The United States had fought against a monarchy, having been ruled by it beforehand as well. Former British Colonies that were treated with a hands off approach but were then deemed to bow before the Royalty that did not represent them. This sort of disconnect drew terrible policies towards the colonies with the ruling class doing whatever they really wished. Revolutionaries rose forth and fought against things such as the taxation on so many items. Tea was one such breaking point as it would be like taxing water heavily, the drink people would seek to be sated with. The expression “Taxation without Representation” was such a strong war cry that it rallied so many to stand up against such tyranny that strained and choked the colonies. These colonials learned first hand the true dirty side of Monarchy rule and when given the chance to implement their own system, they would create the foundation of what the United States of America is today. 

The presence of the American President was founded at the start of the nation. Its purpose was to enact as part of the checks and balances system provided by the executive branch of the United States government. This Executive Branch stands as one with the Legislative and Judiciary Branch which are the three primary systems structured into our government. The President represents the head of the Executive Branch but also the voice of the government that all three branches reside inside. The importance of this position was needed because the President is also the voice of the government to those internationally. Before the increasing levels of democratization the United States experienced in the 1900s where the President came to represent more for the people, the Electoral College still remains as the aspect that determines who is the Head of State. Not by birthright or by tyranny but rather by election of those that govern, the President was founded as the leader of the United States.

In the period of time after the United States came into being and was considered the Confederate States of America the lack of any form of executive power at the national level of government made it exceedingly difficult to enforce any manner of national law and so it was necessary to reform the confederate government into the three branches we currently use.

When our nation originally came together it was considered wrong to establish a nation with a strong federal government. The emphasis was instead on a system in which equal states would come together to conduct business. While this form of government secured each state from the tyranny of the others, it did so to such a degree that no business could be enforced upon any of them. When Shay’s Rebellion occurred, there was no central authority with the ability to counter-act the citizen uprising and the result was that some number of farmers who did not wish to allow their properties to become foreclosed were able to forcefully interrupt the business within their state. In general, property law is an extension, or subsection, of contract law and contract law enforcement is essential to the basic ability to conduct economic business within a country. As a society, we have the trust that we can reasonably conduct contractual business because if the other party were to breach their contract with us we can utilize the courts to seek remedy. When the government can not enforce its decisions citizens will lose faith in the ability of the government to enforce its judicial rulings and business throughout the nation will suffer.

When the executive branch was developed as the country came together to review how the government would look it seems that much of its position was derived from duties previously given to the Senate. With the Judicial branch being in its infancy at this point in time, it would seem that the President was less a manifestation of the third branch of government and more meant to serve as the enforcement arm of the legislature, if not the Senate itself. In either position, the executive was tasked with executing the laws derived from the legislature. As we learned in our text, this enforcement required a more open-ended view of government than the legislature utilized. While the legislature had clearly defined rules and guidelines, the executive branch had a more open mandate of ensuring the laws are followed. Also noted in our text, when the next notable rebellion occurred, the Whiskey Rebellion, George Washington was able to mobilize citizen forces to bring to rebels into compliance with the national laws. I think this series of events, an unanswered rebellion that is followed by a reframing of government and leads to the next rebellion being swiftly answered is a clear depiction of why we have a President in the United States.

Rachel Nelson
Professor Lovecraft
PS F301
September, 10, 2022

We Came, We Saw the Monarchy, We Said Thanks But No Thanks

Why does America have a president? There are many reasons one could choose, but ultimately America has a president because England had a king. From the very beginning of America’s history, whatever your thoughts about it, the desire to have a government without a ruler wielding absolute power over helpless citizens is an ever-present one. The framers got together to solidify this idea, through different perspectives and ideas, in the form of a democracy of the people and for the people.

The issue of how to run a nation according to a nation’s people is a sticky one to be sure: differing ideas, upbringings, and personal beliefs is bound to make a single answer to a question a much more arduous process, especially when one’s populace is largely uneducated in the ways of governmental management. But, overall a good goal to hold. Residing in a nation under a king, even a world away, gave early Americans a piping hot taste of what it was like to be unheard and taken advantage of. Ideals like freedom of speech, the right to vote, freedom of the press, judicial liberties— all of these luxuries we possess now, were what revolutionaries fought and died for and what the framers had in mind when constructing the early government system that has morphed into what we see today. These were not brand new ideas to humanity, however, examples of these can be found in Greek and Roman history and were drawn on by framers whilst crafting the documents, systems, and stations of the early American government. By no means perfect, there was quite a bit of trial and error instituting the newly fashioned system of governance— from lack of funding to trouble getting respect and compliance from citizens, groups, and even each other, setting up the American democracy was no easy feat.

