Help with a paper topic?

[bc2208]

Pretty relevant to our cause:

The Constitution creates no road map and no straight jacket for the presidency. It does not fully delineate the extent and limits of his powers as regards the Congress, the Courts, or the states. Nor does it clarify how he is to manage his own executive team or his relations with other countries. For your paper you are to pick a particular president and a particular conflicts or set of related conflicts and discuss it. Your discussion should both make clear what the nature of the conflict was and also how it illustrates key constitutional and political questions regarding the presidency. How does this conflict help to understand the nature of the presidency and the particular leadership attributes of the particular president involved?



I don't want to do Bush II (too popular) or Lincoln/slaves (professor is very pro-lincoln) - what other interesting topics could I choose?

Thanks if anyone can help

[mcgraw_wv]

Was it Wilson and the Federal Reserve... to which it later regretted every signing into law?

Or what about Kenedy and Pay of Pigs fiasco, a prime example of the president abusing his power to use military force where the congress did not authorize it.

[acptulsa]

Do some research into the Spanish-American War and/or Teddy Roosevelt and the Phillipines and see if either of those topics could meet your needs without irritating your liberal prof.

[bc2208]

Was it Wilson and the Federal Reserve... to which it later regretted every signing into law?

Or what about Kenedy and Pay of Pigs fiasco, a prime example of the president abusing his power to use military force where the congress did not authorize it.

I like the Bay of Pigs - thats a good one. Wilson did sign the FRA, but I've heard those quotes have been spliced and misquoted, plus it's an issue I'm too passionate about which would prevent me from being objective.

I will look into the Spanish -American war.

Thanks guys

[NightOwl]

Look through the Mises Institute's book Reassessing the Presidency, which contains chapters on most major presidents; you'll surely find something that interests you, along with footnotes you can trace to follow up.

Second, you could look into Harry Truman's seizure of the steel mills. That raised lots of constitutional questions.

[yongrel]

Polk and the Mexican American War would be interesting.

The Iran-Contra affair might be fun to write about too.

Ooh, another interesting one would be the Iraq-Iran War, and how we armed both sides.

Another interesting one might be how we unseated an elected leader, Mossadeq of Iran, and installed the Shah.

[acptulsa]

I will look into the Spanish -American war.

Thanks guys

Pleasure. Remember, most experts now believe that the U.S.S. Maine, a third class battleship (other navies would have called it an armored cruiser) most likely blew from spontaneous combustion in it's coal bunker, and William Randolph Hearst is the guy Orson Welles parodied in Citizen Kane if you've seen it. That might help with the background.

Also, if you can find Twain's Letters from the Earth you can find his take on our occupation of the Phillipines (thinly disguised). Including an excerpt from that could win you brownie points...

[Libertytree]

Maybe I'm thinking way outside the box here?.....Why not pick President Ron Paul and how constitutionally his views on todays events would be shaped given the conflicts we have at the moment?

[NightOwl]

I will look into the Spanish -American war.

Thanks guys

If there's a constitutional issue at stake in that war, though, I don't know what it is. Congress officially declared war.

[acptulsa]

If there's a constitutional issue at stake in that war, though, I don't know what it is. Congress officially declared war.

This is true. I think it will do the job because of the frenzy that was whipped up in support of that war. This sort of activity relates to today. The Constitution can be tied in. Nonetheless, it is kind of mild on that angle.

[bc2208]

Maybe I'm thinking way outside the box here?.....Why not pick President Ron Paul and how constitutionally his views on todays events would be shaped given the conflicts we have at the moment?

Haha, I thought of that but unfortunately I'll have to leave that to the class of 2012.

[Libertytree]

Why? Was there a stipulation not mentioned?

[Tarzan]

Well... the entire premise is wrong. Our Constitution grants power as defined in the document. Unlesss a power is specifically granted the President does not have the authority to "make it up as he goes along". The Constitution IS a straight jacket in this regard.

As far as a road map there is not one. No specific directions regarding a cabinet; how to run it, etc.

To correctly answer the question the question must first be corrected. Your "teacher" should not be inserting his own, incorrect beliefs regarding the Constitution. None the less he has... so, if you want to have a look where the presidency started to go wrong take a look at Jefferson. Did Jefferson have the authority to create the "Corps of Discovery" and send them off on a mission paid for by the citizens of the US? The issue was hotly debated and by a strict constitutional reading should not have occurred.

Go for the grade... give the teacher what he wants... but remember the premise is wrong.
If you can sell it (and get a good grade) show him what the Constitution REALLY means... and where it started to go wrong.

I would start with Jefferson.

If you want to use an example with the Executive REALLY out of control you have several you can use... but Clinton is a good one. Bombing countries because... well, just because. Using an "Executive Order" to create protected park lands... stuff WAY outside what he was permitted by the Constitution.
.
---------------------
Remember the 10th Amendment to the Constitution:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."... in otherwords, if we didn't specifically say you can do it... you can't do it! The Constitution does not give rights to the people, the Constitution grants government very specific powers authorized to them by the people. WE THE PEOPLE retain the rights, government does not have any rights.