“If ever there was a philosophy of government totally at war with that of the Founding Fathers, it is the current worship of powerful executives.” – Barry Goldwater, 1964
“[Congress has attempted] to limit future presidents so that they would not abuse power the way it was alleged some had abused power in the past… [failing] to help presidents accrue power in the White House – so that they could achieve good works in the society.” – Dick Cheney, 1984
George Washington, as President, was commonly refered to simply as “Chief Magistrate.” George W. Bush was described by a national newspaper, shortly after 9/11, as the “Nation’s Pastor.”
As the office of President has evolved – encompassing (in the minds of Americans at least) the responsibilities of national counselor, economic sage, world wide philanthropist, faith-healer, and guardian angel – admiration and promotion of the “unilateral executive” has reached it’s zenith in the presidency of George W. Bush. Bush has seized the right to ignore many of the key tenants of our Constitution “while we are at war,” simultaneously embarking on a “war on terror” with no defined or measurable endpoint. With the help of a complicit congress, he has granted himself the power to have an American citizen arrested as an “enemy combatant,” whisked away under military authority, and esconced from the world, with no access to legal counsel. He has declared, again and again, that under extreme circumstances (defined by himself or successive office holders) the President can bypass the Constitution in the name of America’s best interests. With the use of signing statements and executive privilege, he has extracted himself from the rule of law.
But these abuses noted, Bush is by no means solely to blame for the notion of President as “King.”
Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, using both war and peace as an excuse, advanced the notion of the authoritarian presidency. Harry Truman believed, much like our current president, that in times of emergency, and in the interest of national security, the executive branch need not bend to congressional oversight or constitutional restrictions. As president, he attempted to seize and nationalize private industries key to the war effort (in this case, privately owned steel mills), a battle the went to the Supreme Court, who ruled against Truman on constitutional grounds. Nixon believed American’s had no right to know what happened behind closed office doors, and that “if the President does it, it’s legal.” Even Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton embraced the idea of a more powerful and unchecked executive branch, with help and even encouragment from Congress.
In the book The Cult of the Presidency, CATO scholar Gene Healy opens with a story from the recent primaries, in which Mike Huckabee is quoted saying: “America needs positive, optimistic leadership to kind of turn this country around, to see a revival of our national soul.”
Healy asks, what office did he think he was running for?
As I’ve watched the debate here at KVNU’s For The People play out over Rocky Anderson’s appearance on the show earlier this week, and the congressional hearing over impeachment and executive power, I thought it important to interject what I hope is a little perspective into the debate.
Regardless of how you feel about the argument Rocky makes, or the idea of impeaching George W. Bush for war crimes itself, it is unavoidably obvious that the very nature of the executive branch is changing from that intended by the founders, who made great strides to avoid the monarchical system of kings and queens they fled in search of freedom.
Neither of our current candidates have offered more than a brief (and vague) promise to address the matter if elected. Congress (outside of a few hearings) seems to have no intention of doing so. But we are still faced with choice between addressing this issue now, or accepting a unitary executive branch, the loss of our system of checks and balances, and the dissolving of our system of representation in lieu of an all powerful President, bound not by legislation or constitution.
It won’t stop unless we demand it.
-Jason