What is legislative power? Just a vote.
A legislative power is the power allocated to the legislature by the fundamental law (Constitution of U.S. or state, city charter, etc.).
Most common legislative powers are law making (governing criminal and civil matters), taxing, and spending.
Under each of those powers, details are often delegated to others and this may cloud the answer to your other question (great question, btw) which was who makes policy?
Here's an example. A city council passes a law requiring nightclubs to post signs such as "maximum capacity 100 people" and the same law delegates to the city fire marshal the power to establish maximum capacities for each night club, to issue capacity certificates to such establishments, and to fine the establishments if they exceed the max.
The delegated power to the fire marshal is usually considered a regulatory power, not a legislative power. In this case, the policy is set by the city council (legislative branch), but the executive branch official (fire marshal) is implementing the details.
Legislatures often effectively delegate legislative powers such that executive branch officials really are policy makers. Thus, Congress established the FCC and gave it the power to regulate communications "in the public interest and necessity." Given such a wide-open mandate, the FCC is setting policy, albeit within broad factors set up by Congress.
It's a legitimate concern that overly broad delegation of legislative powers will put government beyond reach of the consent of the governed. This is especially true if, God help us, something as terrible as an EU-style NAU was implemented.
Now, if that legit concern is over-hyped in the case of an agreement or series of agreements that are detailed blueprints for cooperation and that don't delegate any legislative power, the credibility of anti-NAU forces will be demolished.
To avoid hurting the political strength of those of us who want to protect U.S. sovereignty, vague and unsupported charges against SPP and subordinate agreements or frameworks should be avoided.
As you will see in the thread-long debate, others questioned my disagreement with Schlafly's contention that the SPP Flu Plan delegated legislative powers to a foreigner. I looked through the documents and haven't seen such a delegation. (Mind you, if it's not there, it's not there.)
Others insist delegation of legislative power to a foreigner is there, but they won't say where. I asked for the specifics. It should be easy to say, "part 6a delegates power to determine legal chicken feed to a Mexican or Canadian" or some other such power, IF THAT WERE TRUE, BUT IT ISN'T.
After providing an explanation showing that the SPP Flu Plan doesn't delegate as Schlafly says, I've been slandered as "pro-NAU" by a person whose silly, unsupported arguments play right into the hands of those who want the God-awful NAU. He's probably not a mole out to destroy U.S. sovereignty by using silly arguments and logical fallacies to open anti-NAU forces to ridicule, but he sure doesn't know how to answer a simple question or argue consistently.
The burden is upon YOU to prove that Schlafly is wrong, not upon me to prove that I agree with what she claims.
You disagree....YOU provide the evidence which supports YOUR position.
Your opinions, as well as your logical fallacies, do not count as evidence.