Nelson and Ellis introduce every pair in an effort to prepare the readers for the critical argument (Ellis & Nelson 12). This enables them to decide for themselves which side of the debate is more persuasive.
The first debate between David Nicholas and Terri Bimes is about the presidency and the modern constitution. Nicholas agreed with the topic and argued that presidency today is an outgrowth of the presidency that was created by the framers. Bimes on the other had argued that today’s presidency is not recognized in the weak office which was intended by the framers. She insists that they would not approve that the office exists (Ellis & Nelson 13). Terri argues the roles of the president, chief legislator, popular leader, and executive of the federal bureaucracy are the domestic roles of the president.
In this chapter the debate is between Richard Ellis and Sai Krishna Prakash. Richard supported the motion that states that that the unitary executive was a myth. He argued that there was no unitary executive. He said the executive is divided into three distinctive branches which were equally powerful. Prakash strongly supported the idea of unitary executive. According to him the president has the authority and powers to direct execution of laws by officers from the branches (Ellis & Nelson 25). He also says that the president has the foreign affairs powers have been granted to the president by executive power through the constitution.
This debate was between Michael Nelson and Andrew Busch. Michael supports the argument suggesting that political parties should nominate the presidential candidates through the national primary. He said the party should choose candidates and delegates at the primary stage. It makes people more involved in the election process. Andrew strongly opposed this argument claiming that it made the election process more complicated. He suggests that it makes the whole process more structured.
This debate was between