Answer:
hm
Step-by-step explanation:
Those who advocate for reducing the power of the president often argue that concentrating too much power in the hands of a single person can lead to abuse of power, corruption, and authoritarianism. This is especially true if the president has unchecked powers, such as the ability to make executive orders without congressional approval or to bypass the judicial system.
Furthermore, some argue that the presidency's powers have expanded too much over time, leading to a bloated bureaucracy that can slow down government decision-making and responsiveness to the public's needs. The checks and balances in the American political system are intended to limit any one branch of government's power, including the executive branch.
On the other hand, supporters of increasing presidential power argue that a strong and decisive leader is necessary for effective governance and decision-making, especially during times of crisis or emergency. They also argue that the current system of checks and balances can sometimes lead to gridlock and inefficiency, making it difficult for the government to respond to urgent issues effectively.
Ultimately, whether the president's power should be increased or reduced depends on one's values and beliefs about the appropriate balance of power between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government. It is up to the American people and their elected representatives to decide how to structure their government and allocate power among its various branches.