Power to the President

Most of the specifications for the executive branch in the Constitution, other than how he is to be elected, have to deal with the interactions between Congress and the President. The president can (fill in the blank) but only if (this part) of Congress approves. The powers of the president have been interpreted widely so that he has more power than I believe the Framers intended. They wanted him to be able to check Congress with veto power and be the head of the military. However, I think that presidents nowadays have too much power. They are active in trying force their policy agenda through Congress, manage foreign relations, and act as the administrative head of the entire nation. The textbook lays it out well in, "The vast size of the executive branch and the number and complexity of decisions that must be made each day pose a challenge for the White House.” (316) In order to deal with the stresses put on the executive branch, there are thousands of employees that work to give the president the information that he needs to make decisions. He has advisors, cabinet members, legislative liaisons; the list goes on and on, but he is the person who actually gets to make all of the choices. The President is limited in some ways and given more power in other ways by the structure laid out for him in the Constitution, and evolved to be what it is now.

In the article, “Unilateral Action and Presidential Power: A Theory,” Terry M. Moe and William G. Howell, two political science instructors from Stanford University, investigate a source of presidential power, which is the president’s capability to act individually and make his own law, that has been unacknowledged yet essential to presidential leadership that it defines how the modern presidency is distinctively modern. The authors’ purpose in the article is to outline a theory of this feature of presidential power by arguing that the president’s powers of unilateral action, which is developed from the ambiguity of the contract, are strengths in American politics since they are not mentioned in the constitution. They also claim that presidents push the ambiguity of the contract to make their powers grow and that Congress and the courts would not be able to stop them (Moe and Howell, 1999, p. 1-3).

A presidential executive order is an instruction issued by the President of the United States in exercising the constitutional authority vested in him to pass executive orders. This authority is derived from Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution of the United States of America, which means the presidential executive order has the power to become a law. Presidents have been mostly using presidential executive orders to issue directives in regard to managing the ways in which the federal government functions. Thus, presidents usually issue executive orders for the purpose of changing or improving the operations of the executive branch and federal agencies and to execute constitutional or statutory presidential duties and tasks. It is in

Beyond this “blunt instrument” of the executive branch’s formal constitutional powers, the presidency is largely what the president makes of it (Romance, July 27). The president’s real power is one of persuasion, or the ability to convince

In the Federalist 51 of the Federalist Papers James Madison writes “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates...the weight of the legislative authority requires that it should be thus divided.” It is necessary for the legislative branch to have the most power because they reflect the will of the people since we directly elect members of Congress and the laws the legislative branch creates inevitably affects the people. The members of the legislative branch are the closest link to the people; they represent specific interest groups and must be responsive to those interest groups or risk losing re-election. The framers of the constitution such as James Madison believed that since Congress is closest to the people they would have a democratic legitimacy that neither the Executive or Judicial branches would possess.

For the common American citizen a major concern, as suggested by a recent Gallup poll, centers around the idea that the President, as Chief Executive of the nation, has too much power and influence in the shaping of the United States (Americans' Belief). In particular, there exist a strong belief that the bureaucracy is directly managed by presidential preference (Roff). In contrast, it is a rarely suggested opinion that the President does not have enough power, control, or influence over the bureaucracy. With these two opinions in mind, to what extent does the President have control of the bureaucracy?

Article ll of the United States Constitution gives the executive branch very broad powers. Many Presidents throughout history have interpreted that differently. They may think that they are able to sign bills into law directly, take military action, etc. One example of this use of power was Abraham Lincoln. We see examples of this in the Emancipation Proclamation and the suspension of habeas corpus.

