American Presidency

This study of the American Presidency is extraordinarily difficult due to content, context, (lack of) access, and inconsistencies across actors.  As a result, as social scientists we will exist in shades of grey instead of a world of black-and-white.  We will challenge theories presented and attempt to improve research with our work.

This discussion asks "What makes a good president good?" (and also, a "bad president bad?")  The discussion will be framed to highlight reasonable differences people may have about certain characteristics.  At the end of the class, we will apply the metrics identified, concluding that context matters.

We will investigate several of the Federalist Papers and Constitution, seeking to understand how the authors viewed the Presidency.  This session should establish the de jure powers of the Presidency, where the office has limited powers associated with enforcing Congress' will and conducting foreign policy.

We will discuss the actual powers exerted by the President of the United States and the executive branch.  We will explore an example of implementing a fictitious policy to share the challenges around implementing policies from Congress.  In short, Presidents routinely operate outside of their legislated authority.

We will discuss both the official and unofficial mechanics of a Presidential election in the United States.   Although the tools used have evolved over time, we will focus on the public opinion and campaign strategy fundamentals have remained the same over time.

We will examine Popkin's The Candidate as a guide for what makes a candidate successful.  We will discuss the gap between an ideal candidate and an ideal president.   We will also identify the predictable decisions and mistakes candidates in certain positions are likely to make through the campaign cycle.

We will investigate the role political parties play in the electoral process.   Although the particular rules evolve over time, neither party's process is designed to be a reflection of the voters, rather it most often is a strategic decision to maximize the likelihood of winning influence.

In this session, we will discuss campaign messaging strategy, specifically what campaigns want to acheive with their advertising.  We will reflect on some of the more effective (and ineffective) advertisements, and hypothesize why certain messages are more powerful than others.

Political parties play a critical role in Presidential elections, including a providing basic campaign infrastructure, a formal nominating process, a wide donor base and ballot access - among other advantages.  We will investigate the roles how parties nomination processes impact presidential campaign.

Students will participate in an election simulation.  This session will focus on students' election strategies, along with a discussion of hypothesized outcomes from the simulation.

We will examine Skowronek's Politics in Time theory that argues that politics is cyclical, and that there are four stages of a political system: reconstruction (creating a new order), articulation (implementing the order's vision), preemption (governing from the counterveiling party), and disjunction (when things fall apart).

Using Skowronek's work as a guide, we will discuss the first two party systems in the United States: Jeffersonian patrician politics that relied on established landed gentry coming to consensus, and Jackson's nationalist populism that focused on expansionism.

Using Skowronek's work as a guide, we will discuss the rise of the Republican party as an implementation to the National System (also known as the American School of economics).  We will reconsider the rise of McKinley and Roosevelt as a potential reconstruction of American politics, rather than a simple articulation.

Using Skowronek's work as a guide, we will discuss the Roosevelt and Reagan realignments in the twentieth century.  We will then apply Skowronek's theory to the period after the book, including the recent few election cycles.

We will examine Neustadt's argument that the power of the presidency is the power to persuade is the central argument in political science regarding the US Presidency.  We will discuss the benefits and potential limits to persuasion as a tool for presidents, along with critique the argument.

We will discuss Kernell's article on how presidents make appeals to the American people is a form of persuading other politicians.  By leveraging the "bully pulpit," Presidents are able to shape and leverage public opinion to influence members of Congress and other political actors.

We will examine Tulis' argument about how the Presidency has evolved with the emergence of new communication tools.  We will hypothesize the impact of artificial intelligence and social media on American politics based on a larger discussion including Neustadt, Kernell, and Tulis.

We will take an abbreviated look at Schlesinger's argument that the executive office seeks opportunities to grow de facto power.   We will examine recent national events to see how Presidents have used crises to expand their authority.  

We will examine Wildavsky's argument that the President exists in two worlds at the same time: domestic politics and foriegn politics.  We will test the hypothesis if the domestic presidency and international presidency are separate, influence each other, and potential impacts of that influence.

We will discuss outcomes from the in-class simulation.

We will examine how professionals within bureaucracy impact how Presidents implement policies.  We will focus on parts of James Q. Wilson's masterpiece, and we will apply principles from that work on major policy initiatives under the last several presidents, including George W Bush, Obama, Trump, and Biden.

We will examine how executive orders have evolved over time from guidance and interpretation memos to policy documents.  In particular, we will investigate how gridlock and political expediency have transformed executive orders into key policymaking tool in recent decades.

We will discuss the theory presented by Moe about how the executive has been able to grow over time.  In general, Presidents are often incentivized to expand their institutional power, while Congress, the Courts, and state governments do not have the capacity to stop this expansion.

We will investigate and discuss instances of Presidents using violent force (or the threat of violent force) to implement policy in the United States.  We will examine these decisions in light of the larger expansion of the executive, legitimacy, and the political theory behind the Constitution.

We will consider the question of legitimacy in the face of a growing executive branch.   The primary question will be, how does the expansion of executive powers and the Presidency impact the legitimacy of a governing republic?

We will apply the key takeaways from this course to key policy decisions made by the current president's first four months in office.  

Students will present their research during these sessions.

We will revisit the original discussion, reflecting on "What makes a good president good?" (and also, a "bad president bad?")  Focus will be on what opinions have been added, changed, or removed throughout the class.