Posted on 05/02/2007 7:19:32 AM PDT by oldtimer2
The Case for the Strong Executive
HARVEY C. MANSFIELD
Complaints against the "imperial presidency" are back in vogue. With a view to President Bush, the late Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. expanded and reissued the book of the same name he wrote against Richard Nixon, and Bush critics have taken up the phrase in a chorus. In response John Yoo and Richard Posner (and others) have defended the war powers of the president.
This is not the first time that a strong executive has been attacked and defended, and it will not be the last. Our Constitution, as long as it continues, will suffer this debate--I would say, give rise to it, preside over and encourage it. Though I want to defend the strong executive, I mainly intend to step back from that defense to show why the debate between the strong executive and its adversary, the rule of law, is necessary, good and--under the Constitution--never-ending.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
The terms of the disagreement over a strong executive go back to the classic debate between Hamilton (as Pacificus) and Madison (as Helvidius) in 1793-94. Hamilton argued that the executive power, representing the whole country with the energy necessary to defend it, cannot be limited or exhausted. Madison replied that the executive power does not represent the whole country but is determined by its place in the structure of government, which is executing the laws. If carrying on war goes beyond executing the laws, that is all the more reason why the war power should be construed narrowly. Today Republicans and Democrats repeat these arguments when the former declare that we are at war with terrorists and the latter respond that the danger is essentially a matter of law enforcement.
This is the very same argument that we have had since the beginning. Mansfield comes down on the side of a strong President during times of war or other problem times, but at other quiet times we need more of the rule of law.
It is a long article, but read it and start the discussion.
The Myth of the Modern Presidency, by David K. Nichols.
The question isn't strong presidency OR rule of law, but, rather, strong presidency AND rule of law.
Congress has a couple of good ways to reign in a strong president. In addition, this fight over the President's war power isn't new, during the Quasi-War Congress spared with Washington and Adams.
Thank you for your answer. I will get that book and read it. In the meantime I have read, online, a review of the book by Tim H. Blessing , Alvernia College. He seems to agree with you and I look forward to reading the book myself. Thank you
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.