Limits of Presidential Powers in the United States Under the Constitution - Report Example

Grade: ______________ d: June-30-2009 Limits of Presidential Powers in the United s Under the Constitution The limitations of presidential power can be analyzed by the authorities a president enjoys theoretically as well as practically under the judicial branch, legislative branch and executive branch. Under each of these branches there are certain limits imposed by the federal government which prefer a limited set of powers to continue with the central government. These powers enforce the president to deliberately cooperate with three branches of government so as to ease checks and balances for them. The president is a part of the system which consists of a constellation of political participants in a constitutional system of shared, separated, overlapping, dispersed and fragmented powers. President though seems to be an influential figure who controls the levers of power but in fact he is only a formal leader who have very little rights to rule the system. Presidents Legal Authority The theoretical or legal limitations of the US president relies on expanding the institutions legal authority or adjusting its support mechanisms. However, unable to exercise such authority, many scholars have emphasized upon the presidents legal vulnerability to pursue the potential to others while continuing to stress the importance of institutional bases of command (Shapiro et al 2000, p. 4). The president according to the twenty-second constitutional amendment of 1951, is limited to exercise presidency for maximum eight years to hold presidential control with a limitation of the third time to be elected. President is not allowed to create or amend laws and to conduct a major action and is bound to seek cooperation of the majority of the House of Representatives, and a majority of the US Senate. Critics argue that since leaders are characterized by low complexity of taking legal decision, yet possessing extensive prior policy experience does not matter because the vigilant presidential style of the president is preserved. However, they are free to make political choices on some return basis, like analyzing long run consequences of today’s decisions or predicting with whatever limited information they have. Presidents in order to avoid fatigue of working eighteen hours per day prioritize their concerns and suggest the best possible solution to cabinet and advisors. Moreover, the president has two types of authority to easily exercise formal authority which includes the ability to command, and informal authority which includes the ability to persuade (Cronin & Genovese 1998, p. 136). The presidential powers which are are limited and shared fits in the category of formal powers, whereas informal powers entails a function of skill, situation, and political time. The formal powers possess the ability to remain constant over time whereas the informal powers are variable and dependent on the skill of the individual president. That does not indicate that a presidents formal powers have remained static but that the pace of change in which presidential power increases is slower than the assumed primacy in the US political system. Executive Authority Persuasion and leadership powers are the most significant to respond to a framework that presents and depicts the personality characteristics and styles of presidents as critical enablers of presidential power. Such power either adds or detracts from the ability of presidents to perceive their policy environments and to navigate the unreliable shoals of the policy process. In the executive branch, presidents historically have opposed insulation and like other actors, act within a strategic context and are influenced by ideological considerations. Their proposals and actions are not shaped by their free will but, are shaped by what is politically feasible given the preferences of their political members of parties, the actions of bureaucrats, and the decisions of judges. If presidents are to select between no agency and an agency that is more insulated than they prefer, they often accept the proposal for the insulated agency. Limitations are also evident in presidential behavior which is tempered by ideological considerations. In circumstances where presidents agree to insulation, the type of insulation they propose may vary based upon ideological predispositions and the relative impact that political insulation will have on the political party (Congress) versus the president (Lewis 2003, p. 71). For instance, Republican presidents favor government corporations more than Democratic presidents because of their similar nature to private sector organizations. Another example is that when President Nixon disassembled the Office of Economic Opportunity, he proposed the legal services structural component of the office be transformed into a new government corporation, the Legal Services Corporation. President Bush when proposed a Resolution Trust Corporation in 1989, he proposed to eliminate Congressional budget oversight. Presidential Powers in Foreign Affairs The presidents power to exercise authority in foreign affairs is comprehensive but only to the extent where he can make laws in a limited criteria within the US. A study conducted in order to examine the traits and leadership styles of past US presidents in context with foreign policy decision making revealed that presidents prefer to adopt power in the form of hierarchical formal advisory system structures, so as to exercise and enhance their own personal control over the foreign policy processes (Preston 2001, p. 8). Presidential power practices decision making in tight time frames where trusted advisers convince the leaders upon direct involvement and personal control over foreign policy formulation and decisions. Past experiences have revealed that policy preferences tended to dominate both the policy deliberations within advisory groups and the nature of the final policy decisions. The prior policy experience or expertise of leaders in exercising their powers to modify policies uphold a significant impact upon presidential style where the nature of advisory group interactions and how forcefully leaders assert their own positions on policy issues, matters. Despite a limited autonomous body, presidents are free to experience and determine what actions will be effective or ineffective in specific foreign policy situations, as well as which promptness must be attended to and which are irrelevant. So commentators must paint a realistic picture of what a new president confronts to exercise limits of his powers, particularly when he is a new comer in making impression in the same old policies. Works Cited Cronin. E, Thomas & Genovese A. Michael, The Paradoxes of the American Presidency: Oxford University Press: New York. 1998. Lewis E. David. Presidents and the Politics of Agency Design: Political Insulation in the United States Government Bureaucracy, 1946-1997: Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA. 2003. Preston Thomas, The President and His Inner Circle: Leadership Style and the Advisory Process in Foreign Affairs: Columbia University Press: New York. 2001. Shapiro Y. Robert, Joynt Kumar Martha & Jacobs, R. Lawrence, Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-First Century: Columbia University Press: New York. 2000. Read More