{"id":411,"date":"2015-07-16T22:07:04","date_gmt":"2015-07-16T22:07:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/courses.candelalearning.com\/masteryusgovernment1x6xmaster\/?post_type=chapter&p=411"},"modified":"2019-05-31T21:33:26","modified_gmt":"2019-05-31T21:33:26","slug":"reading-how-presidents-get-things-done","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/courses.lumenlearning.com\/atd-herkimer-americangovernment\/chapter\/reading-how-presidents-get-things-done\/","title":{"raw":"B. Reading: How Presidents Get Things Done","rendered":"B. Reading: How Presidents Get Things Done"},"content":{"raw":"
\r\n

Learning Objectives<\/h2>\r\n

After reading this section, you should be able to answer the following questions:<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n \t
  1. How does the president try to set the agenda for the political system, especially Congress?<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. What challenges does the president face in achieving his agenda?<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the presidential veto?<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. Can and do presidents lead Congress?<\/li>\r\n \t
  5. What are the president\u2019s powers as chief executive?<\/li>\r\n \t
  6. Why do presidents give so many speeches?<\/li>\r\n \t
  7. How do presidents seek public approval?<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    The political system was designed by the framers to be infrequently innovative, to act with neither efficiency nor dispatch. Authority is decentralized. Political parties are usually in conflict. Interests are diverse.[footnote]George C. Edwards III, The Strategic President: Persuasion and Opportunity in Presidential Leadership<\/em> (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2009).[\/footnote]<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Yet, as we have explained, presidents face high expectations for action. Adding to these expectations is the soaring rhetoric of their election campaigns. For example, candidate Obama promised to deal with the problems of the economy, unemployment, housing, health care, Iraq, Afghanistan, and much more.<\/p>\r\n

    As we have also explained, presidents do not invariably or even often have the power to meet these expectations. Consider the economy. Because the government and media report the inflation and unemployment rates and the number of new jobs created (or not created), the public is consistently reminded of these measures when judging the president\u2019s handling of the economy. And certainly the president does claim credit when the economy is doing well. Yet the president has far less control over the economy and these economic indicators than the media convey and many people believe.<\/p>\r\n

    A president\u2019s opportunities to influence public policies depend in part on the preceding administration and the political circumstances under which the new president takes office.[footnote]Stephen Skowronek, Presidential Leadership in Political Time<\/em> (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2008).[\/footnote]\u00a0<\/span>Presidents often face intractable issues, encounter unpredictable events, have to make complex policy decisions, and are beset by scandals (policy, financial, sexual).<\/p>\r\n

    Once in office, reality sinks in. Interviewing President Obama on The Daily Show<\/em><\/a>, Jon Stewart wondered whether the president\u2019s campaign slogan of \u201cYes we can\u201d should be changed to \u201cYes we can, given certain conditions.\u201d President Obama replied, \u201cI think I would say \u2018yes we can, but\u00a0. . .\u00a0it\u2019s not going to happen overnight.\u2019\u201d[footnote]Sheryl Gay Stolberg, \u201cHope and Change as Promised, Just Not Overnight,\u201d New York Times<\/em>, October 28, 2010, A18.[\/footnote]<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    So how do presidents get things done? Presidential powers and prerogatives do offer opportunities for leadership.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Link: Presidential Recordings<\/h3>\r\n

    Between 1940 and 1973, six American presidents from both political parties secretly recorded just less than five thousand hours of their meetings and telephone conversations. Listen to some of them here<\/a>.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    Presidents indicate what issues should garner most attention and action; they help set the policy agenda. They lobby Congress to pass their programs, often by campaign-like swings around the country. Their position as head of their political party enables them to keep or gain allies (and win reelection). Inside the executive branch, presidents make policies by well-publicized appointments and executive orders. They use their ceremonial position as head of state to get into the news and gain public approval, making it easier to persuade others to follow their lead.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Agenda-Setter for the Political System<\/h2>\r\n

    Presidents try to set the political agenda. They call attention to issues and solutions, using constitutional powers such as calling Congress into session, recommending bills, and informing its members about the state of the union, as well as giving speeches and making news.[footnote]Donna R. Hoffman and Alison D. Howard, Addressing the State of the Union<\/em> (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2006).[\/footnote]<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"200\"]\"Photo The president\u2019s constitutional responsibility to inform Congress on \u201cthe state of the union\u201d has been elevated into a performance, nationally broadcast on all major networks and before a joint session on Capitol Hill, that summarizes the key items on his policy agenda.[\/caption]\r\n

    Congress does not always defer to and sometimes spurns the president\u2019s agenda. Its members serve smaller, more distinct constituencies for different terms. When presidents hail from the same party as the majority of Congress members, they have more influence to ensure that their ideas receive serious attention on Capitol Hill. So presidents work hard to keep or increase the number of members of their party in Congress: raising funds for the party (and their own campaign), campaigning for candidates, and throwing weight (and money) in a primary election behind the strongest or their preferred candidate. Presidential coattails\u2014where members of Congress are carried to victory by the winning presidential candidates\u2014are increasingly short. Most legislators win by larger margins in their district than does the president. In the elections midway through the president\u2019s term, the president\u2019s party generally loses seats in Congress. In 2010, despite President Obama\u2019s efforts, the Republicans gained a whopping sixty-three seats and took control of the House of Representatives.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    Since presidents usually have less party support in Congress in the second halves of their terms, they most often expect that Congress will be more amenable to their initiatives in their first two years. But even then,divided government<\/a><\/span>, where one party controls the presidency and another party controls one or both chambers of Congress, has been common over the last fifty years. For presidents, the prospect of both a friendly House and Senate has become the exception.<\/p>\r\n

