Some historians have suggested the Executive Office of the President has led to a more powerful presidency, replacing policymaking functions that should rightly belong to the Cabinet. According to this line of thought, the Reorganization Act of 1939 has given the president too much power over an entire branch of government, since most members of the executive office are appointed directly by the president without being confirmed by the Senate. Why might people have objected to this plan based on the Constitution

- The plan took away power belonging to the Cabinet.

- The plan increased the powers of the presidency

- The plan created less accountability to the Senate

Explanation:

According to the question, the key reasons due to which the people may have objected to the 'Reorganization Act of 1939' include that 'this plan withdrew the cabinet's power' by 'increasing the authorities of the President' and 'reducing the senate's responsibility.' People believed that the powers must be divided in such a manner that no one takes the sole authority and more power over the other as it could be misused because this plan allowed the presidency to reform its executive branch and also recruit secret staff.

maybe you need to work on the pipes in the house. i am just saying this because you did not give any details.

light bulb

explanation: