| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "NATURE LIMITS PRESIDENTIAL POWER": |
|
|
The Nature and Limits of Presidential Power: An Analysis, 1999.
A review of Richard Neustadt's 1964 work," Presidential Power," which examines the real sources and uses of American presidential power.
1,399 words (approx. 5.6 pages), 1 source, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"In his 1964 work, Presidential Power, Richard Neustadt, a former aide of President Harry Truman, examines the power of the President as an individual. Neustadt asserts that the President indeed possesses great power as an individual. For not only does the President have significant formal powers, but the most influential power of a President, asserts Neustadt, is the power of the President to persuade others. Because of this, claims Neustadt, the President must maintain an excellent reputation, both with his political cronies in Washington and with the general public, for the President's power to persuade is reflected in others' perception of him. Throughout the book, Neustadt refers to three main examples to analyze the nature of Presidential power. His first example is President Truman's 1951 dismissal of General MacArthur, Truman's 1952 seizure of the steel mills, and Eisenhower's 1958 dispatching of forces to secure the integration of Little Rock's schools. "
| |
|
?Presidential War Power?, 2002.
This paper discusses the War Powers Act of 1917 based on Louis Fisher?s book ?Presidential War Power?.
3,015 words (approx. 12.1 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 88.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reports the history of the power of the presidents to declare a state of emergency and to wage war based on the book ?Presidential War Power? by Louis Fisher.This paper explains that the concept of presidential War Powers stands in contrast with the ideas of the framers of the Constitution, who believed that Congress and the President should make the decision to wage war jointly. The author reports that Fisher argues that the War Powers Resolution needs revisiting; that Congress is never conferred with when the United States is involved in military actions.
From the Paper
"International policy continued to be dictated by Congress: although the President was responsible for the army and navy. In some cases, the President would maintain an activist foreign policy, setting an agenda that would be succinctly approved by Congress. This was the case during the Mexican-American War, when President James K. Polk ?notified Congress that ?war exists.?? Calhoun, the most prominent Carolinian politician of the day, was one of the few dissenters. His response was: ?I distinguish between hostilities and war, and God forbid that, acting under the Constitution, we should ever confound one with the other.? (Fisher 32) That members of Congress might even remain this level of circumspection even when the continental United States was attacked by an invading foreign power gives one some impression of the keen grip Congress wished to maintain on war-making authority."
| |
|
Presidential War Powers, 2005.
This paper discusses the doctrinal development of presidential powers in times of war.
5,750 words (approx. 23.0 pages), 32 sources, $ 135.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews the doctrinal development of war powers held by the President as Chief Executive. The author examines legislative war powers enactments, executive war powers initiatives and judiciary war powers-related decisions. The paper focuses on Supreme Court decisions.
From the Paper
"The Constitution of the United States makes the president Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces but does not give to this chief executive unlimited authority to declare war."
| |
|
Presidential Powers, 2007.
The paper explores the power of the US executive branch of government and looks at how it should be limited it.
1,805 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 58.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how the executive branch of government has slowly and steadily provided itself with increasing amounts of power for the past five years, since September 11. The paper looks at three options that would curtail the presidential powers. The paper maintains that the best scenario is to have the power and responsibility of homeland security moved entirely to the National Guard with a mandate that the three executive branches of government have to approve of and sign off on any decision to declare war.
Outline:
Introduction
How It Happened
How To Get It Done
How To Do It
Conclusion
From the Paper
"From the inception of America, society has held the executive branches of government responsible for its use of power. There have always been checks and balances in place to prevent one branch from having more power than the other branches with respect to their place(Ginsberg), however the events of 9-11 has created many changes in governmental power and today many grass roots groups are concerned that the presidential executive branch has worked to provide itself with an unbalanced amount of power. Today the executive branch has a significant amount of influence and power over the other governmental branches. This was done in a step by step process using America's fear and anger at being attacked on American soil, but the end result was an overabundance of power being given to the presidential office without anyone for it to answer to."
| |
|
Russian Presidential Power and Democracy, 2005.
An overview of the powers of the Russian presidency and their implications for democracy.
2,780 words (approx. 11.1 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 82.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper gives an overview of some of the powers at the disposal of the president and how they have created serious implications for the development and consolidation of democracy. It starts with a brief discussion about the Soviet Union's legacy and contribution to the Russian presidential system. It also looks at how the presidency arose in Russia and covers Yeltsin's presidential abuses and powers as well as Putin's.
