Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Presidential powers
I disagree with Stephen Hess’ contention that modern President’s are woefully miscast in the role of manager of the Executive Branch. The Office of The President in its infancy acted strictly as a Chief Executive, by enforcing Congressional legislation that had been passed into law. As the government continued to develop, The President took on more responsibility acting in the capacity as Chief Administrator; by initiating legislation through a top-down process. Today, the President has developed into a combination of the aforementioned roles. The President manages his White House staff, as well as the nation, in order to attain a less hectic, more structured, effective leadership. Constitutional empowerment, presidential character, and public expectations have always and will continue to shape the fundamental managerial role of President of The United States.
The blueprint of the Office of The Presidency can be traced back to1777, when the state of New York passed their Constitution. The Constitution of the state of New York gave only the “Governor” ultimate executive power, stressed the importance of a strong chief executive, granted reprieves and pardons, as well as the establishment of the State of the Union address. The Final aspect of the NY Constitution found in the Constitution today, which clearly is a managerial task, is the power of the Presidential veto. By exercising this power, the President is clearly managing Congress, for if not in the best interest of the nation, it is the President’s responsibility to block the legislation, and give constructive feedback to Congress, with hopes of seeing a revised edition before him as soon as possible. All of the aforementioned aspects of the New York state Constitution can be found in Article II of the Constitution of the United States of America.
The Constitution is the building block for the President’s role as Chief Executive. Through the vesting clause of Article II- paragraph one- executive power is placed exclusively in the President’s hands. Article II-Section III authorizes the President “… to give Congress information of the State of The Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient”, known commonly as the annual The State of the Union address. Through the State of the Union address the President demonstrates another important aspect of h...
... middle of paper ...
...uing Executive Orders that are backed by the force of said laws. The President still supervises the implementation of laws by directing administrative agencies, such as the Department of Interior and the Department of Defense. The President’s responsibilities have remained the same since 1788, yet they have been added to with every newly elected President.
Although the evolution of the Presidency is an interesting subject and I respect Professor Hess’ opinion, it is clear to me that The Office of The President of The United States of America, has since its infancy, and will continue to be in the future, a strong, decisive, informed, position, in which only the most brilliant, motivated, and disciplined are able to manage.
Works Cited
1. The American Presidency Origins and Development. Sidney M. Milkis & Michael Nelson, Congressional Quarterly 1994. pages 82, 263, 293.
2. Organizing the Presidency, Stephen Hess. Brookings Institute 2002.
3. www.encarta.com
4. The Power of the Modern Presidency, Erwin C. Hargrove. Alfred A. Knopf, INC 1974, pg. 304.
The President of the United States is instrumental in the running of the country. He serves as the chief executive, chief diplomat, commander in chief, chief legislator, chief of state, judicial powers, and head of party. Article II of the Constitution states that the President is responsible for the execution and enforcement of the laws created by Congress. He also is tasked with the authority to appoint fifteen leaders of the executive departments which will be a part of the President’s cabinet. He or she is also responsible for speaking with the leaders the CIA and other agencies that are not part of his cabinet because these agencies play a key role in the protection of the US. The President also appoints the heads of more than 50 independent
Skowornek writes, “these presidents each set out to retrieve from a far distant, even mythic, past fundamental values that they claim had been lost in the indulgences of the received order, In this way, the order-shattering and order-affirming impulses of the presidency in politics became mutually reinforcing.” (Skowornek, 37, book). These presidents are in the best position not because they are exceptional at their job but because the time they came into office offered them the elasticity and authority to make new orders and be welcomed by the public because he is taking the country out of its troubles and challenges.
