Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
A recent story in the New York Times confirms what we've witnessed for quite some time now: that Obama believes that it is the role of the president to lead a revolution in society, the economy, and the political system, but to defer on national security and foreign policy to the other branches of government. From the piece:
One Saturday last fall, President Obama interrupted a White House strategy meeting to raise an issue not on the agenda. He declared, aides recalled, that the administration needed to more aggressively use executive power to govern in the face of Congressional obstructionism.
“We had been attempting to highlight the inability of Congress to do anything,” recalled William M. Daley, who was the White House chief of staff at the time. “The president expressed frustration, saying we have got to scour everything and push the envelope in finding things we can do on our own.”
This completely upends the Framers' vision of the presidency. The Framers thought the chief executive's powers would expand broadly to meet external challenges while playing a modest role at home. They saw Congress, not the presidency, as the main threat to the people's liberties. In a democracy, James Madison wrote in The Federalist, "the legislative authority, necessarily, predominates" because it has access to the "pockets of the people." He warned that "it is against the enterprising ambition" of Congress "that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions."
The initiative to regulate the domestic economy and society--limited as it originally was to have been--rested with Congress. The president was to restrain the legislature when it favored party or special interests over the public good. This was no easy job. To give it institutional backbone, the Framers clothed the presidency with independent elections, consistent pay, and control over the execution of the laws. Still, Hamilton could only hope that when the legislature gave in to demagogues or temporary passions, the president would "be in a situation to dare to act his own opinion with vigor and decision."
The Framers expected the presidency to counterbalance the "impetuous vortex" of Congress. A vigorous executive, Alexander Hamilton wrote in The Federalist, would protect against those "irregular and high-handed combinations which sometimes interrupt the ordinary course of justice" and provide security against "enterprises and assaults of ambition, of faction, and of anarchy" which would emanate from the "humours of the legislature." The great threat to the Constitution, Hamilton wrote, was the "propensity of the legislative department to intrude upon the rights and absorb the powers of other departments" such as the executive branch, the courts, and the states. The president's veto would not only protect the executive's constitutional rights from Congress, he wrote, it would also furnish "an additional security against the enaction of improper laws" and allow the president "to guard the community against the effects of faction, precipitancy, or of any impulse unfriendly to the public good."
Obama has inverted the presidency by transforming it from a check on Congress into a radically extreme agent of domestic change.
- Comment (16)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Sep '10
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
I would slightly edit your final sentence as "...transforming it from a check on Congress into a radically extreme agent of forced change."
Jul '10
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Is there any better reason for people not to sit on their hind ends come Nov???
(That and the SCOTUS)
Apr '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Mark Levin frequently says that we're living in a post-constitutional society.
I used to think that was an exaggeration.
Used to.
Jul '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
This succinctly highlights what an abomination Obamacare has been, because even though its writing was largely tossed to Congress, President Barry knew that the administrative side would implement the conditions and mete out the benefits, and that's all under the purview of presidentially-controlled offices and organizations. Think of how the response would have been had Congress forced Catholic agencies to provide contraception as part of their health care package - those politicians would have had to face their voters at some point on their vote, directly, but instead it devolves to an HHS secretary to create these health care fiats, and howl all you want at congress - the politician can claim they didn't do it, or it goes beyond what they themselves had intended the law to do, etc. The administrative state grows in power, and that's mostly the President's office to command - and Barry's gotten exactly what he wants in HHS and the DOJ, both incompetence and a willful blindness toward enforcing laws on the books.
It's been painfully obvious where this is going. That Barry trots out what looks like 25 year-olds to scold us on whiteboards....
Jul '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Chris Campion:
It's been painfully obvious where this is going. That Barry trots out what looks like 25 year-olds to scold us on whiteboards.... · 0 minutes ago
...shows just how far the administration is willing to push the envelope of the office's power, because it's harder to shrink the office once its power has stretched than it is to stop it before the power stretch happens. This same approach resulted in an unread 2,700 page document that will impact 20% of the country's economy, and it wasn't read by the bulk of Congress for a reason - by ramming it through, the power to truly control health care would be made in the administrative state, and not be subject to Congressional or popular control.
