The Growing Power of the Presidency

From Lincoln to Obama, the Executive Branch Has Expanded its Reach

1x 1.1x 1.25x 1.5x 2x 3x

:15 :15

Download

The Growing Power of the Presidency

HD Video Download

"Obama is doing many of the same dangerous things that Bush did," says Chris Edelson, assistant professor at American University, referencing what he considers President Obama's broad interpretation of executive power. He points to Obama's unilateral military intervention in Libya and his defense of the National Security Agency's data collection on American citizens as just two examples of executive over-reach. 

"What's ironic about that is Obama is a constitutional lawyer and scholar by background."

However, President Obama is not the first president to expand the powers of the presidency. Edelson explains the historical precedents of expansive executive power in his new book, Emergency Presidential Powers: From the Drafting of the Constitution to the War on Terror. 

Edelson recently sat down with Reason TV's Nick Gillespie to discuss the growth of presidential powers, how presidents use national security threats to seize more control, why Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus differs from current claims of executive authority, and if it is even possible to keep the executive branch in check. 

About 12 minutes. Produced by Amanda Winkler. Camera by Winkler and Joshua Swain.

Subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube channel to get automatic notifications when new material go live.

Comments

[wareagle]

"What's ironic about that is Obama is a constitutional lawyer and scholar by background."

can we just call bullshit here since neither of those terms means what the man who said thinks they mean.

[Pro Libertate]

Jesus. He was only an adjunct, and scholars are generally known for publishing scholarly works. That's insulting.

Not to mention that the guy probably never read the Constitution, given his tenure in office so far.

[John]

It is amazing how even Reason falls into the fallacy that Obama is a "scholar". The term scholar is an objective term. It means you write and think about a subject for a living. You can be a complete clown and be wrong about everything and still be a "scholar". Cass Sunstein is a scholar, love him or hate him.

But Obama is not a scholar even under the most generous definition of such. At best Obama was a part time teacher. Why the media insists on saying he has a "scholarly background" is beyond me.

[Episiarch]

Because being a "scholar" fits into TEAM BLUE's delusion that it is the TEAM of intellectualism, education, and thought. It's a pretty hilarious delusion.

[John]

It really is. Point out to them sometime that there is an editor of Harvard Law Review every single year and that it is an elected position. It doesn't mean you are the smartest guy or wrote the most important stuff in the class. They just get this blank stare. But he was editor of Harvard Law Review...

[Pro Libertate]

I'm more of a fucking "scholar" than Obama was, because I've published scholarly works, but I'm no scholar.

I agree, the problem with the term is that it really means something, even if the scholar is an idiot--published or otherwise recognized in academia (I include the latter for disciplines that don't focus so much on publication--unlike the law).

I have little problem with people giving him credit for being a lawyer and Harvard-educated, but those are credentials, not professional achievements in and of themselves. Don't call him a scholar without published works, and don't call an adjunct a professor, because that's more akin to an instructor.

[John]

The problem Pro is that as Episiarch points out, they can't admit that anyone on their team is anything but a brilliant intellectual. The truth that Obama is a Harvard educated street hustling, Chicago machine politician is just too painful for them to admit.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

I think passing the bar or getting a JD from Harvard are professional achievements. And I am fine with Obama being called a professor (I think his title was officially a 'Senior Lecturer' which seems nicely appropriate given his propensity to lecture people rather than actually converse).

But yes, I think most people's idea of a scholar is someone who publishes in their field. From what I understand Obama was given an fellowship at U of Chicago Law School to write on voting rights and he ended up publishing a memoir. If that is a scholar then every celebrity with a memoir is a scholar.

[John]

From what I understand Obama was given an fellowship at U of Chicago Law School to write on voting rights and he ended up publishing a memoir.

I have never heard that. That is funny as hell. How does that happen? Wouldn't you feel a little guilty writing a memoir when your employer gave you an office and a bunch of money to write on the voting rights act? I would.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

It is pretty incredible, this has more on it:

http://www.americanthinker.com.....obama.html

[wareagle]

John,

Obama, feel guilt? Come on, man.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

According to my link, not only did he seem to feel no guilt, but he tried to guilt the publisher into letting him keep the advance on the project, claiming he was destitute due to student loan debt.