    Even when the White House and Congress are controlled by the same party, as with President Obama and the 2009 and 2010 Congress, presidents do not monopolize the legislative agenda. Congressional leaders, especially of the opposing party, push other issues\u2014if only to pressure or embarrass the president. Members of Congress have made campaign promises they want to keep despite the president\u2019s policy preferences. Interest groups with pet projects crowd in.<\/p>\r\n

    Nonetheless, presidents are better placed than any other individual to influence the legislative process. In particular, their high prominence in the news means that they have a powerful impact on what issues will\u2014and will not\u2014be considered in the political system as a whole.<\/p>\r\n

    What about the contents of \u201cthe president\u2019s agenda\u201d? The president is but one player among many shaping it. The transition from election to inauguration is just over two months (Bush had less time because of the disputed 2000 Florida vote). Presidents are preoccupied first with naming a cabinet and White House staff. To build an agenda, presidents \u201cborrow, steal, co-opt, redraft, rename, and modify any proposal that fits their policy goals.\u201d[footnote]Paul C. Light, The President\u2019s Agenda: Domestic Policy Choice from Kennedy to Clinton<\/em>, 3rd ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), 89.[\/footnote]<\/span> Ideas largely come from fellow partisans outside the White House. Bills already introduced in Congress or programs proposed by the bureaucracy are handy. They have received discussion, study, and compromise that have built support. And presidents have more success getting borrowed legislation through Congress than policy proposals devised inside the White House.[footnote]Andrew Rudalevige, Managing the President\u2019s Program: Presidential Leadership and Legislative Policy Formulation<\/em> (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2002).[\/footnote]<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Crises and unexpected events affect presidents\u2019 agenda choices. Issues pursue presidents, especially through questions and stories of White House reporters, as much as presidents pursue issues. A hugely destructive hurricane on the Gulf Coast propels issues of emergency management, poverty, and reconstruction onto the policy agenda whether a president wants them there or not.<\/p>\r\n

    Finally, many agenda items cannot be avoided. Presidents are charged by Congress with proposing an annual budget. Raw budget numbers represent serious policy choices. And there are ever more agenda items that never seem to get solved (e.g., energy, among many others).<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    Chief Lobbyist in Congress<\/h2>\r\n

    After suggesting what Congress should do, presidents try to persuade legislators to follow through. But without a formal role, presidents are outsiders to the legislative process. They cannot introduce bills in Congress and must rely on members to do so.<\/p>\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Legislative Liaison<\/h3>\r\n

    Presidents aim at legislative accomplishments by negotiating with legislators directly or through their\u00a0legislative liaison<\/a><\/span> officers: White House staffers assigned to deal with Congress who provide a conduit from president to Congress and back again. These staffers convey presidential preferences and pressure members of Congress; they also pass along members\u2019 concerns to the White House. They count votes, line up coalitions, and suggest times for presidents to rally fellow party members. And they try to cut deals.<\/p>\r\n

    Legislative liaison focuses less on twisting arms than on maintaining \u201can era of good feelings\u201d with Congress. Some favors are large: supporting an appropriation that benefits members\u2019 constituencies; traveling to members\u2019 home turf to help them raise funds for reelection; and appointing members\u2019 cronies to high office. Others are small: inviting them up to the White House, where they can talk with reporters; sending them autographed photos or extra tickets for White House tours; and allowing them to announce grants. Presidents hope the cordiality will encourage legislators to return the favor when necessary.[footnote]This section relies on Kenneth Collier, Between the Branches: The White House Office of Legislative Affairs<\/em> (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1997).[\/footnote]<\/span><\/p>\r\n

    Such good feelings are tough to maintain when presidents and the opposition party espouse conflicting policies, especially when that party has a majority in one or both chambers of Congress or both sides adopt take-it-or-leave-it stances.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n

    \r\n

    The Veto<\/h3>\r\n

    When Congress sends a bill to the White House, a president can return it with objections.[footnote]This section relies most on Charles M. Cameron, Veto Bargaining: Presidents and the Politics of Negative Power\u00a0<\/em>(New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000); see also Robert J. Spitzer, The Presidential Veto: Touchstone of the American Presidency<\/em> (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1988).[\/footnote]<\/span> This\u00a0veto<\/a><\/span><\/em>\u2014Latin for \u201cI forbid\u201d\u2014heightens the stakes. Congress can get its way only if it overrides<\/a><\/span> the veto with two-thirds majorities in each chamber. Presidents who use the veto can block almost any bill they dislike; only around 4 percent of all vetoes have ever been successfully overridden.[footnote]See Harold W. Stanley and Richard G. Niemi, Vital Statistics on American Politics, 1999\u20132000<\/em> (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 1998), table 6-9.[\/footnote]<\/span> The threat of a veto can be enough to get Congress to enact legislation that presidents prefer.<\/p>\r\n

    The veto does have drawbacks for presidents. Consider the following:<\/p>\r\n\r\n