Unitary Executive System Analysis
70 argues in favor of having a single person responsible for the execution of the Presidency. According to Hamilton, a unitary executive is necessary to: ensure the accountability in government, enable the President to defend himself against legislative encroachments, and ensure executive strength. Hamilton explains that, if there is one single executive then it is easier to pinpoint the blame for when something has gone wrong. “The multiplication of the Executive adds to the difficulty of detection…It often becomes impossible, amidst mutual accusations, to determine on whom the blame or the punishment of a pernicious measure, or series of pernicious measures, ought really to fall” (Hamilton). Arguments surrounding the idea of having two presidents can also be used in opposition to an executive council. Regardless of type of executive, in any type other than unitary, the faults and defects can be concealed easier and the blame will never be set onto one particular person. Hamilton also returns back to the idea about the presidential salary, he claims that there is a matter of expense. Many of those in favor of a council admit that it will have to be substantial in size and the salaries of all of the council members will be very expensive and place a burden on the nation. Hamilton ensures that governmental balance can only be achieved if each branch of government has enough self-governing power and this will prevent tyranny of one branch over another.