Has any president voluntarily relinquished the powers given to him by the previous?

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,082
136
Just curious. For all the talk each new candidate gives about the overbearing hand of government, I dont recall any of them giving up his powers (legal or otherwise) which were put in place by the guy before him, at least not of his own volition.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Surprise surprise, this is why us conservative type fuss so much at each power grab. Historically, no government has ever relinquished power until revolution.

The Romans didn't have TV and movies. If they did, I'll bet you they would have put up with a lot more corruption.
 

MotF Bane

No Lifer
Dec 22, 2006
60,801
10
0
Surprise surprise, this is why us conservative type fuss so much at each power grab. Historically, no government has ever relinquished power until revolution.

The Romans didn't have TV and movies. If they did, I'll bet you they would have put up with a lot more corruption.

The Romans had bread and circuses. Same stuff for a different millenium.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Rich get richer, governments get more powerful and authoritarian, and death and taxes.
 

villageidiot111

Platinum Member
Jul 19, 2004
2,168
1
81
Surprise surprise, this is why us conservative type fuss so much at each power grab. Historically, no government has ever relinquished power until revolution.

Lawl, nice job subtly blaming Democrats. I think its fair to say that all political parties are guilty of it.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Surprise surprise, this is why us conservative type fuss so much at each power grab. Historically, no government has ever relinquished power until revolution.

Roman dictators during The Republic voluntarily relinquished power and resigned from a post with absolute power after the threat had passed. Notable exception being Caesar (the end of The Republic).
 

shortylickens

No Lifer
Jul 15, 2003
80,287
17,082
136
Lawl, nice job subtly blaming Democrats. I think its fair to say that all political parties are guilty of it.

Which is why I didnt reference any parties in the OP. Besides I'm pretty sure way back in the day when Federalists and Constitutionals were running things they were the same way.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Surprise surprise, this is why us conservative type fuss so much at each power grab. Historically, no government has ever relinquished power until revolution.

The Romans didn't have TV and movies. If they did, I'll bet you they would have put up with a lot more corruption.


Unsurprisingly the Republicans sought to expand control during their tenure, especially with Bush. The idea that a US citizen can be held captive without Constitutional rights wasn't a liberal idea, but promoted by a party which says it supports the Constitution. BS.

It's all about power.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Roman dictators during The Republic voluntarily relinquished power and resigned from a post with absolute power after the threat had passed. Notable exception being Caesar (the end of The Republic).

Rome had a somewhat Democratic system (put aside slaves and all). They strongly believed in democratic principles against dictators, tyrants, authoritarians.

Their troops marched under the banner "SPQR", 'the Senate and People of Rome', to represent those values.

But they had aristocrats, and they weren't always exactly generous with the troops, and leaders of those troops could build loyalty with them against authority.

Julius Caser's uncle had started this, when aristocrats had grabbed a lot of land for their vacation homes and left the troops with little.

Caesar built his loyalty with the people up, and eventually was in a position to march his forces 'across the Rubicon' - a traditional barrier from the troops to prevent the military from overtaking the government in Rome, which is just what happened, as Caesar defeated all his enemies up to Pompey.

They were already starting to ignore democratic rules, like an office requiring 10 years between holding it for a one-year term being ignored, held years in a row.

The leaders, the Caesars, moved to preserve the facade of Democracy - the Senate - but changed the rules to everything done they could veto, most of the Senate was appointed by them and just became a place for social prestige to be nominated. The military still had SPQR banners, but it was a lie.

At first, it wasn't all bad, as the dictatorship of the first Augustus Caesar did some good - but quickly, there was Claudius, there was Nero et al.

It was a period called 'Pax Romana' - supposedly peaceful - but was decline and tyranny.

Human history is filled with this structure of Oligarchy, a few who benefit greatly from the rest serving them.

One of the few stronger exceptions is the American middle class's growth from FDR through about LBJ or Carter - which has largely been reversed now.

When you include debt, all the postwar gains after WWII of the middle class in the 40's, 50's, and 60's are gone.

Today, powers like the finance industry make symbolic much of our democracy, when the only people who seem able to win high office are ones loyal to the right interests.

We preserve our 'civilian authority over the military' - even when a President as prestigious as the former Allied Commander of WWII, Eisenhower, is powerless to do more to stop the military-industrial-congressional complex than to announce it to the public, when presidents seem to have to ask more than tell the military their policies at times, from Clinton blocked on allowing gays by Colin Powell to Obama's goal to end discrimination met by polling the military's opinion, votes based on the military agreeing. When the culture where FDR wanted the Pentagon to be a temporary building because a concentration of military power that close in the capitol could begin to dominate much of the civilian government is a long forgotten quaint bit of history.
 

Vette73

Lifer
Jul 5, 2000
21,503
9
0
Surprise surprise, this is why us conservative type fuss so much at each power grab. Historically, no government has ever relinquished power until revolution.

The Romans didn't have TV and movies. If they did, I'll bet you they would have put up with a lot more corruption.


I love that the biggest grab for power was under a Republican rule yet make it sound like conseratives were against it. :D
Last I checked it was the "liberals" that were screaming how it was wrong and conseratives saying its legal and should happen.

Funny I can't seem to find any of your post saying how Republicans are wrong and should be stopped during the rule they had when they controlled the house, senate, and WH.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
Unsurprisingly the Republicans sought to expand control during their tenure, especially with Bush. The idea that a US citizen can be held captive without Constitutional rights wasn't a liberal idea, but promoted by a party which says it supports the Constitution. BS.

It's all about power.

The republicans aren't conservative.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,553
2
76
I love that the biggest grab for power was under a Republican rule yet make it sound like conseratives were against it. :D
Last I checked it was the "liberals" that were screaming how it was wrong and conseratives saying its legal and should happen.

Funny I can't seem to find any of your post saying how Republicans are wrong and should be stopped during the rule they had when they controlled the house, senate, and WH.

I hadn't figured this out back then. It's been in the last year or so that I've recognized as a conservative I don't like the Republicans.
 

CanOWorms

Lifer
Jul 3, 2001
12,404
2
0
OK so my thread is not successful.
No names?
Anybody?

Your thread won't produce any names because a President can't make up a power and pass it along only to be rescinded by a successor. Congress gives powers to the President.

Perhaps the question should be has a President vetoed a bill that would give him power.
 
Last edited:

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Bush voluntarily relinquished the power to run a balanced budget and a sane foreign policy.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
It is the same thing with new taxes... once they get implemented they stay. Don't believe me... just look at your cell phone bill.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
It is the same thing with new taxes... once they get implemented they stay. Don't believe me... just look at your cell phone bill.

Or we could look at the slashed top marginal tax rates on the rich, or the slashed marginal tax rates on corporations, or slashed tax rates on passive income, or...

We could look at the slashed property tax rates for both commercial and residential property in California, that have greatly reduced the revenue the state has.
 

Anteaus

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2010
2,448
4
81
Just curious. For all the talk each new candidate gives about the overbearing hand of government, I dont recall any of them giving up his powers (legal or otherwise) which were put in place by the guy before him, at least not of his own volition.

Which powers do you mean? The only power he has is granted by the constitution as implemented by congress. He can't take power that isn't given to him by congress nor keep power that is taken away by the same method.

"Bush voluntarily relinquished the power to run a balanced budget and a sane foreign policy. "

The president can only recommend a budget. Congress is 100 percent responsible for its form when they vote on it. People blame the president (whoever it is) for many things, but much of that isn't even in the president's power to control.