From the Paper
"Powerful executives have traditionally been at the helm of Russian politics. The tsars were at the peak of a steep pyramid of power, only God superseding their authority. Willerton (39-40) contends that the custom of having a strong executive head-ing the country bled over into the Soviet period, with execu-tives like Stalin, Khrushchev, and Brezhnev occupying much of their time with the purpose of consolidating power within the party-state system. The General Secretary of the Communist Party was the country's senior-most executive, holding broad powers of supervision over other secretaries and subordinate bodies."
| |
|
The Cuban Missile Crisis and Presidential War Powers, 1995.
Two essays. The first analyzes Kennedy's decision to use a blockade during the Cuban Missile Crisis. The second examines the historical background and legal questions surrounding the Presidential use of war-making power.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 3 sources, $ 95.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"Kennedy's Decision to Use a Blockade in the Cuban Missile Crisis
During fifty years of the Cold War between the United States and Cuba, the single incident which brought the world closest to nuclear conflict was the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. In the decades since that missile confrontation, historians and political scientists have debated whether the tactics employed by President Kennedy to resolve this dangerous crisis were the most beneficial for the United States in the long run. One of the most controversial tactics used by Kennedy was an air and naval blockade in the waters surrounding the Cuban island. In the short term, it is difficult to argue that this tactic was not the most effective means of resolving the crisis. After all, Soviet cargo ships carrying missiles and components turned back before challenging the US Navy's quarantine line, thus opening the door ..."
| |
|
The Presidential Pardon Power, 2006.
This paper discusses the media's criticism of the use of the presidential pardon.
1,121 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 5 sources, APA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores the criticism and support major newspapers have given toward the use of the presidential pardon. The paper discusses how newspapers focus on the unilateral power of the pardon, its inconsistency with the normal checks and balances structure, the effects of the pardon, differing interpretations of the Framer's intent and potential external influences on the decision-making process involved.
From the Paper
"The unilateral nature of the pardon power gives the President certain privileges that also raise many concerns. The President may exercise executive privilege in regards to providing any information, counsel, or notes that are part of the decision making process using the exemption to the Freedom of Information Act. Newspapers have criticized this practice stating that the public should have a right to this information. Also, critics argue that many of the documents are never viewed by the President and are gathered outside the White House (Bumiller, 2002). In more recent years, President George W. Bush has been criticized for not releasing information related to President Clinton's pardon of Marc Rich. The Bush administration's decision not to release the information was attacked by the major newspapers. Critics alleged it to be an attempt to protect the institution and preserve the unilateral nature of the power to pardon and the process involved (Savage, 2002)."
| |
|
President Clinton and Limitations of Presidential Pardon., 2002.
Discusses President Clinton and his abuse of presidential pardons as President of the White House.
2,400 words (approx. 9.6 pages), 5 sources, $ 89.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The main focus of the analysis is to argue against the fact that, as a country that stands against monarchal styled privileges by a single and very powerful member of government, President Clinton should not have the ability to abuse these powers and act selfishly in their use.
| |
|
Presidential Powers In Foreign Policy, 1987.
Discusses the changing role & power of chief executive since WWII & Cold War in Vietnam, Latin America, Bay of Pigs, Iran-Contra affair and War Powers Act.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 7 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This study will examine the powers of the President in the realm of foreign policy.
As Mc Cracken writes in The President?s Powers, ?Many observers trace the recent trend toward presidential prominence in foreign affairs to President Franklin Roosevelt and World War II? (34).
Although, as Mc Cracken goes on to point out, the President has exercised considerable power in foreign affairs since George Washington?s reign, it was indeed not until World War II and the Cold War that the President has been granted or has simply taken the kind of control in foreign affairs which has resulted in catastrophes which have scarred every President since that time.
As Mc Cracken adds, it was the Vietnam War era which brought into the forefront the struggle between Congress and the(...)"
| |
|
Presidential Pardon Power, 2007.
A look at the US president's power to grant pardon.
1,523 words (approx. 6.1 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 50.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a discussion about the pardoning powers of the United States president. The paper explores the general powers to pardon that are given to the president and the controversies that have come up with regard to that power over the years.
Outline:
Introduction
The Power
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Throughout the years presidential pardons have sparked intense controversy. Issues such as Richard Nixon deciding to pardon Jimmy Hoffa, and then the public later finding out that Hoffa had previously made several illegal contributions to the Nixon campaign fund gave rise to scrutinizing the pardon power of the president.
