Dual Executive :: essays research papers

Dual Executive/PresidentThe idea of an elective head of state for the American chief executive,in its conception, was or so without precedent. The idea of an American dualpresidency, split between domestic and foreign arenas is itself withoutprecedent. A dual presidency would suit America well due to the pressures ofthe mightiness of President of the United States. As Commander-in-Chief, thePresident bears incredible pressures and responsibilities. The President notonly has power in the United States, provided also tremendous bow throughoutthe world. It is not arrogant to change the presidency in order to manageAmericas vast interests all over the globe. The US is certainly not isolationistic anymore, so creating an office for a foreign affairs executive issimply realistic. Thus, the President is not only torn between domestic andforeign responsibilities, but s/he must find time to campaign. A dual presidencywith a domestic and foreign leader could divide these campaigning dutie s. Inaddition, a dual presidency is better adapted to handle simultaneous crises. Adual presidency is a modern day answer to the realities of the Americanpresidency.Essentially, the idea of a dual executive is rooted in the concept of aplural executive. Back in the time of the writing of the Constitution, someanti-federalists precious a weak executive. This weak executive was called aplural executive or an executive council. (Storing 49) The purpose of such aplural executive was not only to weaken the executive, but also to prevent amonarchy from ruling. In fact, an anti-federalist named Randolph opposed anexecutive-of-one so much that he believed it to be the foetus (fetus) of themonarchy.(Storing 93) Yet straight off the threat of monarchy is laughable.The proposed dual executive has no intentions of weakening that branch.Rather, a dual executive makes the branch more efficient, focused, and in touch.Plural is not a fitting circumstance for the dual executive. This is because ap lural executive implies several office holders, or a committee. The more people,the more chaos and disunity occurs.In the 70th chapter of The Federalist Papers, Alexander Hamilton do acase for an executive with a great deal of unity. If power was concentrated in asingle chief magistrate, then the branch would be more cohesive. Hamiltonrelied on the failures of plural executive in the history of Rome and Greece tomake a case against executive councils.Some may argue that by dividing the executive office, it saps the energyand vigor required of the job. Inversely, it can be argued that the Presidenthas so much to do that his energy is weakened by simply world spread too thin.