Examining the conceptualizations and theories of Neustadt and Skowronek’s in comparative perspective, this essay makes the principal argument that both of these theories only represent partial explanations of how success and efficiency is achieved in the context of the Presidency. With Neustadt focusing saliently on the President’s micro-level elite interactions and with Skowronek adopting a far more populist and public opinion-based framework, both only serve to explain some atomistic facets of the Presidency. As such, neither is truly collectively exhaustive, or mutually exclusive of the other, in accounting for the facets of the Presidency in either a modern day or historical analytical framework. Rather, they can best be viewed as complementary theories germane to explaining different facets of the Presidency, and the different strengths and weaknesses of specific Administrations throughout history.
As the President of the United States, a president have powers that other members of the government do not. Presidential power can be defined in numerous ways. Political scientists Richard Neustadt and William Howell give different views on what is presidential power. These polarized views of presidential powers can be used to compare and contrast the presidencies of George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
The U.S. president is a person deemed to be the most fitting person to lead this country through thick and thin. It’s been such a successful method that it has led to 43 individual men being put in charge of running this country. However, this doesn’t mean that each one has been good or hasn’t had an issue they couldn’t resolve when in office. But no matter what, each one has left a very unique imprint on the history and evolution of this nation. However when two are compared against one another, some rather surprising similarities may be found. Even better, is what happens when two presidents are compared and they are from the same political party but separated by a large numbers of years between them. In doing this, not only do we see the difference between the two but the interesting evolution of political idea in one party.
Sidney M. Milkis, Michael Nelson. The American Presidency Origins & Development, 1776-2011. Washington DC: CQ Press, 2008.
An executive order is when a rule or order issued by the president to an executive branch of the government and having the force of law. United States presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself. Obama has less executive order throughout his presidency but just as many per year as those who have more.
This position requires the management of the Country by implementing the laws, nominations of officials, grant pardons, serve as Commander-in-Chief of the military, veto lows passed by Congress, and negotiate treaties. The President is also responsible proposing yearly budgets and helping boost economic development. The many divided tasks between Congress and the Presidency has made it
The Constitution lays out power sharing amongst the President and Congress. However the Constitution is not always clearly defined which leaves questions to how the laws should be interpreted and decisions implemented. There are three major models of presidenti...
I will start with explaining Neustadt’s arguments about presidential power in his book. Then further my answer to the extent in which compare other political scholars, Skowronek, Howell and Edwards in response to Neustadt’s points of view about American presidency.
The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be addressed by the government, when it comes to the presidency, one person, although checked by various other divisions of the same government, has the power and responsibility to literally, as history has proven, change the world. The American people, "like all people everywhere, want to have our (political) cake and eat it too. We want a lot of leadership, but we are notoriously lousy followers" (Genovese). In other words the expectations the public has of the executive office are ever-changing since we demand that our leaders keep up with the evolving world around us and them. Throughout the past seventy eventful years alone, the American people's views, perceptions and demands of the Executive Office of American government have evolved simultaneously with the political and social events of that same time period.
The Journal of the International Institute. 2000. The. The Regents of the University of Michigan. 07 March 05 Sidey, Hugh. The “The Presidency.”
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system. Neustadt brings to light three main points: how we measure the president, his strategy of presidential influence, and how to study them both. Today we deal with the President himself and his influence on government action. The president now includes about 2000 men and women, the president is only one of them, but his performance can not be measured without focusing on himself.
Several aspects of the executive branch give the presidency political power. The president’s biggest constitutional power is the power of the veto (Romance, July 27). This is a power over Congress, allowing the president to stop an act of Congress in its tracks. Two things limit the impact of this power, however. First, the veto is simply a big “NO” aimed at Congress, making it largely a negative power as opposed to a constructive power (July 27). This means that the presidential veto, while still quite potent even by its mere threat, is fundamentally a reactive force rather than an active force. Second, the presidential veto can be overturned by two-thirds of the House of Representatives and Senate (Landy and Milkis, 289). This means that the veto doesn’t even necessarily hav...
Jones, W. T. Masters of Political Thought. Ed. Edward, McChesner, and Sait. Vol. 2. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1947.