Different Aspects Weakening the Presidency The presidency is commonly misperceived as a position of absolute power. On the contrary, presidential scholars Richard Neustadt, Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents, and Gary Rose, The American Presidency Under Siege, argue the presidency is better characterized in terms of weaknesses. Their identification of contributing factors to weakened presidency differ in degree, execution, and form. Neustadt and Rose focus on two separate areas affecting the presidency and its effectiveness, each taking into account different aspects of the presidency while ignoring others. Neustadt's view of a model president is one who is active, yet conservative of his power. The President should have knowledge, understanding and vision. He should measure each situation with cost-analysis mentality, only pursuing what can be accomplished successfully. The President is actively involved in acquisition of power. Using professional reputation and public prestige, the President can increase bargaining power. By building a record of success, the President can become more influential through presidential persuasion, in policy making, and conserve presidential power. According to Neustadt, persuasion measures power. The President is responsible for actions contributing to gaining and losing of presidential power. Presidential power is based upon skill and not upon circumstance. Neustadt tailors his argument to fit individualistic means of effectiveness. Rose shifts the increasing weakness problem away from the President and places it on outside factors, blaming the system of governing and party decli... ... middle of paper ... ...Washington affiliation. An outsider president can increase is ability to bargain if term limits are not imposed. Even a Washington outsider can eventually find his niche and be effective, but not if he is limited. Lame duck views of a second term president decrease his bargaining power and effectiveness. Neustadt and Rose identify factors which contribute to weaknesses of the presidency, but fail to recognize the big picture. Both analysis are narrow and focus on only specific issues. Neustadt's arguments are favorable, because they allow the President to take an active role in acquisitioning power. Rose's views of a helpless president, dependent on outside reform to function, are impracticable. It is hard to believe that the President is so debilitated that he can not on his own actively attain and retain power.
Stephen Skowronek writes about political time and how one can determine the legacy president will leave behind at the time their presidency is done. The president has immense powers when he comes to office but the challenges they each face vary depending on the time they take office. Skowronek analyzes and demonstrates that the most essential factor for a president to attempt to legitimize his actions and orders will be the actions of the president before him. According to the actions of George W. Bush is how we can determine where Barack Obama falls under and following the chain the next president. If Hillary Clinton were to win the 2016 election she would fall under the politics of articulation and Barack Obama would fall under the politics
Examining the conceptualizations and theories of Neustadt and Skowronek’s in comparative perspective, this essay makes the principal argument that both of these theories only represent partial explanations of how success and efficiency is achieved in the context of the Presidency. With Neustadt focusing saliently on the President’s micro-level elite interactions and with Skowronek adopting a far more populist and public opinion-based framework, both only serve to explain some atomistic facets of the Presidency. As such, neither is truly collectively exhaustive, or mutually exclusive of the other, in accounting for the facets of the Presidency in either a modern day or historical analytical framework. Rather, they can best be viewed as complementary theories germane to explaining different facets of the Presidency, and the different strengths and weaknesses of specific Administrations throughout history.
Richard Neustadt stated in his book Presidential Power that “Presidential power is the power to persuade.”(Neustadt, pg.11) Persuasion and bargaining are techniques that presidents can use to influence policy. Neustadt explains how persuasion can help a president get laws passed and to get favorable public opinion.Neustadt explains that bargaining is important in order to influence other politicians in Congress and inside of the executive branch. He stated that "The essence of a President's persuasive task is to convince such men that what the White House wants of them is what they ought to do for their sake and on their authority" (Neustadt, pg.30). Neustadt believes that a president should use persuasion than commanding because it is more effective.Commanding shows that a president is weak. Commanding is only effective in certain situations.
Of the most powerful people in the world, the President of the United States of America hits the top of the list. Even though the policy agendas that presidents set as they take office often go unfulfilled, the office of President is still one of the most envied spots to have. But why could this be? It is because the United States is the most powerful nation in the world and with the President as the leader, he is said to have the most power in the world ("Top Ten Most Powerful Countries in the World"). With power comes responsibility and with this position he must govern a country while abiding by the rules.
To explain, the president has little control with regard to current events and policy making, his wishes are ignored, and his hands are tied. With such circumstances, the president’s desires are viewed as, just that, desires, rather than commands. Unless of course he holds the power of persuasion. In order to reach political power and presidential achievement, the president must persuade other political actors his interests are theirs (Howell 243). Howell counter argues Neustadt, explaining the president exerts influence not by the power of persuasion, but by his unilateral powers. “The president can make all kinds of public policies without the formal consent of Congress”. The unilateral powers emerge from institutional advantages such as the structure, resources, and location within the system of separated powers. (Howell 246-247). By that Howell means, the president’s power does not derive from persuasion, but from simply being the
The most important phase that Neustadt argues about the presidency and presidents is the persuasion power. He writes that the president cannot simply command “do this, do that”, as we all know “nothing will happen”. Different branches of the government have different constituencies and different interests. To make things happen, the president must use his bargaining skill to persuade others. Neustadt, to back his view gives a historical prove in which president Truman,
A successful president’s legacy is measured by his ability to address issues of public concern, rid the government of corruption, create reliable foreign affairs with existing countries and most importantly, act as a voice of the people. However, it appears that Warren G. Harding was more concerned with striving to satisfy many of his cabinet members priorities, without weighing the negative consequences it could have on his presidency. Additionally, his successor Calvin Coolidge was caught in the web of political corruption and sexual scandals that had surrounded Harding’s presidency. Many historians have accurately depicted Warren G. Harding as one of the least consequential president’s due in part to his various political scandals that defined his term; whereas Calvin Coolidge has been wrongly tarnished with the same reputation as his predecessor without sufficient evidence.
