Describe how two of the three Progressive Era Presidents viewed the role of the executive branch and be sure to reflect on the complexity of each president's views. Which president’s argument about the role of the executive branch is the most compelling?

Answer 1

Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, two of the Progressive Era Presidents, had differing views on the role of the executive branch.

Theodore Roosevelt believed in a strong executive branch that actively intervened in economic and social issues to protect the interests of the American people. He believed that the government should regulate big business and ensure fair competition in the marketplace. Roosevelt used his executive authority to break up monopolies and establish conservation policies to protect natural resources. He also advocated for progressive social reforms, such as workers' rights and consumer protection. Roosevelt's view of the executive branch was one that actively engaged in shaping policy and promoting the welfare of the nation.

Woodrow Wilson, on the other hand, believed in a more limited role for the executive branch. He believed that the role of the president was to uphold the Constitution and faithfully execute the laws passed by Congress. Wilson was wary of expanding executive power and believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution. However, Wilson did advocate for legislation such as the Federal Reserve Act and the Clayton Antitrust Act, which expanded the role of the federal government in regulating the economy.

Both Roosevelt and Wilson had complex views on the role of the executive branch. Roosevelt believed in a more active and interventionist government, while Wilson believed in a more restrained and limited government. However, both presidents recognized the importance of addressing social and economic issues through government action.

In terms of which president's argument about the role of the executive branch is the most compelling, it ultimately depends on one's perspective. Roosevelt's argument for a strong and engaged executive branch may be more appealing to those who believe in the need for government intervention in social and economic issues. Wilson's argument for a limited executive branch may be more appealing to those who prioritize adherence to the Constitution and a more restrained government. Both arguments have merit and reflect the complexity of the issues faced by the Progressive Era Presidents.