President.
Ultimately, this balance of power functions as a critical check on presidential authority, ensuring civilian control over the military and promoting the general welfare of the United States. It epitomizes the separation of powers doctrine where separated institutions share governmental powers and encourages negotiation and collective policy-making among the nation's elected officials.