Politic assignment 15

Article II and Washington's Farewell Address

Earlier in the semester, we examined Article II of the Constitution which details the Executive Branch.  These first few paragraphs are just to refresh your memory of that discussion.

Article II of the Constitution describes the Executive Branch.  The Executive Branch is led by the president, but he is not the only member of the Executive Branch.  Most government agencies, programs, and departments are included in the Executive Branch.  Keep in mind, the purpose of the Executive Branch is to implement, or execute, the laws.  In order to do that, lots of different government agencies are necessary.  

Below is a link to the exact text of Article II, which also includes how the article has changed over the years.   

Article II of the Constitution  (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Here are a few major highlights from the article: 

· The President is the head of the executive branch and Commander in Chief of the military 

· President is elected for 4-year terms

· Qualifications for president: must be a natural-born citizen and must be at least 35 years old 

· President can choose the individuals who will be in charge of the various government agencies/departments (but they must be approved by the Senate) 

· Has a large role in foreign policy and in dealing with foreign governments 

· Can be impeached and removed from office by Congress

One conclusion we can draw from Article II is that the Founding Fathers wanted a president to have some power, but not  total  power.  They were very fearful of a really powerful president, because they were concerned that he might ultimately want total power and could become a king or dictator.  This is why they created a very strong legislative branch.  

However, they did create a president that had a lot of control in certain parts of the government, particularly relating to foreign policy and national security (this will be VERY important in some of the later pages of the module).  We will also examine a few reasons why the power of the president has grown since the writing of the Constitution.

One thing to ask yourself, as we study the Presidency, is: does the president have too much power?  Or, do we see any "abuses" of his power?  

George Washington's Farewell Address

One of the more interesting addresses given by a president was the 1st president's (George Washington) farewell address.  By "farewell" we mean that it was his speech indicating that he would NOT be running for a third term of office.  Originally, the Constitution did not have term limits for president, so presidents could serve longer than two terms (Franklin D. Roosevelt served much longer than two terms).  Washington served two terms and then voluntarily said he would not seek a third term.  This was important and it set the precedent of only serving 2 terms.  However, this address is also VERY important because of what he has to say about presidential power and threats to the United States.  

Read this summary of his address (Links to an external site.).  You can find the full version of it here (Links to an external site.), and you might want to just skim through the full version.  As you read it, think about what Washington was saying and whether there are similarities today to what he was saying in 1796.  

Modern-Day Presidential Power

In addition to dealing with foreign governments and national security issues, here are some of the other things we can see the president doing (in theory):

· Oversees the Executive Branch: the general purpose of the Executive Branch is to enforce laws.  Meaning, taking the laws made by Congress and actually making sure they are being obeyed and enforced.  The Executive Branch has a good deal of power when it comes to how strictly they enforce some laws instead of others.  The Executive Branch can also prioritize some laws over others (clearly the Trump administration is prioritizing laws regarding immigration).  This prioritization typically reflects what the president feels is most important.  

· Nominate heads of major government agencies: this is called his Cabinet and will be discussed more on a later page. 

· Nominate Supreme Court justices: when there is a vacancy in the Supreme Court (because a justice has retired or died) the president gets to nominate a replacement.  Trump has already been able to nominate two Supreme Court justices (Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh) and both were approved by the Senate (remember the Senate has to approve of presidential nominees).  

· Issue Executive Orders: more on this in a later page

· Influence Congress: the president cannot tell Congress what to do or not do.  He does not have a vote in Congress and cannot actually even introduce a bill in Congress.  However, he does have influence.  He can threaten to veto a bill if he does not like it (and vetoes are VERY hard to overturn).  He can also try to persuade members of Congress to vote a certain way on a bill.  This is particularly significant if the president is popular in the area the member of Congress represents (certainly Trump would not bother trying to persuade most of the members of Congress that represent California, because, for the most part, he is extremely unpopular in this state).  

· Access to the Public: perhaps no one in our country has the kind of visibility that the President has.  He also has great access to the public; meaning, it is easy for him to communicate with the people of the US and the world.  The president will, from time to time, make speeches that are aired on national TV, often during "prime-time."  The President gives yearly State of the Union addresses that are aired on multiple channels.  He has a VERY active Twitter account.  News networks and websites have almost constant coverage of him.  This is a form of power; he is visible in a way that no one else is and has the ability to talk directly to the nation in a way that one else has.  This is also a way that his power has grown; there was no TV, internet, or social media in the 1700s so presidents have not always had this kind of access and power.  

