Well, as least it is healthy to see Congress reemerge as a co-equal branch of the government, challenging the power of the executive. As you well know, the Republican majority Congress, and to large extent even the Democratic majority Congress after 2006, has been rendered practically irrelevant by Bush and his puppet master Cheney. In their view, the Congress was there just to be - well, another annoying entity to fork over the money whenever they asked for it to pay for their wars and other activities to enrich their already rich friends.
Co-equal is not the correct characterization.
It is a manifestation of modern revisionist historians. The way our government was set up was to have the ability to have checks and balances. There is a difference and it is very important.
The Executive pretty much has the ability to do whatever they want. The checks in place are the Congressional ability to fund or not fund and the Supreme Court's ability to rule it unconstitutional.
The Congress can do whatever the hell they want because they control the money but the President can Veto whatever it is and the Supreme court can rule whatever it is illegal.
The Supreme Court can not do anything proactively (although the liberal justices over the years have tried with varying degrees of efficacy).
The point is that all 3 branches are able to do as they damn well please. It is the "Watchdog" type of governance though. The problem with it is that it is like a fire alarm. For the fire alarm to go off there has to be a fire.
Over the years Congress has eroded the executive powers away considerably. Bush made no bones about it when he was running for office. Now the real test is to see if Obama will give any of it up.
I would say that I would take bets that Obama will not give up much if any, of the consolidated executive power that Bush took back from Congress.