The continuing tensions built into our government have weakened and distracted governance throughout our history, and have contributed to crises our country has endured, such as the Civil War and the Depression. A system in continual turmoil, as is the American government, tries to resolve the strain by clarifying and rationalizing the structure. It is natural to seek ways to reduce tension so governing can be more efficient and effective.
Among those who have written about these pressures and about how to develop better government, the predominant advice has been to “get politics out of government,” specifically to remove the influence of parties and special interests from government; they are seen as the sources of the failures of effective governance.[1] Removing such influences from government, however, gives more power to the President. Since 1900 giving more power to the President has been an explicit part of many recommendations for reform, starting with the Progressive movement in the early 1900s. These reform advocates have been successful: The President has become more powerful over the last century.
Giving the President more power has been the path of least resistance for the U.S. in resolving problems of effectiveness and efficiency. Corwin[2] demonstrated the “aggrandizement of power,” of the Presidency since Jefferson, and Schlesinger, in reaction to the Nixon era, updated this earlier account of the evolution of Presidential power in The Imperial Presidency. [3] With the G. W. Bush administration we saw just another ratchet in the growth of Presidential power.[4]
Increasing the influence of the President has a certain logic: The President is elected by all the people, and so represents all the people. He can be trusted to do what is best for the people. Besides, if he does not do a good job, he can be replaced after four years, or at most after eight years. For most people identify the really great Presidents--Jackson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and FDR--are great because they were strong and forceful leaders who got things done over the resistance of Congress.
[1] see Skowronek, Stephen Building a New American State: the Extension of National Administrative Capacities, 1877-1920 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982; La Raja, Raymond J. Small Change: Money, Political Parties, and Campaign Finance Reform Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 2008
[2] Corwin, E.S. The President: Office and Powers New York University Press, New York, 1957
[4] Savage, Charlie Takeover: The Return of the Imperial Presidency and the Subversion of American Democracy New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2007
No comments:
Post a Comment