The Constitution: Presidential Powers

Americans fought a long and bloody war to eliminate one autocrat, the English King, George III. They didn’t wish to install a new among their own making. How did the Framers guarantee that the President would have enough power to be an effective chief executive, without making him a totalitarian? John Yoo, Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, has the answer.

#prageru #president #constitution #history #americanhistory

SUBSCRIBE https://www.prageru.com/join

Script:

Just how much power should we give to the President? This was among the most vexing (and vital) concerns dealing with the Framers of the United States Constitution in the summer season of 1787.

To be efficient, the President needed to be perceived– both in times of war and peace– as the leader of the nation. For this to happen, he would have to be provided substantial authority. When the country floundered under the Articles of Confederation which had no provision for a primary executive, americans discovered this lesson in the years following the Revolutionary War.

This chief executive could not be made so strong that he might end up being an autocrat. Americans combated a bloody and long war to get rid of one autocrat, the English King, George III. No one wished to install a brand-new one in his location.

The Framers response is found in Article II.

The opening sentence checks out as follows:” [t] he executive power will be vested in a President of the United States.” This might sound uncomplicated, however it was anything but.

Here’s why.

” The vesting stipulation” of Article II, as it’s known, varies significantly from the vesting clause of Article I, which worries the powers of Congress– the House of Representatives and the Senate. Post I’s vesting clause states: “all legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States …” It then goes on to note those minimal powers.

There are no such limitations specified in Article II. The difference is subtle, however important.

Whereas Congress is offered particular obligations, the President is given broad obligations and broad discretion as to how he satisfies them. This belongs to his executive authority.

And simply what is that executive authority?

This is spelled out in Sections 2 and 3.

The President is the commander in chief of the armed services. He sets military policy.

He makes treaties with foreign countries. He sets diplomacy.

He designates his own consultants– what ended up being called his cabinet. He sets domestic policy.

He selects judges to the Supreme Court. That certainly offers him a big say in judicial policy.

“he will take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”

Due to the fact that there’s so much included in all these responsibilities, this list is at huge and as soon as short. Certainly, the President stands at the head of the whole administrative device of the Federal government with all the rights and obligations that entails. If the President can appoint federal authorities, it stands to reason that he should be able to fire them, too.

When you understand that implementing the law involves layers and layers of individuals from department heads to federal law enforcement to government legal representatives, all of whom are accountable to the President, you begin to comprehend how much power the president has.

So, how did the Framers keep the President in check?

First and foremost, they offered Congress “the power of the handbag,” the power to money the operations of the federal government. Congress can limit the President by withholding funding.

The President actually can’t buy a light bulb for a lamp in the Oval Office without a Congressional appropriation. If the President proposes to add a new federal firm or to introduce a war, Congress can bring his strategies to a stop simply by declining to money them.

The Constitution strikes a comparable balance in foreign affairs. The President, as Commander-in-Chief, controls the technique, strategies, and releases of the U.S. Armed Forces, and also determines U.S. diplomacy. Only Congress, however, has the power to state war, and the Senate, by a two-thirds majority, must consent to any treaty worked out by the President.

Congress likewise has the power to impeach the President in cases of major misbehavior– treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. However the bar for impeachment is set really high to secure the President’s self-reliance from Congress.

For the full script, go to: https://www.prageru.com/video/the-constitution-presidential-powers

source

How did the Framers ensure that the President would have enough power to be an efficient chief executive, without making him a totalitarian? To be effective, the President had to be viewed– both in times of war and peace– as the leader of the country. The President stands at the head of the entire administrative device of the Federal government with all the rights and obligations that requires. If the President can designate federal officials, it stands to factor that he need to be able to fire them, too.

Only Congress, nevertheless, has the power to declare war, and the Senate, by a two-thirds majority, need to consent to any treaty negotiated by the President.