How Presidential Power Evolved, From The Founding Fathers To Donald Trump | KERA News

How Presidential Power Evolved, From The Founding Fathers To Donald Trump

Apr 28, 2017

As President Trump nears his 100th day in office, we take a step back to look at how presidential power evolved in the modern era with Rita Kirk, who directs the Maguire Center of Ethics & Public Responsibility at SMU. She says historians estimate it takes about 20 years before one can get a sense of what happened in the past.

Interview Highlights: Rita Kirk…

On the constitutional view of power:

“Our founding fathers were so distrustful of power by a centralized authority that they wanted to make sure that didn’t happen in the United States so historically, the way that they framed the Constitution was to keep anybody from having power for long and certainly for having too much of it.”

On Congress’ role in a president’s power:

Rita Kirk directs the SMU Maguire Center of Ethics & Public Responsibility.
Credit Krystina Martinez / KERA

“It’s absolutely critical for presidential power. The courts have ruled that if there’s Congressional authority behind a president’s action – see the Use of Force Act with President George W. Bush – granted him virtually unlimited power to do what is necessary. But if Congress backs it, you could in essence become the supreme power in the entire government. If Congress doesn’t approve, [presidents] are really restricted to the powers granted by the Constitution.”

On the public perception of presidential power:

“You may remember Henry Kissinger’s memoirs, he talks about trying to end the Vietnam War and the Paris talks were bogged down, nothing was really happening. And at one point, he talks about saying, ‘all options are on the table, even a nuclear strike’ and the Vietnamese weren’t sure that he meant it and Kissinger replied – this is me paraphrasing his remarks – ‘I don’t know, Nixon’s crazy. It could happen.’

I think there’s this uncertainty that we see with Nixon that we also see in [President] Trump. After the two bombings that we’ve had now, there’s no doubt that he has the will to do it. And the question is: will he have to? Will he feel the need to? Is it an imperative thing that we have to do to protect ourselves? But uncertainty can be an issue of power. If you read ‘The Art of the Deal,’ you get the idea of what it’s like to be a business person where you want the opposition to always be a little uncertain of what’s next.”

Rita Kirk directs the Maguire Center for Ethics & Public Responsibility at SMU. This interview is part of NPR’s ongoing “A Nation Engaged” series.