In Nurturing the Imperial Presidency, Brien Hallett asks, "Why have national war leaders always decided and declared war?" Because they have always controlled the drafting of the declaration of war. Ways to remove this control are explored; alternatives are proposed.

A selection of articles taken from Society magazine.

Publisher Description

Documents the various abuses that occurred during the Bush Admin. relating to the House Judiciary Committee¿s review and jurisdiction, and to develop a comprehensive set of recommendations to prevent the recurrence of these or similar abuses in the future. Contents: Preface: ¿Deconstructing the Imperial Presidency,¿ which describes and critiques the key war power memos that gave rise to the concept of broad-based, unreviewable, and secret presidential powers in time of war. Also describes specific abuses of the Imperial Presidency relating to Judiciary Comm. inquiries. Includes a comprehensive set of 47 policy recommendations designed to respond to the abuses and excesses of the Bush Imperial Presidency.

American Despots

Amazing low sale price in defense of authentic freedom as versus the presidency that betrayed it!

Everyone seems to agree that brutal dictators and despotic rulers deserve scorn and worse. But why have historians been so willing to overlook the despotic actions of the United States' own presidents? You can scour libraries from one end to the other and encounter precious few criticisms of America's worst despots.

The founders imagined that the president would be a collegial leader with precious little power who constantly faced the threat of impeachment. Today, however, the president orders thousands of young men and women to danger and death in foreign lands, rubber stamps regulations that throw enterprises into upheaval, controls the composition of the powerful Federal Reserve, and manages the priorities millions of swarms of bureaucrats that vex the citizenry in every way.

It is not too much of a stretch to say that the president embodies the Leviathan state as we know it. Or, more precisely, it is not an individual president so much as the very institution of the presidency that has been the major impediment of liberty. The presidency as the founders imagined it has been displaced by democratically ratified serial despotism. And, for that reason, it must be stopped.

Every American president seems to strive to make the historians' A-list by doing big and dramatic things—wars, occupations, massive programs, tyrannies large and small—in hopes of being considered among the "greats" such as Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR. They always imagine themselves as honored by future generations: the worse their crimes, the more the accolades.

Well, the free ride ends with Reassessing the Presidency: The Rise of the Executive State and the Decline of Freedom, edited by John Denson.

This remarkable volume (825 pages including index and bibliography) is the first full-scale revision of the official history of the U.S. executive state. It traces the progression of power exercised by American presidents from the early American Republic up to the eventual reality of the power-hungry Caesars which later appear as president in American history. Contributors examine the usual judgments of the historical profession to show the ugly side of supposed presidential greatness.

The mission inherent in this undertaking is to determine how the presidency degenerated into the office of American Caesar. Did the character of the man who held the office corrupt it, or did the power of the office, as it evolved, corrupt the man? Or was it a combination of the two? Was there too much latent power in the original creation of the office as the Anti-Federalists claimed? Or was the power externally created and added to the position by corrupt or misguided men?

There's never been a better guide to everything awful about American presidents. No, you won't get the civics text approach of see no evil. Essay after essay details depredations that will shock you, and wonder how American liberty could have ever survived in light of the rule of these people.

Contributors include George Bittlingmayer, John V. Denson, Marshall L. DeRosa, Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Lowell Gallaway, Richard M. Gamble, David Gordon, Paul Gottfried, Randall G. Holcombe, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Jeffrey Rogers Hummel, Michael Levin, Yuri N. Maltsev, William Marina, Ralph Raico, Joseph Salerno, Barry Simpson, Joseph Stromberg, H. Arthur Scott Trask, Richard Vedder, and Clyde Wilson.

How institutions shape the American presidency This incisive undergraduate textbook emphasizes the institutional sources of presidential power and executive governance, enabling students to think more clearly and systematically about the American presidency at a time when media coverage of the White House is awash in anecdotes and personalities. William Howell offers unparalleled perspective on the world’s most powerful office, from its original design in the Constitution to its historical growth over time; its elections and transitions to governance; its interactions with Congress, the courts, and the federal bureaucracy; and its persistent efforts to shape public policy. Comprehensive in scope and rooted in the latest scholarship, The American Presidency is the perfect guide for studying the presidency at a time of acute partisan polarization and popular anxiety about the health and well-being of the republic. Focuses on the institutional structures that presidents must navigate, the incentives and opportunities that drive them, and the constraints they routinely confront Shows how legislators, judges, bureaucrats, the media, and the broader public shape the contours and limits of presidential power Encourages students to view the institutional presidency as not just an object of study but a way of thinking about executive politics Highlights the lasting effects of important historical moments on the institutional presidency Enables students to grapple with enduring themes of power, rules, norms, and organization that undergird democracy

Political scandals have always demonstrated the capacity of our executive officials for self-inflicted injuries, and the Clinton administration was no exception. Unilateral warmaking, claims of executive privilege and immunity, and last-minute pardons all tested the limits of presidential power, while the excesses of the Special Prosecutor cast doubts on available remedies. For eight years, Republicans and Democrats engaged in guerrilla warfare aimed at destroying the careers and lives of their adversaries while tests of presidential power were resolved by the courts, resulting in a reshaping of the scope and power of the presidency itself. This book examines the many controversial and important battles that led to the shrinking of the presidency under the law during the Clinton administration. Located at the intersection of law and politics, it helps readers understand the dramatic changes that took place in the relationship of presidential power to the law during the Clinton years and shows how one president's actions—and congressional and legal reactions to them—have altered presidential prerogatives in ways that his successors cannot ignore. The Presidency and the Law offers an assessment of changes in constitutional and legal understanding of the American presidency, exploring such topics as war power, executive privilege, pardon power, impeachment, executive immunity, independent counsel, and campaign finance. In examining these collisions between president and the law, its distinguished contributors bring the lessons of Watergate and Iran-Contra into the Clinton era and contribute to a Madisonian view that presidents should not operate outside statutory and constitutional constraints. While the essays offer several criticisms of that administration's exercise of power and its interpretation of constitutional provisions and law, many of the authors have been supportive of Clinton and his policy pursuits, and all seek to examine the potential impact of the Clinton administration without being predictive or legalistic. They offer instead commentary, analysis, and criticism that examine the legality and constitutionality of President Clinton's actions within a broader political and historical context. The presidency is constitutionally weaker and politically more vulnerable than the office Bill Clinton assumed in 1993, and it remains to be seen what impact these changes will have on the presidency in the 21st century. This book points the way to assessing that impact, and is essential reading for anyone concerned with the future of our democracy.