The strict constructionist presidency is a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation. The phrase is also commonly used more loosely as a generic term for conservatism among the judiciary. William Taft, being a strict constructionist; to him meant that a president’s power is limited to those powers specifically enumerated by the Constitution. William Taft was looked at as somewhat of a passive and weak. Not specifically because of this form of presidency, but because of the way he used it and ran the country.
Strict constructionists believe that the President can exercise no power that cannot be fairly and reasonably traced to a specific grant of power. Such a specific grant must be either in the Federal Constitution or in an act of Congress that has been passed. The Stewardship presidency would be best explained as a strong assertive role of the office not confined to those ideas in the Constitution, but charged with meeting the needs of the people. A president practices a governing style such as this one based on beliefs they have the duty to do whatever is necessary in national interest, unless prohibited by the Constitution.
Theodore Roosevelt broadened the use of executive power during his time in office. He believed that he shouldn’t be held back or need authorization as the president of the United States to do something that he believed needed to be done for the country in its best interest. That it was his duty to do this. Unless the constitution forbidded it of course. The public presidency that a president’s public relations will promote his policy agenda only if he has high approval ratings. That like Woodrow Wilson stated that presidents should engage in the leadership of public opinion.
Examples are meeting with citizens in “town hall” meeting type of venues with question and answer discussions. Another example would be president Clinton’s dialogue in his running for race relations. A public presidency uses the public to the advantage of the administration for a number of things. For example again in the idea of public polls, polling the president’s approval ratings and rating how strong his numbers are in certain areas such as states or specific interest groups.
The prerogative presidency was a concept where the President acts on his own “prerogative” in a matter for hich the law is silent, or even against existing law or procedure if he deems it necessary. Another way to put it is taking charge of a situation, whether it’s technically allowed or not. Lincoln believed that he should preserve the Constitution to the best of his ability, by every indispensable mean of which the government and nation of which the Constitution was the organic law. The modern Presidency is the term used by historians and political scientists to describe the Presidential office since the early 1930s.
The characteristics of the modern Presidency, as developed by Franklin D. Roosevelt and consolidated by Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, and John F. Kennedy, are as follows: increased constitutional powers in foreign affairs and national security; use of the White House Office and the Executive Office of the President to supervise the bureaucracy; greater willingness to use the powers of the office to deal with economic and social problems; greater attempts to win passage of the Presidential legislative agenda; and greater ability to dominate public opinion by using radio and television, and now the strongest dominant force, the internet.
Over time, there have been many different and variously discussed forms of presidency that have several positive and negative aspects about them. I believe personally that the stewardship presidency/ modern presidency resonated with me the best. The stewardship, the most significantly, mostly because of how president Roosevelt ran his office wielding it. It was slightly similar to George w. bush after 9/11 in some ways which is justifiable; but to what means and what ends which leaves me questioned.
But I believe the president today has little to no power compared to back a hundred years or so ago. Even in the 40’s and 50’s more executive power was within the president’s grasp. I think a less tough stewardship than president Roosevelt’s would be a good way in showing our enemies who we are as well too.
1. )http://www. whitehouse. gov/about/presidents/williamhowardtaft 2. ) http://www. rightwingwatch. org/category/subjects/strict-constructionism 3. )Understanding The Presidency By: P. Pfiffner, Roger H. Davidson 4. ) http://hnn. us/articles/443. html