Question

1) Why is the American president often called the most powerful leader in the world? If that is true, what special responsibilities does this reality entail? Should we limit the president’s role in world affairs? Why or why not? 2. Are the responsibilities of the most powerful leader in the world, the American president, too large a job for one person? Why has the American presidency as an institution grown so large? Are there any powers you think should be taken away from the president?

Answer 1

• About the president as “the most powerful man on Earth” referred to the belief that the American president’s actions and policies not only affect the United States but the entire world. Because of America’s influence in the global economy and in world affairs, it is difficult to ignore what an American president says or does. Further, the American president commands perhaps the most powerful military in the world.America’s influence remains impossible to ignore. America has long been regarded as the most powerful nation, even by its enemies; and the president, as the leader of the most powerful nation, could thus be given that honorary title of “the most powerful person on Earth.”
• The position of the president dominates American Politics. The president is head of America’s executive;Congress heads America’s legislative and the Supreme Court, America’s judiciary. These three parts of the government, make up the federal structure of politics in America.
• The president is also commander-in-chief of the armed forces – a position he takes immediately on taking the oath of office.
• The president has to seek co-operation but he also has to be seen to be leading the nation. This is one of the great ironies of being ‘the most powerful man in the world’. As the leader of his nation he has to be seen to lead yet he is frequently engaged in negotiations etc. (either personally or by proxy) with politicians based in the Capitol.
• We shouldnt limit president's role in world affairs,Foreign affairs is a big part of the office scope, the job role scope. It's incongruent to leave out that scope.I think the Americans, as the largest power, have to remain involved without falling into the trap of becoming the world's policemen and becoming over involved. And I think what that means is that there are certain key things that we need to do, because if we don't do them no one else will, and if nobody does them it will be a much more chaotic world. One of them is to maintain the overall balance of power. That means that American military power remains very important to stability in Europe, in Asia, in an area like the Persian Gulf where we still are dependent on oil supplies.
• 2.As head of state, a president is a largely ceremonial figure; responsible for representing the country at international events, involved with rallying national sentiment and energy in times of crisis or need, critical in the role of helping to facilitate communications between the government and the citizens of the country.As head of government, a president has a leadership responsibility along with some ceremonial duties; primary spokesperson for the policies in places etc.
• The presidency has grown too large in its responsibilities and its expectations, well beyond the imaginings of the founders.No recent American president has been prepared for the overwhelming power of the office and the responsibilities and challenges that define it. They’re expected to be ever-ready for crises yet strategically minded; deeply connected to ordinary citizens but independent of special interests; a manager of democratic institutions and a fearless commander of lethal force.
• A serious redesign of the presidency to make its form follow vital functions will empower leaders to achieve more in areas that matter most (including national security) and avoid issues that should not come to their office (especially divisive cultural debates). Clearer definitions of presidential responsibilities will also make it easier for voters to identify the appropriate qualifications and choose candidates poised for success. Asking the president to do less can indeed allow him or her to accomplish more.
• Another pathway for reform might involve a more institutionalized division of responsibilities between a president and perhaps a prime minister — both of whom would be elected by the American people at different intervals.
• Dividing domestic and international authorities, as the French political system does, or dividing policy leadership from head of state responsibilities, as in the German constitution, would allow presidents more of a chance to lead. A separation of roles would open some time in the president’s crowded calendar for deeper deliberation around key issues. A division of roles would also create more opportunities to focus and innovate, rather than just react.