The President Has Too Much Power Essay

Presidency Article In Richard Neustadt’s often read book, “Presidential Power and the Modern President”, Richard observes the essence of presidential power while working in the executive branch. He served under President Franklin Roosevelt term and also stayed to serve under President Truman as well but it is said that President Kennedy brought presidential power with him in his time. During the first bit of his well written book, Neustadt expresses how the president’s good behavior and image can come with persuasion of others but the final page concludes Neustadt’s opinion on the struggles the president faces along with worldwide issues. According to Neustadt, presidents are expected to do much more than what the Constitution

1. When the Constitution was drafted “Article II, Section 2, clause 2 grants the President the power to ‘appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States [except those whose positions are not otherwise already provided for in the Constitution. And] Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers…in the President alone” (Presidential Powers). However, the issue of removal powers of the president where not addressed within the Constitution, therefore this issue is one that has been debated. The issue with removal power is if the president is given too much power and many member of Congress opposed this power.

The president of the United States does have some powers that many people, including myself question, and who are concerned with the potential of his/her position becoming a branch of its own and sprouting into a vine that could slowly overtake the rest of the branches. But I also believe that with special care and regulation that it could be prevented. For example, many of these powers that have become a concern are mostly informal powers, that come from the ideas from the Constitution and could be more easily and understandably regulated, with the appropriate policies. Just like how the president used to be able to send U.S. troops if deemed necessary to him/her without congress 's declaration of war, but now have to give a 60-day notice to them whenever they do and need approval either way.

Throughout American history, there have been numerous shifts and changes in politics and in the government. From the time George Washington was sworn into office in 1789 to Andrew Johnson’s assumption of presidency in 1808, one of the most prominent changes is the transformation of the presidential power and interpretation of the Constitution. As time goes on, the influence of the president gradually expands and evolves from a tightly constrained role into a significantly powerful position. The authority of the president grows along with the expansion of the nation's prosperity and prestige in the world. During the Revolutionary War in the late 18th century, the Founding Fathers created America and established a new system of governing.

Thomas E. Cronin, Michael A. Genovese, and Meena Bose structured the fourth chapter of Paradoxes of the American Presidency, titled “Presidential Power and Leadership,” around three central ideas. First, the authors examine American views on presidential leadership and powers, as well as how those views contribute to cycles in American politics. Second, they discuss and critique both the president’s political power, as well as the powers invested in the office by the Constitution.

The author believes that a nation’s ruler should be held to certain laws. When it comes to a President though, he fells that they can use the military however they want to benefit themselves. The President would be able to break any rule in office if he would ever to be in trouble, since he would have the military there to back him up. The Author would rather have a King who has to follow guidelines, just like the common people, though not the same rules. A King doesn’t truly control the army, and the author is afraid of what would happen with a national republic and what the consequences

United States v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones should have had the same outcome from the Supreme Court. Both, former President 's violated the law and wanted to use presidential privileges to dismiss their cases. In the United States v. Nixon, the Court had the right to order the President to relinquish the tapes to Congress to use as evidence for the trial against the seven members held accountable. Those accused were owed a duty by the Court to be given a fair and speedy trial. In the Clinton v. Jones case, the Court should have not granted the former President Clinton immunity because the general public needs to realize that not even the President can violate the law and get away with it.

Any additions to the powers listed are unconstitutional and potentially dangerous. The constitution in of itself establishes a government with limited powers. Such interpretation ensures that judges and lawmakers will not become tyrannical

Throughout history , presidents have taken different steps in abusing the executive orders and other presidential directives. Many citizens expressed different views over the executive abuse and benefits the presidents have. The increased use of executive legislation in the absence of challenges from Congress has expanded the power, boundaries, and pose a serious threat to the democracy.

Determining the specificities of what the framers originally intended, however, is the subject to some debate. Saikrishna Prakash, a distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia, analyses the question of original meaning of executive power in his essay “The Essential Meaning of Executive Power”. He argues that not only is the president chief legislator, chief military officer, and the nation's top diplomat, he is “first and foremost...the chief executive empowered by the executive power to execute Congress’s laws and to control the law execution of executive officers”(Prakash, 820). He also acknowledges Justice Scalia’s assessment “that a complete understanding of the executive power might take 7,000 pages and thirty years to complete”(Prakash, 820). Suggesting that we have to be cautious in trying to analyze the presidency from a pure originalist point of view, and that we have to adapt to the ambiguities that result from the evolution of presidential power.

The president in the executive branch does have the most power in relation to any one person, but I do not think this means that there is any dictatorship going on.

If assistance is needed the president can invoke the authority and enforce Laws. The implied powers the president has taken over time are the authorities to negotiate treaties and sign executive agreements.

Undoubtedly, The President is the furthermost known person in a country due to the position he occupies and many times his actual power has been questioned. Two distinct perspectives arose to describe the president’s power as persuasion and unilateral power. First, the persuasive perspective from Richard Neustadt illustrates presidents’ power as persuasive. It highlights what Neustadt believes that is a misconception among the general public who believe that the president is a supreme authority that governs the country, as he prefers from his oval office.

For our government, the president is usually seen as the person with the most power. The president can do many things, such as know what the military has for the defense of America, repeal laws he sees as unfit, or even try to create new laws. In an authoritarian government, one person has complete power over everything. The leader practically

This is due to the power of the media, for instance the radio, TV and the Internet. Media has made it easier for the President to communicate with the people, and the modern presidency is a kind of media invention. This power however, doesn’t seem to actually come into action. It just makes people think the President is the most powerful man on the planet. In reality the power, or influence, is divided between more than just the three branches if government.