“We need powerful leaders, we fear powerful leaders (Monroe, p.365),” This quote explains exactly how I feel when I comes to the president’s powers, The debate between the president having expansive or restrictive power is a difficult one, they both have their strengths and weaknesses. Although, if I had to choose, I think the safest option for our country would be to keep the president with restricted powers. To be fair neither option is a perfect one they both have their flaws. I understand why people would want the president to have expansive powers, for example in an issue of national security. Forcing every decision to go through congress can be slow or impossible to get anything done, therefore putting us at a threat in any situation that has a time constraint. Although congress is a slower process then allowing the president the power to make a decision by himself, I would still rather keep a restrictive power to the president. I worry that …show more content…
William Howard Taft feared, “Ascribing an undefined residuum of power to the President, is an unsafe doctrine and that it might lead under emergencies to results of an arbitrary character, doing irremediable injustice to private right (Taft, The President and His Powers)” The framers needed something to unify the states in order to help people identify as one country rather than separate states. They decided having a president was a proper solution. They needed the president to play a ceremonial role more so than a leadership role. That’s the reason they gave the president so little power, because they feared too much power resting in a single person. George Washington put it this way, “A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position (Washington, Farewell Address)” Another reason I strongly believe that restrictive power is a better option is because the likely hood of us needing the president