Should U.S. Presidents Have Fast-Track Authority to Get Things Done?
A Soho Forum debate on expanding or restricting presidential powers.
HD DownloadDo U.S. presidents need a fast-track or should their power be sharply curtailed? Stanford Political Scientist Terry Moe, says to save our democracy, we have to make the U.S. government faster, more efficient, and more effective — and we can do that by expanding the power of the executive branch to use "fast-track" authority to approve all types of legislation. Moe, who's the author of Presidents, Populism, and the Crisis of Democracy, wants Congress to have the power to approve or deny these laws through an "up or down" vote but not to add amendments or filibuster their passage.
The Cato Institute's Gene Healy says that non-libertarians of all political persuasions suffer from a "dangerous devotion" to the "boundless nature of presidential responsibility." Healy, who's the author of The Cult of the Presidency, says that instead of giving the executive branch more legislative authority, presidential powers must be brought back to their Constitutional limits.
At a Reason-sponsored Soho Forum debate held on March 17, 2020, Terry Moe and Gene Healy went head-to-head on this issue in a recent virtual Soho Forum debate, moderated by Soho Forum Director, Gene Epstein. It was an Oxford-style debate, meaning the winner is the person who moves the most people in their direction.
Narrated by Nick Gillespie. Edited by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.
Music: "Still Life," by ANBR
Photos: Adam Delgiudice/ZUMA Press/Newscom; Abaca Press/Gripas Yuri/Abaca/Sipa USA/Newscom; Al Drago / Pool via CNP / SplashNews/Newscom; KEVIN DIETSCH/UPI/Newscom; OCTAVIO JONES/REUTERS/NewscomSplashNews/Newscom; Sipa USA/Newscom; SplashNews/Newscom
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Stanford Political Scientist Terry Moe, says to save our democracy, we have to make the U.S. government faster, more efficient, and more effective — and we can do that by expanding the power of the executive branch to use "fast-track" authority to approve all types of legislation.
JFC? Why not just give platform to anyone who can give a favorable reading of one of Stalin or Mao's 5 yr. plans?
So to recap
Terry moe=jar jar binks
I was picturing that scene as I was reading this above. It's simply incredible how the statist bootlickers will convince themselves that their tyrant is on their side.
Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
on this page.....VISIT HERE
Sounds like he wants a fascist state.
thnaks https://viidcloudreview.medium.com/orangedrive-review-get-unlimited-storage-in-one-time-payment-629d5e65c9a1
demo https://lifemeet-oto.medium.com/hybridz-oto-hybridz-upsell-hybridz-system-by-lance-groom-ugonna-udunwa-sedfrey-villarta-f7f8565c8f4
gt b avfdfcfs https://lifemeet-reviews-oto.medium.com/lifemeet-review-amit-gaikwad-anirudh-baavra-lifemeet-oto-next-gen-video-conference-hosting-567258923256
" The world is filled with Kings and Queens, who blind your eyes and steal your dreams, it's heaven and hell". Black Sabbath
We need to knock the President's powers back. We need to remove any and all powers given to their wives. We didn't vote for any of these over-entitled cunts. We are dealing with kings and queens. Doubt it? Ask any retired Secret Service member how these people act. They really do believe that they are royalty. It is time to change that.
to save our democracy
Whatever that means.
To save our democracy, we need to remove all constraints from our god-emperors and ensure all their whims are carried out by use of armed goons. I get that we've finally found our wise, altruistic, ubermensch that mankind has searched for all these millennia, but I don't know.......it still sounds a little utopian.
"non-libertarians of all political persuasions suffer from a 'dangerous devotion' to the 'boundless nature of presidential responsibility.'"
Lol yeah sure, hey maybe get elected first to an office above the level of mayor and then we can talk.
What? Libertarians and the LP are not one and the same.
Well 100% of D's and R's are NOT libertarian in any real sense.
So what other political party a)has libertarians in it and b)is winning elections?
The Libertarian Party doesn't really into libertarianism and libertarians like Rand Paul are elected.