· Pardon power: As stated in Article II: "[The President] shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."  Generally, this means the president can pardon anyone for federal crimes, but not state crimes (we will discuss this difference next week).  The president can order that someone serve less time in jail than they were sentenced to; he can commute a sentence (meaning, end someone's time in jail); or he can delay a sentence.  President Trump has already done this while in office (Links to an external site.).  

· Here's a fun question: "Can the president pardon himself?"  Well...it's not clear.  The Constitution does not provide a clear answer one way or another, so we don't really know.  So if the president were accused of a crime, could he just say "I pardon myself"?  Yes, he potentially could.    

· Here's another fun question: "Can the president be prosecuted for a crime while in office?"  Well...it's not clear, but the answer has generally been "no" and no president has been prosecuted.  The fact that you cannot indict and prosecute a current president seems to be a protection that the president has while in office; the thinking being that if anyone could accuse him of a crime, this might make it excessively difficult for him to do his job.  

· Nuclear weapon usage: here's a pleasant thought, it is VERY easy for the president to use nuclear weapons if he wanted to.  The power to use nuclear weapons lies almost entirely in the president's hands (Links to an external site.).  If the president were to want to use a nuclear weapon, he would not need the approval of Congress or the approval of the military (and the US has a bunch of nuclear weapons (Links to an external site.)).  The idea is that if nuclear weapons needed to be used, it would probably have to be done quickly.  Congress does not do anything quickly, so the one person able to respond quickly would be the president.  This is another obvious example of how the president's power has grown since the 1700s since there were no weapons anywhere close to that capability back then.  

So as we can see, the president does have some important powers and can have a large impact on the country, if not the world.  

Executive Orders

Executive Orders are essentially orders the president gives to the Executive Branch to do something.  Since he oversees the Executive Branch, he has the power to give some direction to people and departments within this branch.  

Some of these orders can be very simple and mundane; the president can just simply tell a department within the government that he would like them to prioritize something, or he can tell a department/agency to go help people that have been impacted by a natural disaster.  Here is a website that keeps track of all presidential executive orders (Links to an external site.).

However, some of these orders can be very impactful, significant, and controversial.  For example, one of the first things President Trump did in office was to issue an executive order that banned people from certain countries from entering the United States (this is often called the "travel ban" or "Muslim ban.") You may remember the chaos this executive order caused, in large part because he surprised a lot of people by doing it very suddenly.  The initial goal was to ban certain people from certain countries from entering the US.  This executive order was stopped in the courts and the Trump administration went through a few different drafts before settling on one that was more "acceptable" to the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the ban (it is currently being enforced).  Here is a timeline of this very controversial executive order (Links to an external site.).  We will discuss the debate over this executive order more in a later page of this module and in another module in two weeks.  

This is certainly not the first controversial executive order.  One of the most infamous executive orders came from President Franklin D. Roosevelt which began the internment of Japanese-American citizens during World War II (Links to an external site.).  This was an extremely ugly period in US history in which the US government rounded-up and essentially imprisoned actual citizens because there was a concern (a completely unfounded concern) that they might be working with the Japanese government.  We will also be examining this in more detail in two weeks.  The image above is the announcement of the executive order. 

One of the interesting debates about executive orders, is how much should the president be allowed to do using them?  For example, Congress did not make a law banning people from different countries from entering the US; the President did that via executive order.  Congress almost certainly would not have done this.  So is it ok that the President did something so drastic, without the approval of Congress?  Is this an example of the president "abusing" his power?  Some would argue "yes," that one person should not be allowed to decide who can and cannot enter the country.  Others would argue that if the president thinks doing this will make us safer and that this is necessary for national security reasons, then it is within his right to control who is coming in.  

So executive orders can be extremely powerful.  They can be overturned by the Supreme Court, so there are limitations.  Also, it should be noted that executive orders can be easily overturned by the next president.  Meaning, if Trump loses in 2020, the Democratic president can basically overturn all of Trump's executive orders (Trump has essentially been doing this to many of President Obama's executive orders). 

