It is executed by the executive. The question is the degree of power the executive has over the policies they're enacting. Not crazy at all to believe that the policy-making body of our government largely controls that.

This is very obviously the design of our government.

"[The President] shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"

That's come up, too. The Copyright Office is a unit of the Library of Congress. Trump tried but failed to fire the head of the Copyright Office.[1]

U.S. Marshals used to belong to the judicial branch, and were hired by the district courts. In the 1960s, they were moved to the executive branch, under the Justice Department. This wasn't controversial at the time. The court system wasn't set up to train and manage the marshals. But the effect was that the courts lost their independent muscle.

[1] https://apnews.com/article/trump-supreme-court-copyright-off...

“Independent” agencies have always been a distinction within the executive branch, not a distinction from thr executive branch, so while arguably true on its face, your statement is also a strawman.

why is that crazy? legislative supremacy is an extremely common pillar of many theories of democracy. the executive has only the powers enumerated in the Constitution and explicitly granted by Congress. if Congress wants to set up an agency independent of POTUS, that "should" (scare quotes because who knows what this activist SCOTUS will do) be well within its constitutional purview

To execute is different than having the royal prerogative, or at least it did to the founders: https://jach.law.wisc.edu/exec-power-royal-prerogative-found...

What do you mean? Why isn’t it okay to create agencies that have different models of management? Like by Congress or private third parties or whatever? They can do whatever legislation allows right?

To everyone asking: why is it crazy?

Because the constitution explicitly grants the president absolute executive power over executive branch (government) of which FCC is part of. If government is a company then president is CEO and can do anything he wants to do.

Of course people can argue about the meaning so ultimately the arbiter of what constitution mean is Supreme Court.

And recently there were several lawsuits in the vain "the president can't do THAT" and while federal judges said "indeed, he can't" and issued injunctions, they were pretty much overturned by higher court or Supreme Court, re-affirming that president does in fact has control of executive branch.

And if you want to game this: if this wasn't true, congress could completely defang the powers of the president by making every government agency (IRS, FBI, FTC etc.) "independent" and de facto giving the power to unelected beaurocrats away from elected president.

And why should you care about this?

Because every 4 years you can vote for a different president.

You can't vote for the head of FCC.