why do we have a president

why do we have a persident when he is so weak

all he can do is comand the amed forces(and hes sucking at it)ane pass and veto bills(and if he vetos it it can still be passed by the house)

and if he can do more i frogt about it

To distribute watches to needy Albanians ?

Umm as an outsider I think the US presidential system is flawed. In other republics the President is more apolitical and it is the Prime Minister who pushes policies. The presidential role ought to be non partisan.

Originally posted by TheBaldEagle
why do we have a persident when he is so weak

all he can do is comand the amed forces(and hes sucking at it)ane pass and veto bills(and if he vetos it it can still be passed by the house)

and if he can do more i frogt about it

The editorial comments are, IMO, out of place in a post asking about Presidential power...I'm not saying that they're *wrong*, mind you, just that they really don't relate to the main topic of your post. That said, you have a talent for understatement. Even if "all" he could do was to command the Armed Forces of the United States, that, in and of itself would make him a very powerful man indeed. Add to that the 'power of the pen", to enable or veto bills by the affixing or denying of his signature, and you have, in addition to his military role, given him a check on the entire power of the Legislative branch of the government. Those two powers alone would make it a powerful office, if you stop and consider their ramifications.

Since you seem curious, though, (and I'm in the mood to type a bit, as a break from packing), here's a link to the text of Article II of the Constitution of the United States. Article II has the answer to your question, since it defines the Executive Branch and the office of the President.

Article II of the Constitution

If you aren't in the mood to read the rather stilted language, I'll give you a quick list of Presidential powers, in the order they are defined (in Article II, Section II).

1) The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States
As mentioned above, this is one of the defining powers of the office, and a substantial power in its own right.

2) he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices,
As the head of the Executive Branch, everyone in that branch is answerable to the President. If you've ever been called into the boss's office (or the Dean's office, or the Principle's office, you know what kind of power / threat that is).

3) he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.
The President has the authority to overturn a judicial verdict, in plain English.

4) He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;
The President has the power to negotiate treaties, even though the Senate has to ratify them. Essentially, the President speaks for the entire U.S. in a diplomatic sense.

5) he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.
The President gets to pick Ambassadors, which has a definite impact on our foreign relations. He also gets to pick (within limits) the Justices of the Supreme Court, who, in turn, effect the way laws are interpreted, possibly for years after the President who appointed them is gone.

6) He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union,
He has the right and the responsibility to give a 'state of the union' address.

7) and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.
He can bring items before Congress, and, if they can't set a date of adjournment, he can actually send them home. He also receives foreign ambassadors, and issues commissions to military and civilian government officers.



[edit on 14-6-2007 by Brother Stormhammer]

i think we should completely go with a system more like the roman republic's executive power. two consuls. sure... we have a president and a vice president, but they're both in league with each other in the modern system.

Well originally we did. The second place winner in a presidential election was made the vice-president. Often that meant people that truely hated each other would be a heartbeat away from the big chair. It quickly opens the door to speeding up that last heartbeat. Take JFK and Nixon. Think old Tricky Dick would have let JFK have a long lived and fruitful presidency?

One of the most interesting powers is number 7. Bush has full constitutional power to walk into Congress and tell them all to get out and go home. He could have done it over the war spending budget that demanded manditory removal date for the troops. He could do it over the "non-amnesty" amnesty bill that he is begging not to be swept under the rug.

What makes it so interesting is that nothing in the Constitution provides for a balance to it unless that action was challenged under the 10th Ammendment. Meaning the states or more likely the people would exercise their retained power to stop it. The reason I say it would likely be a power of the people is because all of government constitutional power is granted by the people who do have the right and power to revoke it at any time for any reason. (preamble, 10th, 1st, 2nd Ammendments)

A good link

In a system with a Prime Minister, that is the equivalent of a Vice president, but one who does not need to be elected on the "President's ticket."

It would be hugely beneficial for reform in USA if the leader of the ruling party in Congress were the Vice President. That position should have a variety of powers separate from and not subjugated by the President's office.

Then you would start to see some real democracy. My suggestion is that under this model the Armed forces should be controlled by the Congressional VP and the President have only a power of veto over the Armed forces.

Because in 1776, Amercia wanted to be independant, and not under direct rule from Great Britain.

It's about checks and balances. Would you want to give even more power to a president to just enact new laws with out debate?

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Well originally we did. The second place winner in a presidential election was made the vice-president. Often that meant people that truely hated each other would be a heartbeat away from the big chair. It quickly opens the door to speeding up that last heartbeat. Take JFK and Nixon. Think old Tricky Dick would have let JFK have a long lived and fruitful presidency?

Bad example, since (at least according to some sources) Johnson didn't let JFK live through a long and fruitful presidency.

One of the most interesting powers is number 7. Bush has full constitutional power to walk into Congress and tell them all to get out and go home. He could have done it over the war spending budget that demanded manditory removal date for the troops. He could do it over the "non-amnesty" amnesty bill that he is begging not to be swept under the rug.

Actually, the check on the power to dismiss Congress is written into the same clause that grants the power...it can only be invoked if the Congress cannot agree among its members on a date of adjournment. I can't think of a time that power has been invoked, but I can think of a situation where it might be needed...a filibuster that has enough support to keep a movement to adjourn from reaching the floor.

[edit on 14-6-2007 by Brother Stormhammer]