[Pro Libertate]

I didn't mean to suggest those weren't achievements. They just aren't acts of scholarship. He didn't even publish as a student.

[Episiarch]

I'm a scholar too, ProL. Mostly I study your mom.

[Pro Libertate]

Well, it does seem that you have published your work here, so that's better than Obama.

[wareagle]

I have little problem with people giving him credit for being a lawyer and Harvard-educated, but those are credentials, not professional achievements in and of themselves.

and that's the whole point. Credentials are all he has. There are no achievements. There is no scholarship. There is compelling community organizing scenario. There is no legislation in either the IL Senate or the US version. There is just a media creation.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

I do not see how you can separate that kind of credential from being an achievement in and of itself. You have to take and pass the bar exam to be a lawyer. Perhaps it is not an impressive thing, but not everyone passes it and so getting that credential requires some achievement. I think the same for getting most college degrees.

Of course, none of that a scholar makes.

[Pro Libertate]

Don't be sensitive--I'm not trashing students. Those achievements are meaningful, but they are a far cry from scholarship or even professional success.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

Agreed on that.

[OneOut]

It has been said that he did help defraud the government in the Pigford case.

That's an accomplishment, of a sort.

http://gawker.com/new-york-tim.....-482778341

[Mad Scientist]

Scholar == reality based, and since Obama is so very obviously reality based, he must be a scholar.

[Mad Scientist]

Don't forget Nobel laureate!

[Anonymous Coward]

"What's ironic about that is Obama is a constitutional lawyer

What case involving a question of constitutional interpretation has he litigated?

and scholar by background.

What scholarly work, if any, has he published?

*Hint* Autobiographies, especially false ones, are not scholarly works.

[R C Dean]

From where I sit, you aren't a "____________ lawyer" unless and until someone has actually paid you to do ______________.

I'm a hospital/healthcare lawyer because I have been paid to do hospital/healthcare law. Some schmuck who took a class in healthcare law isn't a healthcare lawyer until some hires them to do healthcare law work.

[The Late P Brooks]

"Obama is doing many of the same dangerous things that Bush did,"

But he's doing them for the right reasons.

[John]

And he is doing more. When did Bush ever just amend the content of a law via dictate?

[Bo Cara Esq.]

"When did Bush ever just amend the content of a law via dictate?"

Are you kidding? The FISA thing comes immediately to mind.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

I could add the torture stuff, since we are talking about it. He had his OLC lawyers just come in and redefine what they could do.

And do not forget how Gonzalez just 'reinterpreted' statutory and regulatory language to change pornography websites record keeping requirements and the Controlled Substance Act in an attempt to bar Oregon's Assisted Suicide experiment.

[John]

Bush didn't amend FISA. FISA functioned exactly as it was written. Moreover, even if you don't agree with Bush's interpretation of FISA, it wasn't just his. The FISA court agreed with it. They didn't say "well he can say that". No. they said, this is within the law.

That is not unilaterally changing a law like Obama has done on any number of occasions.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

John, I think you are incorrect. Bush bypassed FISA and the FISC.

"Soon after the September 11, 2001 attacks U.S. President George W. Bush issued an executive order that authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct surveillance of certain telephone calls without obtaining a warrant from the FISC as stipulated by FISA (see 50 U.S.C. ? 1802 50 U.S.C. ? 1809 ). "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N.....ce_program

[Pro Libertate]

I'm curious: which of Bush's dangerous things isn't Obama doing now? And, by the way, that statement makes it sound like Obama is not only not doing all of the bad stuff, it also suggests he hasn't added on a bunch of his own.

[John]

That is a good question. What abuse under Bush ended under Obama? There has to be at least one. But I can't think of it.

[tarran]

Obama assures us that he ended the use of torture.....

Which is why we can be certain the CIA did *not* have a prison in Benghazi as Patreus' girlfriend claimed. 😉

[John]

And sending prisoners to other countries to be tortured is so much better than doing it ourselves.