The President's Cabinet

The President's Cabinet are his closest advisors and they each represent a government agency or department.  These are the heads of the major federal government agencies. One of the president's powers is that he gets to nominate the heads of these agencies (the Senate has to approve them).  However, there are a few Cabinet positions that are not Senate-confirmable; meaning, the president can just choose whoever he wants for certain positions.  The major agencies/departments are led by someone that is typically called a "Secretary," such as the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense.  The Attorney General is another one of these people and he leads the Justice Department.   

Here's President Trump's Cabinet (Links to an external site.).  

The job of these people is to run their particular government agency and enforce the laws that relate to that agency.  However, since they were chosen by the president, they do have to answer to him to a certain extent and do regularly report to him.  This can be very tricky; how do you balance doing what is right for your agency while also balancing keeping the president somewhat "happy?"  

There is also the idea that these agencies should be somewhat independent; meaning, that their sole purpose should not be to only do what the president wants.  For example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is supposed to investigate federal crimes.  Their job is NOT to only investigate crimes the president wants them to investigate (they are not his personal police force).  However, the Director of the FBI is nominated by the president, so that can create some conflict.  

Members of the president's cabinet can also be replaced/fired by the president.  He does not have to present a reason for firing them nor does he need Congress' approval to do so.  We have already seen the president replace/fire many of the people he had previously chosen to be in his cabinet (Links to an external site.).  The president has already set a record to turnover in his cabinet (meaning LOTS of people have left his cabinet either voluntarily or not).  This kind of turnover has consequences; it impacts continuity and there are often "acting" directors/people in charge while the president choses who should be the new nominee. 

The size of the Executive Branch has grown considerably since the Constitution was written.  Many departments and agencies that exist now did not exist in the 1790s.  For example, the Department of Homeland Security, did not become a federal department until 2002 (in response to the terrorist attacks on 9/11).  To be more precise, there were only 4 departments in the federal government, and in the president's cabinet, in 1789 (those departments were State, Treasury, Defense, and Justice).  Today, there are 15 major departments.  That is a dramatic difference and as the executive branch has grown, so has the president's power and influence (remember, these departments partially work for the president).  This is another example of the growth of presidential power.  

___________________________________________________________________________

There are too many government agencies to discuss all of them, nor would I expect you to know all of them or who is leading each of them.  However, I will quickly mention a few: 

· Justice Department (Links to an external site.) is led by Attorney General William Barr.  This is the agency that deals with federal law enforcement and investigations; more specifically, they attempt at controlling crime within the US and ensuring for punishment for those commit crimes.  This is also the agency that recently investigated the President and whether he was involved with the Russian government to influence the last presidential election (you probably have heard of the Mueller Report (Links to an external site.)).  The president was cleared of charges linking him to the Russian government, but there still remain some questions about whether he hindered the investigation or obstructed justice.  

· State Department (Links to an external site.) is led by the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.  This is the agency that deals with with foreign governments.  Their goal is to develop foreign policies with other governments that focus on diplomacy. 

· Department of Education (Links to an external site.) is led by Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos.  This is the agency that deals with, in theory, promoting student success in all schools, increasing access to education, promoting equal access to education, overseeing federal student loans, and eliminating discrimination in our schools. 

Individuals like these above, and the heads of all of the other agencies, are very important.  They can influence the priorities of their agency and they can decide on what their agency is going to do or not do.  The President will of course have an influence, but the day-to-day operation of these large government agencies is left to the members of his Cabinet.  So knowing who these people are and what they value is very important in understanding what they are doing to do as the heads of these agencies.    

Trump and Presidential Power

Presidents often get accused of wanting too much power or trying to do too much on their own (meaning, without Congress' approval).  A common complaint about President Obama (Links to an external site.) was that he used his executive order power too much and did this to avoid needing Congress' approval.  This is a typical tug-of-war between Congress and the President; Congress wants to make most of the big decisions and they believe it is their job to do so, but the president also wants to make some big decisions and they often get frustrated when Congress takes too long to do something (or doesn't do anything at all).  So some of the complaints made against President Trump are not new or unique to him.  

However, there have been some areas in which the president seems to be testing the limits of presidential power and where questions have been raised whether the president can actually do what he wants to do.  Let's look at some case studies regarding presidential power and think to yourself, do you believe the president should have the ability to do what Trump seemingly wants do to. 

