Power Approach -- Neustadt

Defining power – the “clerkship” of presidential power. "The conditions that promote his leadership in form, preclude a guarantee of leadership in fact."

Command – the limitations of unilateral presidential power. Not a very effective way for presidents to operate because five conditions have to be in place: direct order, clarity, publicity, ability to carry it out, and authority to do it.

Power approach, cont.

Persuasion – the core of presidential power. Separate institutions sharing powers. Successful uses of presidential power don’t come from the Constitution, but from the ability of the president to persuade. Logic doesn’t work: have to make others think it is in their interest to do what the president wants, not because it is in the president’s interest. The “Tom Sawyer” theory of presidential leadership.

Power approach, cont.

Professional reputation – the President’s standing “inside the Beltway.” Influence will depend on the appraisals of those who would be influenced

Public prestige – the President’s standing in the public (Gallup approval numbers). “Approve of the job the president is doing.” Personal component to this: is it support of the president as an individual? Or more the office? Also, separate the personal from job performance evaluation?

Presidential Approval Ratings1946-2004

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1946 1949 1952 1954 1957 1960 1963 1965 1968 1971 1974 1976 1979 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1995 2000 July2004

Truman

Ike

JFK

LBJ

Nixon

Ford

Carter

Reagan

Bush 41*

Clinton

Bush 43*

Power approach, cont.

Interaction between reputation and prestige.Making right choices. How to do it: guard

power prospects, protect against unrealistic expectations and hopes, has to be his own director of central intelligence (not literally)

Examples – Clinton and gays in the military. Didn’t think about the long-term power stakes. Bush and post-war planning attempt to reform Social Security.

Critiques of the Power approach

Alternative goals: presidents have pursued goals that are not consistent with the power motivation. Moral leadership, accountability instead of “protecting power stakes” (“the buck stop here”).

Alternative sources of influence: Legitimacy and loyalty can be important in addition to prestige, reputation, and legal authority.

Methodological – only supports with anecdotes. Ken Mayer’s work on executive orders. Also, approach only makes sense if presidents are trying to influence others. May use confrontation.

Critiques of the Power approach, cont.

Prescriptive: As practical advice to pres., how does it stack up? Can lead to "overload and breakdown."

Normative: what power ought to be or what it is? Have to ask what power is being used for.

Modification of the critique – not wrong so much as incomplete. Presidential power also varies by decision-making situation and substantive policy type.

Alternative interpretations of presidential power: charismatic leadership (Max Weber).

Rational Choice Approach

Assumptions of the rational choice approach

a. Goal directed behavior, consistency, maximize expected value.

b. Complete versus incomplete information.

   c. Explain collective action by looking at the maximizing behavior of individuals.

Does this approach make more sense to apply at the mass level or elite level (for example, to study presidents)?

Rational Choice, cont.

Applied to other areas of politics           a. Social choice / Arrow’s paradox           b. Collective ActionApply to the Presidency           a. Basic decision theory           b. Game theoryApproach may be used to formulate

hypotheses that can be tested across a variety of issues and presidents. Allows broader generalizations.

Rational Choice, cont.

New Institutionalism: the politics of structural choice (Moe): uncertainty, political compromise, and the fear of the state. Importance of public authority, Creates conditions under which it is much more difficult for the president to lead.

Response of president: politicize and centralize authority within the White House. Can lead to things like the Iran/Contra affair in the Reagan administration. Also, intelligence failures in the buildup to the war in Iraq.