Many argue that the most powerful branch in government is the Executive Branch. The President is considered as the most influential and the most important position in the U.S. government. However, the powers granted to Presidents and the prerogative they have exerted are not listed in the Constitution but instead have been adapted and expanded upon by each President. Although the Constitution does not define the powers of the President, it has defined Presidential powers in terms of peace, war, and emergency. A recent expansion of Presidential power, exerted by Bush and then Obama was this “War on Terror (WOT)”. President Barack Obama and his predecessor President George W. Bush have both expanded the powers of the President through the

The Constitutional framers would never have believed how much power the President of the United States has obtained to this present day. Based off their work, it seems as if the framers expected Congress to have the vast majority of power. It is true that Congress still has maintained some of their power; yet, as a collective society we tend to place our sole interest on the president and magnify on all his accomplishments and especially on all his losses (sometimes even blaming him for events that are out of his jurisdiction). Nonetheless, the president has gained quite a remarkable amount of power over the years and it is highly noticeable when analyzing differences in the institutions, the policies, and culturally.

While some would argue that the framers of the Constitution did enough to limit the power of the President because of actions carried out by the leaders of the past, the more valid perspective is that these actions were made based on personal goals, and that judgements on these actions are justified based on opinions—not facts. From this, it can be concluded that the authors of The Constitution of the United States have placed enough rules, regulations, and checks to successfully limit the power of the President. In this modern American world, social and governmental society is continuously developing and evolving over time; important decisions that drive this evolution are made everyday by people of great importance. One of these important

In this paper we will compare the formal and informal powers if the President and we will explore how and why the Presidential powers have increased over time. The history of the Presidency is an account of aggrandizement; one envisions, today, a President with far reaching power, however, when looking at the Constitution alone we find a President with significant limits. Is the President of the United States the most powerful person in the world or merely a helpless giant?

Presidential power has increased immensely over recent years and little is being done in an attempt to restore the original intent of the Constitution. There are multiple factors that affect this, including the executive orders of presidents, the Constitution giving an unequal distribution of power between the executive and legislative branch, the failure to use checks and balances, and the ineffectiveness of Congress. With the lack of congressional involvement in legislative decisions, the president has the ability to take matters in their own hands.

The presidency occupies a unique position in all systems of government including the American system of government. The formal powers and the constitutional position occupied by the institution of the presidency are at the core of all national and international politics (Alexandrova & Timmermans, 2013). The President can serve as Commander-in-chief, nominate and appoint ambassadors, just to name a few of the powers of office. However, there is another power that is often overlooked by most, the power of agenda setting. The Constitution does not directly state this power, but it is heavily implied. This paper scrutinizes the institution of the presidency in line with agenda-setting literature. The agenda setting process relates to a series of streams, circumstances, or activities within public policy institutions and processes. The agenda setting process has three streams that incorporate the problem stream, the policy stream, and the politics stream. The problem stream relates to potential policy problems that may have different magnitudes attached to them. The policy stream associates with an agglomeration of potential solutions to policy problems (Eshbaugh-Soha, 2010). Additionally, the politics stream links to those policy issues and solutions that

Although it is often said that the President of the United States holds the most powerful office in the world, this does not mean that he is able to decide very much for himself. The American Constitution, which was adapted in 1789, clearly states the Separation of Powers. Thus, the president makes up only one third of the government, namely the executive branch. He is also controlled by a complex system of checks and balances, which makes sure that he (or any of the other branches, for that matter) does not become too powerful. We will now have a look at the different problems which may be facing a recently elected president, and then discuss to what extent his powers are important.

I believe Both Bush and Obama were successful exercising executive authority to influence administrative agencies. The author noted that President Bush mastered the administrative presidency and writes, “Bush 43 Administration has been able to influence agency budgets more than his predecessors” (p. 41). The text notes that he not only controlled the substance of agency action but also the information agencies could use. President Bush’s executive orders created policy initiatives that established several faith-based and community initiatives. Although the text was written prior to President Obama’s term, the use of executive orders was also successful. Percival (2001) wrote “from the first days of his Administration, President Barack Obama made it clear that he would play an active role in seeking to mobilize the federal bureaucracy to achieve his policy ends.” (p.2528). President Obama’s executive order to the FDA is one example of how a president can use an executive order to instruct an agency on how to implement existing policy. Clearly, these recent administrations have been more active and more successful in efforts to persuade agency heads to pursue policies desired by the White House. In my opinion, this activity is an important reason for their success and now extend far beyond the OMB review process exemplified in the executive