Do U.S. presidents need a fast-track or should their power by sharply curtailed? Stanford Political Scientist Terry Moe, says to save our democracy, we have to make the U.S. government faster, more efficient, and more effective — and we can do that by expanding the power of the executive branch to use "fast-track" authority to approve all types of legislation.
Did this apply to Trump? Or is Terry Moe yet another 'intellectual' with an alarmingly short memory of the torture and dystopia he suffered just a couple of months ago under literal Hitler?
It's not bad memory. It's looking towards a bright future where the D's are assured a permanent one party state by "fortifying" elections to make sure every vote is counted regardless of it's origin.
Apparently "checks and balances" are just another remnant of the Jim Crow era.
to save our democracy, we have to make the U.S. government faster, more efficient, and more effective
What the hell does that have to do with democracy?
It means if the majority - no distinction between 50.01%, 99.999%, and every number in between - wants something and doesn't get it fast enough, democracy is doomed.
Or the biggest minority. About a third of Presidential elections don't produce a majority in the popular vote.
Don't think so much, Zeb. It leads to confusion.
I'm I the only one that feels that people have started to use the terms "our democracy" and "democratic party" interchangeably?
I agree with both of them. This is not much of a radical idea and won't give the president much more power since congress still needs to approve it. It is better to focus on taking away power that the president can do without congress.
Serious question. Are you 7? Because that's the only way that I could believe that anyone could be as jaw-droppingly naive as you clearly are.
Wanting to take away presidential power is a very reasonable position. And both on the video agreed that the proposal in question is not radial.
"The proposal in question is not radial."
Literally the smartest point you've ever posted on here. I'll bet you think that pro wrestling and the Easter bunny are both real too.
Have you ever put even in a second of thought about why there are limitations and inefficiencies that make it difficult for them to "implement" and "get things done?" Were you not hemming and hawing all last year about lack of police accountability? Exactly who's rules do you believe those armed goons are "implementing?"
We have the highest rate of incarceration in the entire world, 5 simultaneous wars, supported by "both parties" & the entire corporate media that are proven to be based on lies, a totalitarian surveillance state that has given itself a heaping helping of literally any information that it wants and on and on, a fed that just switched us over to an "MMT" economy overnight with out any input from the people that our legislators "represent".
You're right, it's completely reasonable to get out of their way and remove roadblocks from getting anything else that they might want.
Christ. You. Are. Dumb.
The tyres on my car are radial.
Efficiency in implementation is great.
However, when it comes to deciding what to do, I'm all for a nice slow thoughtful process, going through each Constitutionally required step, in order, with plenty of time given for each member to read, think and talk about the minutae of the action being considered.
We need to limit the government to precisely what is in the Constitution. If legislators want to change that, they should go through the Amendment process. Article I, Section 8 should be the limit of what legislators can vote on. Anything else is unconstitutional. I do grant that there may be a few things that need to be added, but that should be done by Constitutional Amendment.
"Stanford Political Scientist Terry Moe, says to save our democracy..."
Dude doesn't know we live in a republic? I thought Stanford was the "Harvard of the west". This guy is a professor there and doesn't know basic American history?
This is not much of a radical idea and won’t give the president much more power since congress still needs to approve it - What?
The proposal in question is not radial.
The preferred velocity of our gov is slow. Since they don't know anything about the subject they are creating laws for, it prevents bad changes from happening quickly. When people are receiving less burden from the gov its good, then 2nd choice is gridlock.
What the good professor wants is a Prime Minister that presides over a parliament. This was rejected at the founding and should be rejected now.
The fact that the US is supposed to be a federal republic and NOT a democracy seems lost on our betters like Professor Moe. It was disappointing to listen to the weak rebuttals by Mr. Healy. The government should be made smaller with less power not larger with more centralized control.
If the presidency is too powerful, that is in large part because the federal government in general is too powerful.
Thanks for sharing this site! After reading this awesome piece of writing I am too glad to share my knowledge here with colleagues..... Purshape
This is not much of a radical