Though it is clear that presidents wield far more power than was ever intended by framers, even to the point some would classify America as an imperial democracy, the separation of powers, checks and balances, voting by citizens, and rights upheld in the constitution are all part of the system of government framers dreamed of creating, with the presidency firmly planted in the executive branch. Living in a world dominated by hereditary secession of absolute power, early Americans and the framers yearned from a system of governance that put officials elected by the people in power, answerable to the people. While this only included white, land-holding men as the “people” being referred to, it was the stepping stool for the democracy we see (for the most part) thriving today.

The United States of America has a president because the founders of our system of government found a strong executive (relative to their initial formulation of executive power) integral to the satisfactory functioning of our system of government (perhaps this statement can be extended to ALL forms of government; however, as this is a class on the American Presidency, I will not concern myself with this question). The presidency has ballooned since the time of the founders. In some cases it can be said that it has simply enlarged naturally to keep pace with the burgeoning state of the US and its interconnectedness with the world. In others, it has undoubtedly grew as a result of conceited efforts on the part of the president and his cabinet to increase their share of power. As a result of all this expansion, it is essentially established fact that, since the end of WWII, the president has become the most powerful person in the world.

There is significant irony in this fact, as the presidency was originally imagined as a weakened alternative to the kings and dictators of the world. Over the years, it is clear a dual phenomenon of the strengthening of the American president as well as a weakening of the center of executive power in foreign governments has resulted in the president rising to its unipolar position. Though the founders would have certainly been dismayed or at the very least perplexed at what the office has become, if they had a broader outlook they would certainly note how the American form of government gained prominence across the globe and rejoice at the fact that, though the president’s power has increased over the years, it is still in many regards the same institution set up around 250 years ago.

As I alluded to in my opening, the trials the founders faced with the executive set up under the Articles of Confederation showed that their new system of government could not function without a strong executive. Without a figurehead to bind the disparate states together under some level of authority, it would be impossible for the federal government to operate and keep the nation equal and binded together. The fact that it was necessary even under such a new, radical system of self-governance perhaps speaks to the nature of rule: that there must be power vested at the top of a power structure. Another key facet of power is that it tends to consolidate itself given the chance. The lack of foresight on behalf of the founders allowed (and, given power’s consolidating attributes, even destined) the presidency to turn into what it is today. Given these ruminations, I would say that the reason we have our paradoxical, strongly-weakened presidency is due to the nature of power and the founder’s inability to understand it.

It is undeniable that the founding fathers and framers of the Constitution would not recognize the position of the President. The power of the executive branch has swelled to what would be an unthinkable and alarming degree to the Framers. But one must ask, is it just the power of the executive that has changed? Executive power has expanded, but the power and polarization behind American government has also grown to an unrecognizable extent.

The Framers of the Constitution lived in a very different time and were looking at a very different picture. They were inspired by the injustices that they had just fought a war against. They were inspired by the charismatic personality that George Washington possessed. But mostly they did not know how the world would change and how the Constitution would be interpreted. It is difficult to say if political scientists and constitution lawyers from even before the FDR administration would recognize our government today let alone members of the Constitutional Convention. FDR ended the more isolationist politics that the US had operated under since George Washington. The US is now a global economic and military superpower, the police force of the globe, a founding NATO nation, a permanent member on the UN Security Council. I don’t think the Framers would have ever anticipated the power that comes with just handling foreign policy.

If power in the executive was still relegated to being primarily concerned with international relations, the current trajectory towards globalization and the rise of non state actors would still make the presidency very powerful. Another thing that the Framers may never have considered is our current two party system. George Washington warned of the dangers of parties. The extent of polarization in our current system, where one party vehemently supports the President, while the other actively tries to obstruct them, would not have been a scenario to the Framers. Maybe they would have considered a bipolar executive if the Constitution was being written now. This change in situation also effects the powers that the current office of the President holds.

When the Constitution was written there was a specific purpose for the President and for the executive branch. The powers to veto and enforce laws, the power to handle all foreign policy, and the power to grant pardons and elect members to the judiciary are all part of the executive powers ‘vested’ in the President as well as others. The transformation that the Presidency has taken is partially due to Presidents expanding powers, but is also due to the fact that we are a more powerful nation that has encountered events that the Framers did not foresee.

The role of the president in the United States has changed since the creation of the presidency. In today’s world, the powers of the president have expanded far from what was conceptualized by our nation’s framers. The traditional role of a president was expected to have minimal responsibilities and framers had small expectations for the head of the executive branch. Unlike the more rigid boundaries set for Congress, those who created our constitution did not see a reason to specify the powers of a president. This ambiguity was unofficially made less so by the first few presidents, especially George Washington. He was able to oversee the government and provide a part in the checks and balances as envisioned by the framers. 

