American Presidency

Domestic policy encompasses a variety of policy issues which range from poverty, law enforcement, environmental protection, labor relations among other issues. However, in recent years, the focus in domestic policy has shifted to focusing on health care insurance, stem cell and AIDS research, prescription drug coverage, educational testing and accountability, drilling, logging, welfare reform, gay marriage, affirmative action, homeland security, transportation safety among other issues . Discussions over these issues are usually contentious since the members of the cabinet have control over how they are formulated and implemented.The cabinet was created in order to allow political constituencies considered important an institutional voice in running of the government affairs. The rise of important constituencies and issues necessitate the devotion to domestic policy by agencies. In this regard, the presidents in power have usually coordinated policy development using centralized mech anisms. History of domestic policy over various administrations. Many presidents have long felt that they had limited powers over the domestic policy.During the 1930s, Franklin Roosevelt had a desire to increase control over this policy and began examining the legislation which was being sent by agencies and departments to Congress. This was a process which was known as ‘central clearance' and it was aimed at strengthening the presidency. It achieved this purpose since after sometime, in addition to examining the proposed legislation; the president has the power to examine the executive orders, proposed testimony and enrolled bills. In 1939, there was the creation of the Executive Office of the President.There was also the creation of White House Office, and this ensured that the president had a cadre of personal staff at his disposal. President Truman increased involvement in development of policies, as well as the size of personal staff. Dwight Eisenhower doubled the staff p ortfolios including the White House Office for planning, atomic energy, and agriculture and airways modernization. President Kennedy joined the presidency and undid most of the formal structures that Dwight Eisenhower had developed, though he retained the White House policy development.Lyndon Johnson made sweeping policy changes in the domestic policy and expanded the domestic staff of the White House. He also institutionalized several task forces which consulted within and outside government to seek new ideas. President Richard Nixon transformed the Bureau of the Budget of Office of Management and Budget. This office was designed to help him in management the wider executive branches. New political appointees were installed and they had a higher rank than the career analysts of the agency.The next president, Gerald Ford, eliminated the Domestic Council and created the Economic Policy Board which was also staffed by personnel of the White House. Carter on the other hand sacked five cabinet secretaries, and this undermined the gains which had been made as far as centralized staff was concerned. Ronald Reagan increased control of central domestic budgeting and he defended this decision by explaining the need for urgent budget at the time. This led to an increase in control of the policy development.He also used the White House to create seven cabinet councils and their purpose was to ensure that heads of departments followed priorities of the White House. His model has been retained by subsequent presidents, though it has changed names severally. Under President Bush, it was known as the â€Å"Domestic Policy Council'. President Clinton on the other hand increased the National Economic Council and this was formed to handle issues which did not fit into DPC or NSC jurisdiction. The system was also retained by President Bush, and he increased the composition of the DPC staff to over twenty professionals.Power of President over domestic policy. Currently the Presi dent has limited powers over the domestic policy due to influence from Congress. However, the president can influence the domestic policy through two ways; appointments or reorganization. These ways can be used to gain influence over agencies which the presidency has no prior control over. The presidency can also to a certain extent influence the interpretation of law through directing the agencies on how to interpret bills which have been signed into law, by use of ‘signing statements'.In case legislation is silent or vague on certain matters, the presidency may use executive orders, presidential proclamations or memoranda to shape the implementation of the law. It may shape the law and direct it in a direction which may be different from the one the lawmakers contemplated. For instance, President Clinton used the presidential proclamation to develop a national monument in Utah, on two million acres of land. President Bush on the other hand set up a military tribunal for non- citizen terrorist suspects through an executive order in 2001.Another means which the presidency uses to control domestic policy is through the process of rule-making. The Office of Management and Budget plays the role of reviewing the regulations of the central clearing process. This office has also the power to review draft regulations, especially those which are not favorable to the society. In 1985, an executive order was issued to agencies, requiring them to forward an ‘anticipated regulatory actions' list which was to be reviewed by OMB. Interest groups and legislators grumbled, though Reagan and subsequent presidents have maintained these processes, some of which are stronger.Congress realized this loophole and established statutory power which delayed changing major rules by sixty days, in 1995. During that period, Congress also gave itself power to veto such