Unintended results rule the day economically. If there were some policy formula by which we could achieve strong, predictable growth with rising wages and stable prices, then you can be sure that implementing such a formula would be at the top of every president’s agenda: No president would choose a recession, a financial crisis, or a stock-market crash. But a thriving economy isn’t something you can put together like a jigsaw puzzle. It is more like a delicate flower you try to cultivate. By way of contrast, the president has a great deal of real, direct constitutional power when it comes to foreign policy. His power is not fully plenipotentiary — treaties have to be ratified, trade accords require legislation to implement them, Congress may authorize or decline to authorize military force or entangle him in purse-strings, etc. — but it is both expansive and invested in him personally. And though this is not always obvious, it has applications other than war-making. You would think that would be attractive. But the realities of democratic politics draw the president’s attention in other directions. Might the presidency be drawn back? It would be difficult, but the payoff would be great. Rather than the national-chieftain model of the presidency we have today, we could have one that is focused on administrative competence and faithful execution of the law at home and securing U.S. interests abroad, which would be a great improvement — sparing us a god-emperor and, with any luck, giving us a better-functioning administration.