However, as the world moved towards the industrial revolution and became more globalized, so too did the presidency expand. Presidents like Franklin D. Roosevelt used the executive branch far beyond its original limits in order to pull the United States out of the Great Depression. Other presidents have used their role as the Commander in Chief to use military forces abroad (with the help of a compliant Congress). A president is also the head of government and the head of state. They are supposed to preside over the government and are responsible for the execution and enforcement of laws created by Congress. They also represent the United States to other governments of foreign countries.

The president has far more responsibilities than what was originally envisioned by the framers. A president is now the head of many bureaucracies that run the government. The president’s cabinet is their selection of how they want the federal government to be run and the many presidential advisors help make critical national decisions. A president can also be a great unifying (or dividing) force. In times of crisis, many American presidents have served as one who guides the will of the American people as the leader of a nation. Presidents can also divide a nation by making alienating statements and inciting hatred between the diverse groups of American people. 

All together, the role of a president is ever changing with the current times. The framers would not recognize the current role of the presidency from what they had originally created. Many presidents have overstepped unofficial precedents of their office in order to achieve their goals for the United States and its people. Although it may seem concerning that this has been done, it can be justified by presidents as a necessity in order to fulfill the responsibilities inherent in their role in the government. However, it can also be seen as a precursor to more imperial presidencies. The president has to find a delicate balance between their responsibilities and keeping in line with the ambiguous framework of their duties. The only question is if the elected president is able or willing to strike this balance.

            The creation of the position of the presidency is a move by the founding fathers inspired by a desire to create a strong central point in a newly established government. The worries of the founding fathers were based on their past, and concern for generations to come. They framed the constitution with multiple goals in mind. First, they wished to move away from the strong central power placed in a hereditary king by giving more ability to states and separating federal power between three branches. What also aided in the creation of the presidency is historical precedence. They looked to the Romans to learn what can work in a democracy, but also more importantly, what does not work. In my opinion fear of failure is what lead the framers to create a presidency in the way they did. After realizing what the failures were of past iterations of democracy and republics, they avoided them knowing what would happen if the second attempt at a federal agreement would fail. With failure comes the threat of the British coming back to retake the colonies after their slow implosion.

Presidential powers as explained in the book play a large role in both domestic and foreign matters making them vastly important which demands a strong leader. Without a central figure to direct the political traffic standstills are inevitable and trade dwindles. Creating separate branches helps to check powers, but it also frees up the president to make better use of his own. Using that power the president becomes the de facto spokesman for the United States, and hopefully, they portray the wishes of the people. This also becomes important in times of war as commander in chief the President can be a civilian counsel. The President has many roles to play and due to that he must fit certain criteria.

After realizing what may happen in the future and putting into words their plans the next step in securing the presidency for future generations is making sure it works in the first one. Had the first presidency been a failure significant pushback from the states was a strong possibility. George Washington as the first United States president was and remains to be a strong choice that not only affected people at the time but remains to have a large impact on the way the presidency is conducted today. His ability to create certainty against a tired and uneasy people propelled the presidency forward. Coupling that with his decision to retire early creating a moral standard for presidents allowed United States citizens to believe in what a presidency could be.

I believe that the establishment of a President of the United States was a necessity in order to promote the smooth and effective flow of governance. The idea of creating a republic where the people elect representatives and form assemblies to govern is a noble idea but without a central executive officer an assembly will not function properly. As the text states the initial confederation government struggled with foreign relations and in dealing with foreign heads of state due to the lack of a singular voice. I believe that a singular voice at the executive level is a necessity for the stability of governance and this stability is why I believe that we have a President. 

The danger in investing power in an executive branch to achieve stability of government is the potential for the individual to abuse the power given to them. The founders recognized the need for the stability of an executive officer and sought to balance that need with protections against the individual usurping power. The solution was to give the newly created President enough power to address the flaws that the government had while at the same time limiting their authority in such a way that power could not be pulled from the people. The important concept was that the executive would be given specific powers and not general powers. General powers allow for the individual to mold and shift the government in a way to promote self-interests and the promotion of a powerbase. 

I believe we also need a President in the role of commander and chief. Countries which do not have civilian control over the military run the risk of a junta. The President, as the dually elected representitive of the people ensures that the people are in control of the military aparatus. If the president is necessary for the stability of foreign policy and the control of the military it could be said that the office of the President is then a force of stability within the overall government. 

To me the presidency is the ‘face’ of the American people. In other words, apart from the President’s functional role in the government the office serves as a symbol of the government itself. When people abroad envision the government the image of the presidency comes to mind. In some cases this can be an image of hope and inclusion which promotes the ‘American dream’ and at other times it can be a divisive image. Whatever the occupant of the office presents in terms of character it is important that the citizenry of both the nation and the world have that image to look to. Thus, the office to me represents stability as well as an image which can promote justice and equity.