____________________________________________________________________________

Case Study #1: The Wall

We have already discussed this topic this semester.  The basic premise is that the president would like to build a wall (or build some of a wall) along the southern border of the US.  He needs money in order to do this, but Congress has not given him the amount he has requested.  Trump believes Congress is keeping him from doing his job; namely, he should be allowed to protect our national security and he believes this is necessary for our national security.  Recently, Trump has issued an executive order declaring a "national emergency" (Links to an external site.) at the border which will allow him to move money from other parts of our government and use it to help build this wall.  Some see this as an abuse of power and Congress voted recently to stop the president from doing this; however, Trump issued his first veto which means he will be able to move forward in reallocating money to use for building the wall.  

Here is an article discussing this situation and the president's veto (Links to an external site.)

____________________________________________________________________________

Case Study #2: The Travel Ban 

This was briefly mentioned on a previous page, but the travel ban is an excellent case study regarding presidential power and its limits.  To quickly summarize this executive order, Trump initially declared that certain non-citizens trying to enter the US from certain countries were banned.  This ban was initially blocked by the courts using the argument that all of those countries were Muslim-majority countries and that the president was just wanting to make it harder for Muslims to enter the country.  However, the president argued that these countries were "unstable" and that people in those countries potentially posed a threat to the US, and he was doing this to protect our national security.  The Trump administration went through a few more versions of this ban, and changed the countries that were included in the ban; he added some non-Muslim-majority countries like North Korea and Venezuela and took off the list some previous countries.  He did this in order to refute the argument that he was only banning Muslim-majority countries.  Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the ban (it is currently being enforced). 

A big debate in both of these two topics is what is considered to be "national security."  Do people from those countries that are banned actually present a threat to the US?  Is there a national security threat at the border with Mexico?  

_____________________________________________________________________________

Case Study #3: Involvement in Yemen 

This is not a topic that we have discussed, and you are not expected to be very knowledgable about this, but this topic presents another interesting case study of presidential power.  

There is currently an on-going war in the Middle Eastern country of Yemen.  Essentially, there is a rebel group fighting against the government leaders in Yemen.  The government side of the conflict is being supported primarily by Saudi Arabia, but the United States has also been involved and has provided information/intelligence and weapons.  The rebel side is largely supported by Iran, which is a big enemy of Saudi Arabia and the Iranian and US governments have generally not been friends.  Additionally, the US and Saudi Arabia have a close relationship, so the US supporting Saudi Arabia is not surprising.  This is a brutal war and estimates are that 50,000 people have died over the last few years and hundreds of thousands have been negatively impacted. 

Recently, Congress voted to end US involvement in Yemen.  Congress clearly thought the president was doing something inappropriate by keeping the US involved in this conflict.  However, President Trump vetoed this act by Congress, thereby keeping our government involved in this conflict.  Technically, according to Article I, if the US is going to be involved in a war, Congress should authorize that involvement.  However, over the years, presidents have increasingly been using the military in foreign governments even without Congress' approval.  President Trump's argument is that it is his constitutional power to deal with foreign governments and as commander-in-chief he believes that this is a proper usage of the military.  

Here is a good summary of the situation in Yemen and the president's veto (Links to an external site.).  

 

Impeachment and Limits to Presidential Power

There are some important limits to the president's power: 

· The President has term limits; he can only serve a maximum of 2 terms which means he can only be in power for 8 years (remember that Congress has no term limits) 

· Presidential nominees have to be approved by the Senate; the president cannot single-handedly decide on who is running the different agencies of our government.  The Senate has to approve of those nominees 

· The President cannot make laws by himself and does not control the federal budget.  These are things Congress has power over

· Actions taken by the president, such as executive orders, can be overturned by the Supreme Court

IMPEACHMENT 

Impeachment is another very important check on presidential power and it is the process by which the president can be removed from office before his term is over.  Two quick notes about impeachment: one, this process occurs entirely within Congress.  We, the people, cannot vote to impeach the president and the Supreme Court has no role in this process either.  Two, it is a process that involves both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So let's take a look at this process

STEP 1: House of Representatives 

The first step in the impeachment process occurs in the House.  Members of the House would have to write "articles of impeachment" in which they detail what they believe are things the president has done that might justify him being removed from office. 

