Refitting the Presidency to the Constitution

[G_j]

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/05/18/9032/

Published on Sunday, May 18, 2008 by CommonDreams.org

Refitting the Presidency to the Constitution
by David W. Orr

The 44th president will assume office with powers greatly enlarged by his or her predecessor. Drawing on recent precedents, the next president could launch preemptive wars with only minor interference from Congress, ignore the ancient right of habeas corpus and imprison political enemies, spy on American citizens without serious legal restraint, use practically any federal agency for political purposes, manipulate the press in ways inconceivable prior to 2000, corrupt the federal justice system for political gain, destroy evidence in criminal cases, use the Justice Department to prosecute members of the opposing party, offer lucrative no-bid government contracts to friends, expand the creation of private security armies, use torture, create secret prisons, assassinate inconvenient foreign leaders, circumvent laws with signing statements, and a great deal more. Such things are now possible because the system of checks and balances carefully written into the Constitution and explained in great detail in the Federalist Papers were weakened as a result of historical circumstances of the 20th century, but systematically and with great forethought by the administration of George W. Bush.

Said to be necessary in order to protect the country from terrorism, the expansion of presidential authority in truth was carried out by neo-conservatives who in the smoke and ashes of 9-11 smelled opportunity. The result is James Madison’s worst nightmare: the unification of once carefully separated powers of governance — executive, judicial, legislative — in the hands of a single faction along with substantial control over the press, radio, and television and an extensive police and surveillance apparatus he would have loathed.

The surreptitious and perhaps fraudulent manner by which presidential powers were recently expanded has greatly diminished trust and respect for the office at home and abroad. But unless explicitly repudiated by the next president and prohibited by law, the precedents of the Bush presidency will stand. The expanded powers of one president typically are carefully guarded by their successors. Republican or Democrat the next president will be advised to distance the office from the more controversial actions of George W. Bush, but only as a matter of expediency, not for reasons inherent in the Constitution or the law. If so, we will have crossed the line into executive tyranny.

Acquiescence in the unlawful enlargement of presidential power is neither right nor necessary. The next president would be well advised to support the appointment of a special prosecutor to thoroughly investigate the possible illegalities involved in the recent expansion of presidential power not to exact political revenge, but as the first step toward recalibrating the presidency to the Constitution. Second, he or she should appoint a Blue Ribbon panel of experts in Constitutional Law and the presidency to make recommendations to Congress about the restoration of the office.
..more..

[L. Coyote]

1. Should be entitled "The Treasonous Abuse of Our National Tragedy for Political Profit"

or some such. Ideas?

[G_j]

4. Treason, will work,

nothing "ous" about it. Treason it is..
:-)

[annabanana]

2. bookmarked. . I don't care WHO the next pres is.. If He or She doesn't

loudly and emphatically and thoroughly put a nail in the coffin of the Unitary Executive I will OBJECT

[G_j]

3. they MUST!

but I fear they won't, :-(

[snot]

5. Everyone, as many of us as possible shd forward this to as many as possible,

including but not limited to media types like K.O. et al.

Really well one, and very impt. -- thanks, G-j!

[unblock]

6. a somewhat facile analysis. it's foolish to ascribe shrub's powers to the presidency

and pretend that the new and expanded powers he/cheney have enjoyed will somehow stick to the institution they occupy.

they didn't get the powers from the office, and the vast majority of those powers won't stay there.

they got those powers by, as the article describes, but having a common faction control all the major levers of government -- judicial, legislative, and executive, plus the media. the checks and balances "worked" in the sense that none of the braches did anything the others didn't really agree with. the problem was america's diverse range of views wasn't adequately represented in those institutions.

as soon as a democrat is president, believe me, he will NOT have the power to imprison or spy on political opponents. we'll quickly return to a proper divided government. partly because this is the philosophy of the democrats and partly because democrats will not have the kind of concentration of power the republicans have enjoyed.

once could argue that democrats might have had this level of power, say, during the fdr years. perhaps there were some excesses of sorts. this is in the nature of having an imbalance in representation.


the only powers that will stick are the ones both parties can agree on. spying on political opponents will not be among them.

[G_j]

7. worth a K