Were the Framers of the Constitution of 1789 able to observe the modern Presidency, they might be very surprised to find that such a powerful and independent office had evolved from the rather limited language of Article II. Some Constitutional lawyers would even go so far as to say the founding fathers would be horrified by the amalgamation that has been created over the previous 60 years in the executive branch by having congress cede portions of its power in the name of expediency. 

Which specific powers or tasks that we today take as commonplace for the President to perform do you think the Framers would find most objectionable and why? Are there good reasons to explain this change or evolution from the original intentions of the Framers? Do you think in some ways that such a strong Presidency upsets any of the original Constitutional balances that the Framers believed were essential?

The post Were the Framers of the Constitution of 1789 able to observe the modern Presidency, they might be very surprised appeared first on The Writer.