gov paper 2 - There is much debate about the controversy...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
There is much debate about the controversy issue that presidents have the unilateral power to wage war. The framers of the Constitution believed that both the president has the right to act unilaterally but that there were limits to the president’s war power (Rourke, pg. 160). The passage of the War Powers Resolution (WPR) helped clarify the president’s war powers, yet there was still some smoke in the air about the actual power the president had. Jules Lobel, professor of law at the University of Pittsburgh thinks that the president’s war powers should be curbed and that the WPR has failed. On the opposing side, Stephen G. Rademaker, senior counsel, BGR holding and former associate White House Counsel to President George H. W. Bush argues that the president’s war powers should be left as is. Lobel thinks that the war powers of the president need to be limited because “The constitutional principle that those decisions not be made by one person is too important to our nation’s well-being and security to be a partisan issue” (Rourke, pg. 162). He also
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/15/2011 for the course POS 2041 taught by Professor Rosenson during the Fall '08 term at University of Florida.

Page1 / 3

gov paper 2 - There is much debate about the controversy...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online