미국형 대통령제의 역사적 기원 : 대통령의 자격요건과 헌법상 권한 - 필라델피아 제헌회의에서의 핵심 쟁점을 중심으로

초록

The provisions of the U.S. Constitution concerning the qualifications and powers of the presidency have resulted not only from the theoretical perspectives on government and power, but also are the outcomes of historical experiences and political compromises. In this Article, I traced the origins of the U.S. Constitution’s provisions concerning the qualifications and powers of the presidency back to the debates in the Federal Convention of 1787, and found some significant features. On September 7, just ten days before the Convention ended, the delegates finally approved a list of qualifications for president: at least thirty-five, a natural-born citizen or a citizen at the time of the Constitution’s adoption, and fourteen years a resident. Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 5 of the Constitution, the presidential qualifications clause, owes its origin to the dynamic interplay between political philosophy and political pragmatism that characterized the entire Convention. The late insertion of the presidential qualifications clause is not only because the delegates turned against election of the president by congress, but also because they did not want to raise unnecessary doubts about a foreign leader being imported to rule. The provisions of the U.S. Constitution concerning the president’s powers to veto laws and to make appointment to federal office, as well as the traditional power of the executive over war and peace, reflected the two main political compromises of the Convention—how to allocate representation in congress and how to select the president. After the Connecticut Compromise(“the first main compromise”) altered the expectations of the delegates as to whether small or large states would dominate the Senate, they finally arrived at a grand package of interrelated compromises on presidential election(“the second main compromise”) and presidential powers. As the result, the Convention settled on giving the president much more policy independence in specific issues such as the veto, appointment, and foreign policy. Moreover, the powers of the presidency, unlike the qualifications of it, have been expanded and strengthened beyond the Constitution’s original meaning, reflecting the changing historical circumstances.

키워드