U.S. GOVERNMENT & POLITICS, SPRING 2011

THE PRESIDENCY, DAY TWO

Woll 48 (Rossiter), 49 (Neustadt), 50 (Barber)

Wednesday, March 9, with reference to our handout from Friday, March 4

♦ Rossiter (Woll 48) highlights the numerous segments of American politics where presidents lead – leadership is the critical focus of the presidency in Rossiter’s eyes.

Note the parallels here (and in the next reading) to members of Congress. Public opinion can be viewed as an independent force – presidents and members of Congress make decisions and the public decides whether to like the decision/reward the decider, or dislike the decision/punish the decider. In reality, presidents and members of Congress can uses their office and their powers to shape public opinion rather than simply be passive victors/victims of public opinion. If the President truly does lead the executive branch, the forces of peace and war, Congress, his/her party, and the rituals of democracy as head of state, it stands to reason that s/he can lead public opinion as well.

♦ Neustadt (Woll 49) highlights the different constituents a President serves: executive branch officials, Congress, members of the President’s party, the U.S. public, and other nations & their citizens. Satisfying all of these constituencies is an impossible task and in this selection Neustadt is highlighting the limits of presidential power.

Elsewhere in the same book from which Woll 49 is pulled, Neustadt highlights the power to persuade (see March 4 handout for more) as the critical power a president possesses.

♦ Barber (Woll 50) presents a famous typology that connects presidential character to a president’s actions in office. Activity/passivity refers to the energy presidents bring to the job; most recent presidents are typecast as active on this dimension – the demands on the President today are significant and it would be difficult not to engage actively. Positive/negative affect refers to “how he feels about what he does” – is the presidency another duty to be performed or is there something satisfying about carrying out the myriad tasks?

The two dimensions lead to four TYPES: active-positive, active-negative, passive-positive, passive-negative. Presidents are found in all four categories. Here is a chart of how presidents have been classified (the most recent ones are not classified by Barber himself, as Barber is now retired).

Questions for today:

Does the modern presidency and the numerous demands of the office lead to a preference for one type (using Barber’s types) of president over the others?

Where would you classify Barack Obama based on his two-plus years in office so far, and why?

Which of the constituencies of a president seems most important to being effective as president, and why?

Which of the aspects of American politics led by the president is most important for the president to do well in, and why?

Looking ahead, is the President destined to remain the central figure of U.S. politics? If you answer is yes, is this a good or bad thing for the United States?