This paper summarizes the book by David Nichols, in which he examines the office of President of the United States.
David Nichols takes as his basic tenet the idea that it is time to examine the notion that the power of the modern Presidency is so vast that it has outgrown the limits imposed on it by the Constitution. (P. 2).
The result of this growth is the myth of the modern Presidency. But there are problems: “Like most myths, the myth of the modern Presidency is not without foundation … [B]ut like most myths it is ultimately unsatisfying because it distorts reality … [and] it has been accepted largely on faith.” (P. 2).
Nichols’ book approaches the modern Presidency from a more scholarly viewpoint.
He begins with this observation:
“The myth of the modern Presidency prevents us from seeing the theory of the constitutional Presidency. It severs the connection between effective presidential leadership and the idea of a constitutional government. The purpose of this book is to restore an appreciation of that connection.” (P. 10).
Nichols begins by examining the Presidencies that he considers “modern”—and his list includes not only Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) (the President some scholars consider the first truly “modern” President in the terms which are defined in the book), but also Lincoln and Washington. (P. 13).
Perhaps the most important observation Nichols makes is that the beginnings of the “modern” Presidency can actually be found in the Constitution. He says that both Progressives and “restraintists”—a term for those who seek to restrain the power of the Presidency, labor under a false premise: “They share the belief that the constitutional Presidency is a weak Presidency.” (P. 34).
The Essay on Modern Technology vs Books
One of the most important marvels of modern technology is the Internet, which has not just revolutionized the process of information retrieval, but also, dramatically changed the way people seek information. If in the past, people often had to spend so much time and energy going through many pages or sheets of printed media only to seek for specific information, now with the aid of the internet; ...
The belief is untrue, says Nichols: “… the authors of the Constitution intentionally established a strong Constitutional Presidency.” (P. 34).
But there is something that comes into play here that cannot easily be predicted, and that is public opinion. Such opinion cannot be legislated or controlled, and as such it acts as both a check on Presidential authority, and a source of that same authority. When a President is popular, he can often expand his powers and enact legislation that he could not hope to pass if his popularity lessened.
Nichols carefully examines Article II of the Constitution, which specifically describes the office of President of the United States, and the powers pertaining thereto. It also describes the method of “chusing” the President. (P. 35).
Nichols discusses the power granted the Chief Executive; the selection method; the power held by the President as Commander-in-Chief; and other Presidential powers, in minute detail. (Pp. 36-63).
What the reader gathers from Nichols’ work is the realization that the constitutional Presidency as created by the Founders is far more powerful than we imagine, and the figure of the President as the most powerful man in the world is not an image that was created in the latter half of the 20th century.
After establishing the fact of a powerful constitutional Presidency, Nichols further examines the myth of the modern President in the context of the budget process, the veto, and the Presidential war powers.
The budget is such a vast and complex issue that I won’t even attempt to address it here. But Nichols’ point is that the “… the President’s unique national perspective will allow him to set the terms of the budget debate.” (P. 85).
(By “national perspective” Nichols alludes to the fact that the President and Vice President are the only officials elected by a nation-wide vote.) Further, in terms of the deficit, it is the “President’s agenda” that determines whether or not the deficit is addressed or ignored. (P. 85).
The Essay on President Bush Power Machiavelli Nuclear
George Bush and Niccolo Machiavelli are two very influential political figures that share some similar ideals. Machiavelli's work was never intended to be applied to republics, or a democratic government. The advice written in The Prince would have likely been applied in the time of absolute government, when countries were ruled by one leader. It is a work which, as Machiavelli himself says that ...
(Certainly we’ve see the current President using his – until recently – high popularity ratings to drive through bills that have allowed a tremendous amount of deficit spending, thus running up an enormous national debt. He has indeed set the terms of the debate.)
Nichols goes on to “puncture” other myths, showing how the reality of the Presidency is frequently at odds with beliefs about it. In this context he deals specifically with the growth of bureaucracy and foreign policy. In both areas he discusses the Presidency from a historical perspective, then describes the ways in which the actions of earlier Presidents helped to consolidate the power of the office, thus giving the lie to the idea that the powerful modern President is a construct of the mid to late 20th Century.
The Presidency of the United States has been an office of extraordinary power and influence since its inception. That can be a two-edged sword, however:
“The popular executive is perhaps the greatest contribution of the American Constitution to the theory and practice of modern liberal government. It mutes the conflict between consent and effective government. … the President is elected and reelected by the people. Oddly enough, it may be precisely this fact that gives rise to legitimate fears of tyranny. The danger is not that the President would be a king, the danger is that he would be a demagogue.” (P. 62).
An increasingly vocal number of Americans would suggest that the current President has fallen into this trap. Fortunately, the Constitution, the Presidency and the country are no doubt strong enough to survive.
Reference
Nichols, David K. The Myth of the Modern Presidency. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State U. Press, 1994.