decisions through joint resolution. In 2001, this veto was used against rules of ergonomics which the Occupatio nal Safety and Health Administration had issued. American Presidency control over foreign policy. The United States foreign policy guides the relationship which the United States has with other foreign nations.It is very influential mainly due to the reason that the United States has the largest economy and that it is the only superpower present . The aim of the US foreign policy is the creation of a prosperous, democratic and secure environment for Americans and the international community. It deals with export controls such as non-proliferation of nuclear hardware and technology, safeguarding US interests abroad, as well as fostering trade and economic relations with other countries. Many people are of the opinion that the American presidency has more control over foreign policy than domestic policy .This especially became clear after the September 11 terrorism attacks against the United States. However, there has been a long conflict between the President and Congress over the ri ght to formulate foreign policy. The main debate has centered on if congress and the Presidency are equal partners in formulation of the foreign policy, or if the Presidency is solely responsible for the formulation of the foreign policy. There is also a debate on whether Congress has the right to enact legislation which controls the flexibility of the Presidency.This struggle for control of foreign policy between Congress and the Presidency began during the world wars after countries began being interdependent. In 1920, Congress challenged the presidential treaty and began being assertive in running the foreign policy agenda. Some people are of the view that the intrusion of Congress in the running of the foreign policy has been disastrous and may have hindered a crucial US role, which may have averted World War Two . War powers. According to the US constitution, the President and Congress share power to declare war against other countries.However, many presidents have not involved Congress when ordering war against other countries which are considered to be enemies of the United States. President Thomas Jefferson dispatched US Naval ships to guard vessels against attacks by pirates without prior Congressional approval. The president later secured support from Congress, though he set a precedent which has been used by many subsequent presidents. Another example is President Nixon and Johnson who although had support from Congress, there was unanimous agreement among Congress that the actions in the Vietnam War had gone beyond those which had been given approval.In 1973, the passing of the War Powers Resolution Act was passed, and it required the president to seek approval from Congress whenever soldiers were about to be put in harm's way . It also stipulated that hostilities should be ended by the President within 60 days, unless war had been declared against another country by Congress, or if the 60 day condition had been extended by Congress. The third exce ption was if withdrawing soldiers after 60 days would cause harm to them. Non military foreign aid.Foreign assistance is a part of the US foreign policy and is under the international affairs budget of the State Department. Some of the components include economic assistance which supports security and political goals, bilateral development aid, multilateral economic contributions and humanitarian aid. In fact, the US is the largest aid donor internationally in absolute dollar terms. Domestic versus international powers. Currently, the United States Presidency has greater power in the international arena, as has been analyzed in the domestic policy and foreign policy above.Due to the resistance by Congress on control over the domestic policy by the Presidency, this marked the beginning of curtailing the President's powers as far as domestic policy control is concerned. It has also been discussed that in 1995, Congress gave itself statutory powers to delay implementation or even rever se unfavorable policies and laws which are imposed by the Presidency. On the other hand, it has been discussed that the US foreign policy was also meant to be controlled by the Presidency and Congress on an equal basis .The opposition to unpopular presidential policies began as early as 1920. However, President Thomas Jefferson set a precedent when he overlooked the mandate of Congress as far as foreign policy formulation is involved. This precedent was followed by many subsequent presidents, as has been discussed in the paper. Other presidents sought the approval of Congress before implementing foreign policy, but once they got this approval, they went beyond the boundaries of the mandate that they had been given. This undermined the role of Congress as far as foreign policy was involved.Currently, it is clear that the Presidency has more control over the foreign policy than over the domestic policy. The domestic policy can only be influenced through appointments and reorganization . This is a very limited form of control over Congress. However, in the foreign policy control, the Presidency can impose policies which go over the mandate of Congress. This illustrates that the American Presidency has more control in foreign policy affairs as opposed to the domestic policy. Arguments against greater international power by US presidents.Some people are of the view that the US presidency should have limited powers as far as foreign policy or international power is involved. One of the main reasons for supporting this argument originates from the track record of previous presidents as far as international power is involved. Many of the previous presidents including Gerald Ford, John Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, George Bush