Do you think that the office of the president has too much power?

N

Norah

Colossians 3:23
I really love American history and I also believe that the US constitution and the way our founding fathers set up this country is amazing and ahead of its time. If you've ever read any of the comments that I make on here you will probably notice that I'm big on a limited and weaker central government. It's my opinion that our federal government, especially the executive brand and the office of the president, functions way beyond the limited and more balanced version that I think most founding fathers, especially ones like Jefferson and Madison, envisioned for us. I think that the office of the president of the United States has way more power than it should or that it was meant to have. Examples would be all of the executive orders that have been passed just in my lifetime alone and it shows no signs of slowing down. Even Trump's presidency, even if he reversed the executive orders from Obama, he still has far more authority than I think he was meant to have. What do you all think? This isn't really about Obama or Trump but more about the office itself.
 
Executive Office has been increasing power since the turn of the 20th Century, however, considering the day and age we live in where quick decisions are necessary, it might not be as draconian, a development as you portray. At the same time the Legislative Branch has shrunk in power largely because of it's ineffectiveness in getting anything done within an appropriate time period.

The Constitution itself was authored and enacted to replace a weak Federal Gov't, and the actions of Washington/Hamilton showed their belief that an effective Executive Branch was necessary
 
archives said:
Executive Office has been increasing power since the turn of the 20th Century, however, considering the day and age we live in where quick decisions are necessary, it might not be as draconian, a development as you portray. At the same time the Legislative Branch has shrunk in power largely because of it's ineffectiveness in getting anything done within an appropriate time period.

The Constitution itself was authored and enacted to replace a weak Federal Gov't, and the actions of Washington/Hamilton showed their belief that an effective Executive Branch was necessary
Click to expand...
That's true but they didn't intend an imperial Presidency.
 
Norah said:
I really love American history and I also believe that the US constitution and the way our founding fathers set up this country is amazing and ahead of its time. If you've ever read any of the comments that I make on here you will probably notice that I'm big on a limited and weaker central government. It's my opinion that our federal government, especially the executive brand and the office of the president, functions way beyond the limited and more balanced version that I think most founding fathers, especially ones like Jefferson and Madison, envisioned for us. I think that the office of the president of the United States has way more power than it should or that it was meant to have. Examples would be all of the executive orders that have been passed just in my lifetime alone and it shows no signs of slowing down. Even Trump's presidency, even if he reversed the executive orders from Obama, he still has far more authority than I think he was meant to have. What do you all think? This isn't really about Obama or Trump but more about the office itself.
Click to expand...

It is not so much about the power the office has, but about the use of that power by politicians.

The right likes to blame the poor for trying to elect politicians who will "give them stuff".

Some on the left know, the right merely panders for the bottom line.
 
The president's power has built in checks and balances that rely on a strong Congress to enforce. Unfortunately for the last eight years congress has let obama take a big crap on the Constitution for fear of being labeled as racist.
 
Way to much for Mr. "one and done". He should stick with what he knows. Fake universities, the proper art of using a tic tac, fleecing contractors etc. Get my drift?
 
danielpalos said:
It is not so much about the power the office has, but about the use of that power by politicians.

The right likes to blame the poor for trying to elect politicians who will "give them stuff".

Some on the left know, the right merely panders for the bottom line.
Click to expand...

So, which presidents increased the power of the office without promising the people "stuff?"
 
Threedee said:
The Pill Bill alone refutes this claim.
Click to expand...

What stuff, did Bush give? A fifty dollar rebate or two.

Here is what the wealthiest got, last time we had a capitalist of wealth in the White House, under the guise of supply side economics:

After the Great Recession which started in 2007, the share of total wealth owned by the top 1% of the population grew from 34.6% to 37.1%, and that owned by the top 20% of Americans grew from 85% to 87.7%. The Great Recession also caused a drop of 36.1% in median household wealth but a drop of only 11.1% for the top 1%.
...

During the economic expansion between 2002 and 2007, the income of the top 1% grew 10 times faster than the income of the bottom 90%.
....
--https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_in_the_United_States
Click to expand...
 
Sawyerloggingon said:
The president's power has built in checks and balances that rely on a strong Congress to enforce. Unfortunately for the last eight years congress has let obama take a big crap on the Constitution for fear of being labeled as racist.
Click to expand...

fuck off you racist scumbag
 
Congress needs to assert it's powers -if it won't the executive will bypass and glom up powers.
It's rare for SCOTUS to intervene
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top