PS 408 – The American
Presidency
The Historical Approach
September 11-13
Historical approach: periods or eras
The traditional system: 1789-1932.
The patronage state. Nature of politics within this
political system: Congress-centered to the extent
that the national government was involved.
Relation between nature of the regime and
politics.
Evidence that founders intended Congress to
dominate? Electoral control of the presidency.
King Caucus, deadlock of 1800, and the 12th
Amendment. Power of the purse.
Periods or eras, cont.
Modern Presidency: 1933 – present.
Need for a strong president came with the Great
Depression. Ushered in the regulatory and
redistributive state. Contrast to Congress, which has
been largely unchanged as an institution since the
1800s.
Components of the New Deal revolution:
Constitutional change: more expansive
interpretation of the commerce clause. “switch in time
that save nine.” NLRB v. Laughlin Steel (1937),
Wickard v. Filburn (1942). Unchallenged until the
Lopez case in 1995.
Modern presidency, cont.
Governmental change: new government
responsibilities for income security, the
economy, fairness in labor practices, etc.
Institutional change: end of congressional
government. Delegate power to the
bureacracy.
Political change: pushed parties to the
periphery and created more direct link
between the president and the people.
Modern Presidency, cont.
Consequences of the modern presidency
Ted Lowi – the plebiscitary presidency:
pressure for the president to expand power.
Examine Watergate and the recent practices
of domestic spying, torture, extraordinary
rendition, etc.
The presidency in the media age: the shift from
“institutionalized pluralism” to “individualized
pluralism” (Sam Kernell).
Historical approach: cycles
Stephen Skowronek – political time. Constitutional
and “national development” approaches are well
established, but they overlook the recurrent
patterns of history. Common historical context
faced by presidents in similar junctures of
political time. Three repeating regime types:
a. Regime construction: Jackson and FDR.
Challenges and opportunities faced by
presidents who are at the beginning of a new
party system.
Cycles approach, cont.
b. Regime management: Polk and Kennedy.
Reaffirmation and articulation. Continue the
policies of their predecessors.
c.
Regime enervation: Pierce and Carter.
Disjunction. Difficulty of holding the regime
together.
Problems with the approach: Role for Congress?
Divided government and role of minority party.
Unique challenges faced by modern presidents?
Higher expectations.
Applying the historical approach
Evolution of the nomination process
King Caucus,1800-1824. Congress controlled
nomination.
Party conventions, 1832-1908, party leaders
Emergent primaries, 1912-1968, voters started to play a
role, but still party leaders.
Dominant primaries, 1972, McGovern-Fraser reforms in
1972 made the primaries the only path to nomination.
Evolution of the general election: partisan electors in the
Electoral College.
Which approach does this fit better – periods or cycles?
Where would Clinton and George W. Bush fit in
Skowronek’s approach?