and Ronald Reagan have been accused by many political experts of pursuing American interests as far as capitalist tendencies are involved, and ignoring domestic issues including real democracy and human rights.For instance, President Bush has been accuse d of exploiting international power and waging the war against Iraq, which has cost billions of dollars, yet many people in America do not have access to basic services . The number of people who do not have medical insurance at all, or have limited coverage, is more than two million, and millions others do not have access to decent housing. In spite of this situation, billions of dollars are being spent annually in Iraq and other external military installations, despite opposition from the public.There are also people who are of the opinion that the US foreign policy supports some current and former dictatorial regimes through the foreign policy, and this undermines the gains which have been made through democracy, as well as undermines the human rights agreements. Due to the current financial crisis which faces the United States and other countries of the world, it is very important for the current US President to concentrate more on the domestic policy than international policy, since the economy of the United States is at stake.Summary and conclusion. It has been discussed that the American Presidency has certain influence over Congress in both the foreign and domestic policy affairs. However, the Presidency is able to control the foreign affairs policy more than the domestic policy largely due to the precedent which was set by President Thomas Jefferson. Most people are against the excess control over the foreign policy, especially during this time of the global economic crisis, where the Presidency should be more focused on improving the local economy.It is hoped that the current president will involve Congress in all policy affairs, in order to get through the economic crisis and develop an effective foreign policy. Works Cited. Ambrosio, Thomas. Ethnic identity groups and U. S. foreign policy. Washington: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2002, p 117-122. Barilleaux Ryan J. & Rozell Mark J. Power and Prudence: The Presidency of George H. W. Bush. Texas: Texa s A&M University Press, 2004, p 27-32. DeConde Alexander, Burns Richard Dean, Logevall Fredrik. Encyclopedia of American foreign policy. Washington: Scribner, 2002, p 255-261.May Bernhard, Honicke Michaela, Moore Michaela Honicke. The Uncertain Superpower: Domestic Dimensions of U. S. Foreign Policy After the Cold War. Washington: VS Verlag, 2003, p 29-36. Singh, Robert. American Government and Politics: A Concise Introduction. New York: SAGE, 2003, p 270-275. Sylvan David & Majeski Stephen. US Foreign Policy in Perspective: Clients, Enemies and Empire. London: Routledge, 2009, p 40-46. Wittkopf Eugene R. 7 McCormick James M. The Domestic Sources of American Foreign Policy: Insights and Evidence. New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2007, p 34-38. American Presidency The books Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership, The Presidency In A Separated System, and Debating the Presidency: Conflicting Perspectives on the American Executive attest that in the United States, the president has extensive powers. He or she functions in many capacities on tap. As a separated system, Charles O. Jones says that the American president essentially though the president in the United States is also the chief policymaker and leader of the president’s political party, they share the roles of head of state, head of government, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces (Neustadt, 1991).The president is thus the most unifying force in a political system in which power is highly dispersed, both within the government and between government and the people. The president and advisors also establish and administer national policies in such areas as social security, education, health, civil rights, and air and water pollution (Neustadt , 1991). Because of the importance of the United States in international affairs as the president is the chief diplomat himself, the US presidential race is followed with interest all over the world.Richard J. Ellis and Michael Nelson also point out that as the U. S. politics as a separated system affects the elected president, the US president, as political leader, appoints cabinet and subcabinet officers, federal judges, US attorneys, and ambassadors to important foreign countries and fills several thousand other jobs of varying importance. The president also administers an executive pork barrel or the distribution of federal funds to be spent on public works, military installations, and social programs.The president and advisors also establish and administer national policies in such areas as social security, education, health, civil rights, and air and water pollution. The foremost prize of American politics is granted to anyone who qualifies for the position after a ballot vote . The election of the president of the United States every 4 years is the focal point of the American political process. Because of the importance of the United States in international affairs as the president is the chief diplomat himself, the US presidential race is followed with interest all over the world.The formal qualifications for presidential candidacy, as limited by Article II Section 1 of the Constitution, are that the aspirant must be at least 14-year natural-born resident of the United States and must have reached the age of 35. the 25th Amendment to the Constitution details procedures for presidential and vice-presidential succession when there is a vacancy in either office that the president becomes incapacitated.Should the presidency and the vice-presidency become vacant simultaneously, the