What are impeachable offenses?  Well...that's not clear.  The Constitution does not give much guidance on what are examples of things the president could do to warrant being removed.  The Constitution does list two things, treason and bribery, as examples, but other than that all it says is that the president can be impeached for "other high crimes and misdemeanors."  WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?!?!  Basically, Congress gets to decide what they consider to be impeachable offenses.  It DOES NOT have to be something criminal; the president can be impeached for just about any reason, but the general idea is that the president should only be impeached for something REALLY bad or a clear abuse of his power (however, there is no clear guidance on what constitutes "really bad"). 

If a majority of the House agrees that the president has done something REALLY bad, then he is impeached.  Does this mean he is removed from office? NO!  Impeachment actually does not mean much; it just means the House believes the president has done something bad.  If a majority of the House does not vote to impeach the president, then this process ends there.  But impeachment does not mean removal from office.  That decision is made in step 2. 

STEP 2: the Senate

If a president has been impeached, then we move to step 2 of the process, which occurs in the Senate.  The proceedings here actually resemble a trial; basically, the president is being put on "trial" (it is not a real trial) in which the Senate gets to decide whether the president should be removed.  Just because he was impeached does not mean he has to be removed.  The Senate may say that while the president did something bad, it was not soooo bad that he needs to be removed from office.  

In order to remove a president from office, 2/3 of the Senate would have to agree to do that.  If a president is removed from office, then the Vice-President becomes president (the Vice-President does not get removed just because the president was removed).  This impeachment process can also be used to remove a Supreme Court justice from the court, and it is the only way to remove a Supreme Court justice.  

TRIVIA TIME!!

Have we ever had a president removed from office by the Senate?????

 

 

 

 

NO. 

Have we ever had a president impeached by the House??????

 

 

 

 

YES. Two.  President Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton were both impeached; however, neither were removed from office.  

Many people think Richard Nixon was impeached, but he resigned before the House could vote to impeach him (it is generally thought that they would have impeached him and likely would have removed him).  President Ford later granted Nixon a pardon which protected him from ever being prosecuted for any crimes he may have committed while he was president (don't you just looove our government!).  

Here is a really interesting article about the impeachment process (Links to an external site.) and it includes some information on why Johnson and Clinton were impeached.  

Below is a good video that discusses this process:

Impeachment (Links to an external site.)

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Impeachment and President Trump

Impeachment is a VERY topical thing to be discussing because the House of Representatives has started impeachment hearings regarding President Trump.  This does not mean that they will vote to impeach him, it just means that they are investigating and are calling people to testify to discuss what they know about the president's possible wrongdoings.  Depending on what is said in the hearings, the House may hold a vote to impeach him and they may ultimately impeach the president (which, as stated above, DOES NOT mean he is removed from office).  

Why are they holding these hearings????

Well, that is a long story and I would recommend looking at these links (Links to an external site.) which have good summaries (Links to an external site.) of what is going on and why the president might be impeached.  

In short, there seems to be two issues the House is looking at: 

1.) Did President Trump ask the president of the Ukraine to investigate former Vice-President Joe Biden and his son?  Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, had been involved with a Ukrainian corporation that has found itself in some controversy.  Joe Biden is running for president and is one of the front-runners to win the nomination from the Democratic Party. So to some people, this seems to be the US president asking a foreign country's president to "dig up dirt" on a political rival of his, which is not a good look and might be an abuse of presidential power. 

2.) Did President Trump withhold aid/money from the Ukraine to compel them to investigate Hunter Biden?  This is a much more serious allegation as it can be seen as either "blackmail" or "bribery."  The US government has provided aid to the Ukraine in the past (hundreds of millions of dollars) and some believe President Trump was going to condition receiving aid on investigating Biden.  To some people, this would be a huge abuse of presidential power. 

What the president actually did is not totally known as of yet, and there is some debate over whether these things are actually worthy of removing the president from office.  As mentioned earlier, we don't have clear guidelines as to what constitutes an impeachable offense, so there is obviously debate regarding whether these things are impeachable.  

I would encourage you to read through the articles above discussing the impeachment situation and formulate your own opinions about what is going on.