In order to understand Franklin Roosevelt as the first modern President, it is crucial to examine how the “modern” presidency differed from past presidencies. Renka asserts that the modern presidency’s power comes from four features: “the rise of the United States to world power status, rise of the central government within the American federal system, creation of a modern electronic communication networks enabling the rhetorical presidency to expand, and the creation of a modern administrative apparatus for the president and the White House” (The Modern Presidency from Roosevelt through George W. Bush). Each of these came about under the “entrepreneurial leadership” of Roosevelt (Greenstein 3).
The president has a significant amount of power; however, this power is not unlimited, as it is kept in check by both the judicial and legislative branches. The president is held responsible for passing legislation that will improve the lives of everyday Americans, even though he shares his legislative powers with Congress. The sharing of power acts as an impediment to the president’s ability to pass legislation quickly and in the form it was originally conceived. However, Americans do not take this into account when judging a president, as they fully expect him to fulfill all of the promises he makes during his campaign. By making promises to pass monumental legislation once elected without mentioning that Congress stands as an obstacle that must be hurdled first, the president creates unrealistic expectations of what he can fulfill during his time in office (Jenkins-Smith, Silva, and Waterman, 2005). A president is expected to have the characteristics that will allow him to efficiently and effectively lead the nation and to accomplish the goals he set during his campaign (Jenkins-Smith et al., 2005). There have been a handful of presidents that have been immortalized as the ideal person to lead the United States and if a president does not live up to these lofty expectations the American public will inevitably be disappointed. Since every president is expected to accomplish great things during his presidency, he is forced to created and project a favorable image through unrealistic promises. The combination of preconceived ideas of the perfect president and the various promises made by presidential candidates during their campaign create unrealistic expectations of the president by the American public.
The presidency of the United Sates of America has been an evolving office since the term of our first president, George Washington. This evolution has occurred because of the changing times and the evolution of society itself, but also because of the actions of the men who have become president. Starting in the 20th century, most have referred to the presidency as the modern presidency due to changes in both a president's power and the way that the office itself is viewed. As the office of the president has evolved so has who can become president evolved. Yet, even today there are certain individuals who because of their gender or race have yet to hold the office of the presidency. The men that have been president in our modern era have all had faults and greatness, some having more of one than of the other. The modern presidency is an office that many aspire to, but that few hold. The evolution of the office of the presidency has been one from that of a traditional role to that of a modern role that is forever evolving.
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system.
Presidents of the United States take an oath to uphold the Constitution. In times of crisis, however, presidents are tempted to circumvent the spirit of the Constitution in the name of political expediency. The president of the United States of America is frequently under pressure, which could be for something as simple as dealing with his wife (especially if she's running for the US Senate), but usually the problem is more extensive. Then, the whole nation is affected, and the problem becomes a national crisis. A widespread panic is possible. The president must propose a plan to aid his nation while keeping the public under control. Lincoln. Roosevelt and Truman proposed bills to stop or prevent the national crises that plagued the country.
The American Presidency is undoubtedly one of the most widely recognized popular icons throughout the world. Although to most foreigners or those who have never resided in the United States or know little of its history, the executive branch of government may seem to be as dull and unyielding as the rest of the American politics, for those few rare individuals who have taken the time to examine and closely scrutinize this office of the American political system and its recent history, quite the opposite will be said. Unlike Congressional or local elections where typically a number of individuals of the same ideological background must be elected in order for a particular issue to be addressed by the government, when it comes to the presidency, one person, although checked by various other divisions of the same government, has the power and responsibility to literally, as history has proven, change the world. The American people, "like all people everywhere, want to have our (political) cake and eat it too. We want a lot of leadership, but we are notoriously lousy followers" (Genovese). In other words the expectations the public has of the executive office are ever-changing since we demand that our leaders keep up with the evolving world around us and them. Throughout the past seventy eventful years alone, the American people's views, perceptions and demands of the Executive Office of American government have evolved simultaneously with the political and social events of that same time period.
...ancial Times stating, “The bottom line here is that Americans don't believe in President Obama's leadership. He has to find some way between now and November of demonstrating that he is a leader who can command confidence and, short of a 9/11 event or an Oklahoma City bombing, I can't think of how he could do that.” When the president is popular and integrity of the Executive branch is high, the President can lead public opinion on specific issues. When the factors are low, generating support can be a challenge to overcome and they may engage in strategies (major policy speeches, bold policy initiatives, raising public awareness on national security) to increase popularity, competence, and prestige. We see many of these strategies now as the President campaigns for a second term and also in his running mates as they try and sway public opinion during their bus tours.
Understanding and evaluating presidents’ performance often poses challenges for political experts. The nation votes one president at the time and each presidency faces different tests. The environments surrounding a presidency have a tremendous impact on the success and failure of that presidency. In addition, the president exercises his power through a check and balance system embody in the Constitution. As stated in (Collier 1959), the Constitution created a government of “separated institutions sharing power.” As a result, a president works with others institutions of the government to shape the nation’s agenda. Thus, determining a presidential performance becomes difficult, especially when it comes to comparing the performance among presidencies.