Presidential Powers

In the aftermath of the US succeeding in its revolution that cast off the colonial oppression of England in 1783, leaders of the former colonies met in Philadelphia, to thrash out a constitution for the new country. They were fully aware of the fact that they were creating a new state and hoping that its governing process would be robust and unprecedented. They wished to forge a democracy that was modeled on a republic created some 2200 years earlier in Greece.

Having just shaken off the heavy-handed rule of King George, they were determined to avoid setting up a form of government that would again control the American populace with monarchical powers. In their minds, the new country would need an executive who had the power to manage its affairs, but who would also be restrained by two complementary branches of government: the legislative and judicial branches.

The country's founders, besides being concerned about limiting presidential powers, were also wary of establishing too much democracy. They were chary of setting up a “tyranny of the majority,” wherein the ignorant and uninformed masses would become influenced by emotional and feverish ideas and vote for foolish programs and compelling ideas put forth by a charismatic person or cabal.

The founders were, after all, prosperous and educated men. They possessed ideals of how a democracy should behave, but had elitist biases about preventing the mob from taking over. Plato held similar apprehensions about democracy in ancient Athens—that uninformed commoners would force unwise actions. These concerns of the framers of the US Constitution in 1787 resulted in establishing the Electoral College, which would correct for a possible foolish popular vote for a president.

The constitutional fathers debated long and passionately on how to create a constitution that would prevent any one individual (the president) or group (the masses) from seizing too much power and sending the country off into chaotic behavior. They did a remarkable job of it. For over 200 years the checks and balances they built into the document have kept the US from careening out of control, when imbalance threatened.

After the Constitution was drafted and sent to the 13 states for ratification (which occurred two years later), many people expressed concerns about some of its provisions. For one specific example, George Mason of Virginia was disturbed that it allowed the president to pardon convicted criminals. He could foresee the possibility that an unscrupulous president would encourage his faithful minions to commit illegal acts on his behalf and then pardon them, after they were convicted. Mason thought that this provision of the Constitution would allow a deceitful president to become an autocrat who would then take control, not unlike King George.

Mason was vocal about his fears, and threatened to stop Virginia from ratifying the proposed Constitution. Virginia's approval was crucial. During the state's debates, John Madison convinced George Mason to relax, by telling him that surely if ever a president went that far, he would quickly be impeached and removed from office. 

The founding fathers wrote a constitution that successfully guided the country for over two centuries, yet Donald Trump has utilized both the Electoral College intervention and presidential pardon power to indeed establish himself as a would-be autocrat. The Electoral College process awarded him the presidency, despite his losing the popular vote. That constitutional process of the forefathers backfired.

In addition, Trump has currently pardoned two of his convicted henchmen, who broke laws on his behalf. George Mason surely must be agitatedly rolling in his grave.