Your search for: presidency AND war AND powers

Sheffer deals with some of the oldest continuing constitutional problems confronting the American government: the judicial development of presidential war powers, potential constitutional dictatorship, and a wartime constitution. What enhances these problems is the very cryptic language presented by ...

Sheffer deals with some of the oldest continuing constitutional problems confronting the American government: the judicial development of presidential war powers, potential constitutional dictatorship, and a wartime constitution. What enhances these problems is the very cryptic language presented by Article II itself. First, the generalities of Article II are read expansively enough to cover specific presidential actions, while a theory of inherent powers tends to justify the means. This combination of action and theory, Sheffer asserts, presumes that ends and means are determined only by the president. The end result is that presidential action takes on the characteristics of constitutional power.

This study provides a balanced and scholarly analysis of the war powers controversy, a controversy as old as the Constitution and as current as the conflicts in the Persian Gulf and the Balkans. The work examines the debates among the Founding Fathers, Congressional and United Nations resolutions ...

This study provides a balanced and scholarly analysis of the war powers controversy, a controversy as old as the Constitution and as current as the conflicts in the Persian Gulf and the Balkans. The work examines the debates among the Founding Fathers, Congressional and United Nations resolutions, communications between the Executive and Congress, as well as other issues surrounding the use of military force in foreign conflicts. The author considers the impact on the war powers controversy of the ways in which warfare has changed: from conventional to electronic and from major ground force actions to swift air strikes and rapid response troop deployments. Particularly relevant is the author's examination of war powers in the present time of overall world peace but sporadic regional conflict, the context in which the struggle between Congress and the Executive over war-making limits and constraints continues. This work will be of interest to scholars and students alike in American government, politics, and military studies.

Popular interpretations of American government tend to center on the presidency. Successes and failures of government are often attributed to presidents themselves. But, though the White House stands as a powerful symbol of government, the United States has a separated system intentionally designed ...

Popular interpretations of American government tend to center on the presidency. Successes and failures of government are often attributed to presidents themselves. But, though the White House stands as a powerful symbol of government, the United States has a separated system intentionally designed to distribute power, not to concentrate it. Charles O. Jones explains that focusing exclusively on the presidency can lead to a seriously distorted picture of how the national government works. The role of the president varies widely, depending on his resources, advantages, and strategic position. Public expectations often far exceed the president's personal, political, institutional, or constitutional capacities for achievement. Jones explores how presidents find their place in the permanent government and how they are "fitted in" by others, most notably those on Capitol Hill. This book shows how a separated system of government works under the circumstances created by the Constitution and encouraged by a two-party system. Jones examines the organizational challenges facing presidents, their public standing and what it means, presidential agendas and mandates, and lawmaking - how it works, where the president fits in, and how it varies from issue to issue. He compares the post-World War II presidents and identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each in working within the separated system. Jones proposes a view of government that accepts divided government as a legitimate, even productive, form of decisionmaking and emphasizes the varying strategies available to presidents for governing. He concludes with a number of important lessons for presidents and advice on how to make the separatedsystem work better.