No matter what was going on at Bengazi, any President who continues with rendition cannot claim to have ended "torture". And it is funny how not a single reporter bothered to ask Petreus or his mistress just exactly where she got that idea. The CIA said it wasn't true and that was apparently enough. You would think they would get bored lying for the government every day.

[wareagle]

Petraeus had already been tossed under the bus with the release of the emails to that woman. That this happened on the eve of his testimony to Congress is coincidence, I am sure. As to her, she was easy to dismiss as some over-aged debutante.

[John]

That doesn't explain why should would lie about such a thing.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

Well, in fairness the woman had obviously some history lying about things.

[John]

That just means we shouldn't take her word alone Bo. It doesn't mean no one should investigate it or just take the CIA's word for it.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

Of course, the CIA has hardly been truthful in many things itself.

[Episiarch]

Obama is doing many of the same dangerous things that Bush did

I will now do my impression of an Obama supporter. Ahem:

(sticks fingers in ears)

LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU

[sarcasmic]

That was depressing.

[The Late P Brooks]

"I will preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, insofar as it serves to buttress my political power, and enhance my ability to act unilaterally in the furtherance of my political goals. All praise Me, amen."

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's just get a small list of what Obama has done:

Obama extended the Patriot Act without amendment

Obama initiated a surge in Afghanistan (getting more killed than Bush in less time)

Signed the NDAA in 2011 (And '12. And '13)

Obama defended "indefinite detention" as constitutional.

Obama killed Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen, and his son, without trial.

Obama approved drone strikes that have killed hundreds of civilians in Yemen, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.

Obama PROTECTED Bush's activities as State Secrets.

Obama continued raids on medical marijuana dispensaries.

Obama has prosecuted more whistleblowers than any President in history.

Obama immunized CIA agents engaged in torture.

Obama has engaged in four times as many warrantless wiretaps as Bush.

And a bunch more shit, but you should be getting the idea by now.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

"Obama has engaged in four times as many warrantless wiretaps as Bush."

Do you have a citation for that one? I was under the impression he expanded the PRISM (which of course is its own kind of bad) but not the warrantless wiretaps.

[Anonymous Coward]

Via Breitbart:

ACLU: Obama Has Quadrupled Warrantless Wiretaps

After months of litigation and Freedom of Information Act requests, the ACLU obtained documents from the federal government proving that real-time monitoring of electronic communications inside the U.S. has climbed 60 percent since 2009 and far surpasses monitoring under President Bush.

The ACLU reports that the Dept. of Justice used "pen register" and "trap and trace" techniques 23,535 times in 2009 and 37,616 times in 2011.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

AC, that does not seem to say 'warrantless wiretaps.'

[Anonymous Coward]

More from the article:

It should be noted that all of this is perpetrated by the Dept. of Justice without obtaining traditional warrants.

From the ACLU blog linked iin the article:

Justice Department documents released today by the ACLU reveal that federal law enforcement agencies are increasingly monitoring Americans' electronic communications, and doing so without warrants, sufficient oversight, or meaningful accountability.

[Bo Cara Esq.]

"traditional warrants" could mean they were using FISA approved warrants (not something I like by the way, but better than what Bush was doing which was bypassing FISA, FISC or any other court).

[Anonymous Coward]

It could mean that, but it is unlikely. If it were so, why would Obama renew the FAA for another 5 years (2012)?

[Episiarch]

Now that's a legacy TEAM BLUE can be proud of.

[Lord Humungus]

it could have been worse!

[BigT]

Obama is a constitutional lawyer and scholar

Dennis Rodman is a seasoned diplomat and internationally known statesman.

Mylie Cyrus is a sophisticated entertainer and dignified role model.

[bassjoe]

Lincoln's habeas suspension was at least supported by Article I, Section 9, of the Constitution. I fail to see how NSA's actions are even arguably constitutional.

[JulesE]

Lincoln recognized limits?

Didn't he murder thousands of American citizens in America, something that Bush and Obama have not done (yet)?