Speaker of the House and the president pro tempore of the Senate, in that order are next in the line of succession, followed by members of the cabinet in a specified order. When w ar broke out in 1914, President Woodrow Wilson had announced a policy of neutrality for the United States. This policy was hard to maintain for a number of reasons. Most Americans sympathized with Britain and France because they were democratic countries.It is the exemplary polity of the United States that buttresses the foreign policies established and engaged in by American presidents (Jones, 1994). How much a president is weighed down by either a domestic policy or a foreign policy is a matter of debate. From a pragmatic perspective, the ease of the president’s management of policies is contingent on persistence to the United States’ welfare in the long run. For instance, U. S.military and foreign policies have been progressively maneuvered by the need to guarantee steadfast access to overseas oil, more than ever in the Middle East, and that as American imported oil dependence carries on to ironically strengthen our industries and conflict with some British-dependen t Arab nations, the American forces will ever more find themselves waging war to guard oil-producing zones and supply routes. American leaders have preferred to â€Å"securitize† oil while preserving healthy international relations (Ellis and Nelson, 2006).Foreign policies have also made American presidents wary of their consequences at the local level (Zernicke, 1994). No question about it; the 9/11 incident was the commencement of enlarged hostilities and vigilance as well. Security needs have turned our country into a police state. The bottomline of this is the tight spot between safety of private individuals and the world as a whole (Ellis and Nelson, 2006). Adds Richard Neustadt, the United States is a natural businesswoman too if modern capitalism is any indication. The United States is one of the four huge countries that accounted for more than two-thirds of total world exports.The president truly accustomed to this separated system seems to partake not merely the powe rs but the country’s resources as he welcomes the idea of internationalism because it is what will make most of the Americans’ lives easy however hard it may be for him to sustain the strength of the U. S. dollar in the international market. The American economy has been a symbol of the wealth of a nation. The efforts of our forefathers and present geniuses have created economic values, which drive the presidents to be protective of local interests in the global village (Neustadt, 1991).Historically, as the United States grew stronger economically, its leaders continued to favor a policy of expansion. The rapid growth of industry created a need for markets for American manufactured goods and a need for raw materials (Ellis and Nelson, 2006). Moreover, several prominent Americans believed that expansion would demonstrate American power and greatness. It was the destiny of the United States, they argued, to become a great power, and this meant extending American influenc e to other lands and raising the American flag on distant shores.It may not be easy to carry out foreign policies for a single president that may need to contend with a legion more of leaders in the international arena, but what his painstaking efforts make of his image will be an easy preference for the people that put him in the White House (Neustadt, 1991). Many international allies resented the growing influence and power of the United States. They felt their neighbor to the north had turned from a protector to an aggressor. But by its role in the Caribbean, in particular, the United States revealed its strength as a nation.In only a little more than a century it had grown from an infant republic to a major power in international affairs (Ellis and Nelson, 2006). Richard Neustadt, Charles O. Jones, Richard J. Ellis and Michael Nelson prove that Americans cannot deny the fact that in our political experiences, the successive change in political leadership led to anything but an i mprovement in the lives of the people. The domestic policies had improved education and had built housing, schools, roads, and railways. But on a larger scale, federalism just proves that the American polity is the most influential political event in world history.It provided for the actualization of the ideals and principles of such political thinkers as John Locke, Rousseau, and many others (Jones, 1994). The achievement of independence, adoption of the Constitution, and the creation of the republic served as lessons to other people in their struggle to build their nation. The success of the federal republic proved that individual states could be united under a central government but still free to act in order to solve their internal problems (Neustadt, 1991).We have been living under representative democracy, which basically means that we have elected presidents among a variety of leaders to represent us, to give us voice in forums, and then periodically we have judged well they represented us. American polity, in the very form of the Constitution, gives the world a mindset miraculous in the era of revolutions; that if we value freedom and independence, if we are disturbed by the conformity of attitudes, values, and behavior that bureaucracies often induce, then we may wish to set up conditions and policies that foster uniqueness, self-direction, and human dignity, locally or globally.Works Cited Neustadt, Richard. (1991) Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership. Free Press. Jones, Charles O. (1994). The Presidency In A Separated System. Brookings Institution. Ellis, Richard J. and Michael Nelson. (2006). Debating the Presidency: Conflicting Perspectives on the American Executive. CQ Press.