At least not controlled as easily - and that's where we stand. Barry knows how hard it is for the USG to dismantle something once it has been built, and we can point at several Cabinet level positions as evidence of that (HUD, Dept of Energy, Education, etc). We're deep in the soup here, and he's winning.
Dec '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Does anyone know which country's constitution Obama taught at University of Chicago?
If it was the US constitution could the former students file a "class" action suit to recover some of their tuition.
Why is it when people talk about the "living constitution", I think they are trying to euthanize the old constitution and what is living about that.
Edited on April 24, 2012 at 2:51amApr '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Jan '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Mark Steyn had it right, long ago, when he wondered about Obama's essential contradiction ... first, Obama assured us that he truly believes that this is the greatest country in the world.
Second, let's change it!
Dec '10
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
John,
Your argument is cogent but not compelling. The recent behavior over ObamaCare was just beyond this kind of analysis.
The government went to the Supreme Court with a bill which would commandeer 1/6 of the GNP of the Unitied States. THEY DIDN'T EVEN BOTHER TO MAKE AN ARGUMENT! They more accurately whined to the Court to give them whatever they wanted.
The President of the United States followed this travesty with a blatant attempt at destroying the very foundation of the Court by speaking as if Marbury v Madison was up for reconsideration.
This double insult does not constitute recasting the role of the Presidency. It constitutes TYRANNY!
Just another day in Mr. Obama's neighborhood.
Regards,
Jim
May '10
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Chris Campion
We're deep in the soup here, and he's winning. · 47 minutes ago
To quote a famous American hero, "we have not yet begun to fight..."
Oct '10
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Obama's running against Congress. I don't think he'll do anything really significant with executive power--that might lessen the contrast with a "do-nothing" Congress he's running on.
Feb '12
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Thanks for the insightful post.
The irony is that now it's the legislature that is protecting us from the President's full agenda. But the framers didn't imagine the Leviathan Administrative state (all matters of the Executive branch) we have today.
I don't know what all the framers would say if they saw their government all grown up, but it would begin with "What the...?"
Jul '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Remember that the main reason the socialist in charge got checked was because of the tea party and those on it's periphery. I find Obama's comments about finding end runs about his agenda entirely fitting. He is the greatest enemy to freedom our country has seen in 100 years. He will convince people to sell their souls for free abortions and diaphragms and the sheep will bleat their way to the slaughterhouse of entitlements.
Mar '11
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
John Yoo:
Obama has inverted the presidency by transforming it from a check on Congress into a radically extreme agent of domestic change.
It's not like Americans weren't warned - they just chose to ignore the warnings, mesmerized by Mr Obama's baritone voice, ready smile, and sharp-creased pants.
Are Americans wiser now? I dunno.
Edited on April 24, 2012 at 7:24amOct '10
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
The framers never foresaw a day when the leaders (rulers), and many people would embrace the philosophy that they rejected, which now calls itself progressivism. They also never foresaw the day when the rulers, of America, and the intelligentsia would embrace the raging fires of the Enlightenment philosophies of Europe, untempered by the lessons of the Protestant Reformation.
And they never foresaw the day when America's rulers and elites would cease to be a Godly people, and instead, become hostile to the very God Whose blessings covered this nation with good.
We have the consequences of our decisions. We have chosen rulers who promise us the paradise that only God can provide. It is called Utopia, and it is Death.
Apr '12
Re: Obama's Radical Transformation of the Presidency
Someone asked if there were any reason to vote in November.
The Community Organizers know the answer. Voters can replace the President, elect conservative Senators and Representatives and turn toward responsibility, Constitutional government and a better future under the Living God of Creation. But, we must fire President Obama via the voting booth.
Will I support Mitt Romney. I will now. I also suspect with the turn of Primary events that a multitude of Conservatives will.