Unilateral Power Essay

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).

For each of the congressional powers below, explain one way that presidential decision-making is affected by that power.

In his study The New Imperial Presidency: Renewing Presidential Power after Watergate, Andrew Rudalevige examines the American presidency and how it has changed over time. First off what is an Imperial Presidency? An imperial presidency is a term that was coined around the 1960s by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. to describe the modern presidency of the United States. In the beginning of the book Rudalevige states, “Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. had affixed an enduring adjective to the Nixon Presidency: Imperial. This didn’t mean that the president literally had become emperor but suggested the occupant in office exercised more absolute power.”

Unilateral Presidential action is the ability to act, without the consent of Congress. This ability was not original intended by the framers of the Constitution however, over time the Execute Branch stated to outgrow the reaches of the Legislative Branch. One instance in which lead to this type of actions by presidents was of Lincoln’s actions to save the Union. Lincoln acted without the consent of Congress due to Congress being out of session. Lincoln later would explain his actions to Congress as the Commander and Chief of the United States that he had the right to act in a state of emergency or a crisis. One reason to his actions was Article 2 Section 2 “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and the Militia of the several states, when called into actual service of the United States.”

Since the creation of the United States of America, the power of the President has increased dramatically. Specifically, regarding foreign affairs, the power of the President has greatly increased. According to foreign policy specialist Michael Cairo, the Constitution originally gave Congress the majority of war powers. While the formal powers of Congress include the power to declare war, raise and support an army, and regulate commerce, the President was only meant to mainly be Commander in Chief and negotiate treaties in regard to foreign affairs. The President’s role of leading the armed forces may seem like it would give him the authority on all issues regarding foreign affairs, but this power was granted to the President so that he could react quickly if a national emergency occurs. Although Congress was originally given the majority of war powers, Presidents have begun to utilize unilateral authority in the realm of foreign policy. In the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and more recently in Iraq and Afghanistan, the President deployed troops without a declaration of war from Congress.

In the constitution it states that the Presidents purpose is; to be chief of state, chief executive, chief administrator, chief diplomat, commander in chief, chief legislature, party chief, and chief citizen (The presidents job description). As the chief of legislature, one of the presidents duties is to not only review bills being proposed by congress, and occasionally say they must be revised but to also enact laws affecting the people of the United States immediately, rather than wait for them to move up through the many levels and debates of congress. For this, he can use the power of an executive order, a constitutional way to provide laws that relate to national welfare or the good of the citizens. A few good example of this would be executive order 13767, which moves for additional border security on the United States southern border, and executive

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

When it comes to foreign affairs it is very important that the President has the ability to use executive privilege. For instance, if the United States was making a treaty with another country, both countries may have to give things up in order to come to an agreement, and everything considered by both sides as well as everything agreed upon should not be made public for everyone, including other countries to see. This is best stated in 1796 by George Washington after the House of Representatives requested that he give them information concerning his instructions to the United States Minister to Britain regarding the treaty negotiations between the United States and Britain. Washington replied by saying:

Especially with a divided government, and even without, the president is challenged to gain the support of Congress (Heffernan, 2005:59). While the President is responsible for carrying out the law and can even issue executive orders ultimately Congress hold the purse strings. Without the budgetary support of Congress the President’s agenda will not be fulfilled. Treaties and all appointments from cabinet officials to Supreme Court justices have to be approved by Congress, specifically the Senate. “As a result, the White House is engaged in a constant process of persuasion” (Heffernan,

In the admittedly short life time of the Presidential branch its occupants have taken massive strides in empowering and strengthening their office. At times a case could be made that the executive has aspired to too much; threating essential American political values, such is the case of President Franklin Roosevelt who secured a third term of office ignoring precedent and tradition. However, evidence would suggest that for any significant step a president takes towards increasing their power; often results in an equal and opposite reaction. That is not to say that our presidents are weak, in actuality we see that our presidents have significantly increased their power to wage war

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.

As the commander in chief, the president plays a significant role in shaping foreign policy. The president possesses the power to appoint senior cabinet members, commit troops and conduct high level talks with foreign governments. Congress, on the other hand, has the power to ratify treaties, confirm the president’s appointees and approve budgetary measures. And while the president has the ability to commit troops, only Congress has the authority to declare war. Despite criticisms of the American policy making process describing it as inefficient and slow moving, the main purpose and thus benefit of the constitutional separation of power is the framework of checks and balances that safeguard against monopolization of foreign policy decision making.

President has the right to deploy the military in most situations, but does not have the