Question

why do you believe the united states is better served with a strong unitary executive?

Answer 1

Infantilizing the President is a natural adaptive reaction to situations that are inherently extra-constitutional. Officials and administrators have cause to doubt the sincerity of the President's oath of office or his mental health. Faced with a president who opposes conventional executive-branch procedures and management in favor of unfiltered personal speech and a fusion of the office with his own personality, they need to do something.

But, of course, it wasn't meant to be that way. The Constitution creates a unitary executive branch of which, in the purest form at least, the President supervises the workers and simply does what he orders them to do or to be dismissed if they do not. Constitutionally speaking, despite the internal mechanisms that have been formed over time, the Executive Branch is controlled by the President and, at some point, the President oversees the entire Branch.

The federal courts are divided regionally and stratified by the three layers of the judicial system district courts, appellate courts, and the Supreme Court. Congress has two chambers, each of which has its own formal rules. Yet the presidency of the United States is a single male. So the executive branch is nothing more than the men who work for it. There is, of course, a debate about how unitary the "Unitary Executive" really is, and that debate is wrapped up in a broader collection of claims about the extent and existence and limits of presidential authority. But there is a core to the unitary-executive theory that is not at issue. There is only one president, and he appoints the leadership of the executive agencies, which represent his pleasure and therefore must obey his orders or risk being dismissed.