Later president Gerald Ford riled the public once again when he publicly pardoned Nixon for any federal crimes he may have committed while he was president. Ford did this when Nixon was not even under any indictment which sparked an angry outcry from public officials and residents alike. "
| |
|
Presidential and Congressional Powers, 2002.
This paper investigates the powers vested in the Congress and the President of the United States.
780 words (approx. 3.1 pages), 2 sources, MLA, $ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how the powers between the President and Congress are defined in the U.S. Constitution. The paper begins with an overview of the powers of the Executive Branch as outlined in Article II of the Constitution. This is followed by a detailed discussion of the Legislative Branch's exact powers and discusses why the process is divided into three forms of legislation. The paper also discusses that the reason so much power was given to Congress was to guarantee that the needs of the people were adequately addressed and respected. This basic philosophy is one of checks and balances, where the Congress can make the laws, but it is only the President, or Executive Branch that can enforce these laws in order to insure that the country remains a democracy.
From the Paper
"Where Congress can fund and form a military, the President is the Commander in Chief of all the armed forces. As such, he has the power to decide when and were military forces are sent and how they are employed. The significance of this power has been demonstrated in conflicts from Vietnam until now where the President has routinely utilized military powers to assert American will around the world without first getting the approval of congress. The President also has the power to grant reprieves and pardons, to make treaties, to create and manage agencies that form the various functional enforcement system (enforcement of legislation). The President is granted the power to appoint, under congressional review, individuals to the cabinet (Federalist Papers 67-77)."
| |
|
Presidential Abuse of Power, 2002.
An over of the use and misuse of executive power in recent American history.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 4 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper compares the events that occurred in the Watergate and the My Lai scandals with those of the more recent Iran- Contra holocausts in Central America. The main theme of this paper is that while Nixon was chastised for an abuse of executive power during his administration, such abuses have continued since those controversial events.
| |
|
Theodore Roosevelt: Presidential Prerogative Powers, 2001.
Shows how, at the transition between the old and the modern Presidency, Roosevelt began to mold and expand the president's role.
2,611 words (approx. 10.4 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 78.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Theodore Roosevelt played a role in expanding the president's powers (prerogative powers), especially in the international arena. It analyzes the various methods TR used to expand his office's powers, including fear tactics, executive agreements, appealing to the public during press conferences and a lot of good public relations so that his words spoke much louder than his actions.
From the Paper
"One of Roosevelt's (self-proclaimed) major accomplishments was making the building of the Panama Canal possible. In 1903, the government of Colombia refused to ratify an agreement to permit the US to begin construction of a canal. Roosevelt wasn't going to give up on the canal and he even considered simply taking possession of the isthmus with the help of the military. Instead, he took a less drastic, though still outrageous, route - he encouraged Panama to secede from Colombia, and ordered the US navy to prevent Colombian warships from putting down the revolt. Roosevelt then promptly recognized the new nation of Panama, and negotiated an agreement with the new country that granted the US a zone in which to construct a canal. Roosevelt's actions with Colombia excluded Congress from its constitutionally assigned responsibilities in matters of war and peace. And they also increased the president's power in foreign matters."
| |
|
Presidential Powers, 1992.
A constitutional definition and restrictions including the relationship with Congress and examples in domestic and foreign policies.
2,925 words (approx. 11.7 pages), 7 sources, $ 103.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This study will present an analysis and discussion of Presidential power and its limits in the government of the United States.
There are certain powers which are spelled out in the Constitution with respect to the President with more specificity than other powers. The creators of the Constitution wanted to make sure that the President had enough legal power to be able to serve effectively as the leader of the Executive branch and the initiator of domestic and foreign policy. On the other hand, they wanted to make sure that there were limitations on the powers of the President in order to prevent him from accruing to himself and the Executive branch so much power that the delicate balance of power (particularly with respect to the relationship between Congress and the President) was upset."
| |
|
Presidential Power, 2006.
Discusses the contention that the opposite of progress is Congress.
1,125 words (approx. 4.5 pages), 3 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the contention that the opposite of progress is Congress and then explains that the contention gives the impression that Congress is a toothless body, unable to effect any meaningful change. The paper then goes on to present arguments that refute this general perception.
From the Paper
"Indeed, as pointed out by Wilson, there is a widespread perception among Americans that Congress has been losing power to the US president since the 1930s. Certainly, the impression created by the media is that the US President - such as the current President Bush - is immensely powerful. However, this belief is..."
|
|
|
