Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The president's role quizlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The modern president is seen as the face of America to many of the countries around us and as the Commander in Chief to the people of America. “One model cast the President as an agent of democratic transformation,a leader who could be counted upon periodically to break through the knot of interests protected by the Constitution, thereby opening the government to new possibilities and revitalizing the political system at large. The other model cast the President as a policy entrepreneur, a political facilitator who would bring together actors across dispersed and relatively independent institutions to orchestrate timely responses to national problems as they arose,” Skowronek. He or she is seen as a symbol, but as well as many other things that are pretty important for this country to be functioning in this modern
Presidents need achieve autonomy, using the rules of the constitution, persuasion, and their position in office to accomplish it. This is one of the most integral part of a presidents institutional incentive structure. It is what makes a president a good president. “A Presidents authority and status gives him great advantages in dealing with the men he would persuade. Each “power” is a vantage point for him in the degree that other men have use for his authority.” (Neustadt). Public prestige is very crucial to the bargaining power of a president, mainly for the reason that Washington 's elite insiders believe it to be so. What the President is liked for is as important as how many people like him. Prestige is somewhat identified as giving the president some ‘leeway’ in the opportunities he or she has or the risks he or she may take. However, the weaker his or hers support for a particular policy is, the more his or hers cause in Congress may depend conclude to negative tactics such as the veto and even the impounding of
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.
Of the most powerful people in the world, the President of the United States of America hits the top of the list. Even though the policy agendas that presidents set as they take office often go unfulfilled, the office of President is still one of the most envied spots to have. But why could this be? It is because the United States is the most powerful nation in the world and with the President as the leader, he is said to have the most power in the world ("Top Ten Most Powerful Countries in the World"). With power comes responsibility and with this position he must govern a country while abiding by the rules.
Have you ever watched the Presidential Inaugural Address? Well, you should because you can learn what the new president wants to do with the country you are living in. I analyzed Barack Obama and George Washington’s Inaugural Addresses. There were many differences and similarities between Barack Obama and George Washington’s that I will further explain in this essay. One difference was that Obama’s speech was about trust while Washington’s was about the citizens rights for the new nation. One similarity is that both speeches talked about what each person wanted to do as president. Barack Obama and George Washington's Inaugural Addresses made a big impact on the country.
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.
In order to understand Franklin Roosevelt as the first modern President, it is crucial to examine how the “modern” presidency differed from past presidencies. Renka asserts that the modern presidency’s power comes from four features: “the rise of the United States to world power status, rise of the central government within the American federal system, creation of a modern electronic communication networks enabling the rhetorical presidency to expand, and the creation of a modern administrative apparatus for the president and the White House” (The Modern Presidency from Roosevelt through George W. Bush). Each of these came about under the “entrepreneurial leadership” of Roosevelt (Greenstein 3).
In chapter eight in The Balancing the Presidential Seesaw (2000), Vaughan offers additional observations and recommendations for future presidents. As a former president, Vaughan observation is clear that “presidency is not about headlines – whether to make or avoid them – it is about working hard day in and day out, year in and year out” to accomplish the community college’s goal (Vaughan, 2000, p.
Choosing a president can be very challenging. There are many things we as citizens look for in a candidate. For example, goals, visions, etc. We always want what is best for our country and for our families. James D. Barber looks into one thing, which is the candidate’s character. This essay will explain James D. Barber’s theory. It will also criticize the placement of five presidents in the typology he has created.
Presidents of the United States take an oath to uphold the Constitution. In times of crisis, however, presidents are tempted to circumvent the spirit of the Constitution in the name of political expediency. The president of the United States of America is frequently under pressure, which could be for something as simple as dealing with his wife (especially if she's running for the US Senate), but usually the problem is more extensive. Then, the whole nation is affected, and the problem becomes a national crisis. A widespread panic is possible. The president must propose a plan to aid his nation while keeping the public under control. Lincoln. Roosevelt and Truman proposed bills to stop or prevent the national crises that plagued the country.
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 presidential power within foreign policy; the first being the presidential model in which decisions abroad are made by the president and his or her top aides and advisors. This model is accepted amongst many because during times of urgency and crisis the president must make quick decisions. The president unlike congress is provided various sources of intelligence information, which is a benefit in analyzing situations globally and making sound decisions.
The most important phase that Neustadt argues about the presidency and presidents is the persuasion power. He writes that the president cannot simply command “do this, do that”, as we all know “nothing will happen”. Different branches of the government have different constituencies and different interests. To make things happen, the president must use his bargaining skill to persuade others. Neustadt, to back his view gives a historical prove in which president Truman,
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.
Presidential power has become a hot topic in the media the in recent years. There has been extensive debate about what a president should be able to do, especially without the involvement of Congress and the American people. While this debate has become more publicized since the Bush administration, similar issues of presidential power date back to Truman and the Korean War. As with much of the structure of the U.S. government, the powers of the president are constantly evolving with the times and the executives.
The President has many duties and responsibilities, some of which many may be unaware. The President has these powers so that they can try to make our country a better, safer place to live. However, they also have limits to these powers so we do not turn into a dictatorship. Some of these powers are stated in the Constitution known as expressed powers, the others are implied powers obtained throughout history.
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...