1. Presidential Character
The Imperial Presidency

2. What is an Imperial Presidency?
Phrase became popular in the 1960’s
Presidencies that get “out of control” in regards to power and influence
Presidencies that have exceeded constitutional limits

3. Arguments: Imperial Presidency is Increasing
Increased staffing = appointments based on personal loyalty to the president, not subject to outside approval
Creates a “royal court” (Nixon, Reagan)
New advisory bodies developed around the presidency, many of which complemented (critics suggest rivaled) the main cabinet departments
Office of Management and Budget, National Security Council
The Senate does not "advise and consent" to appts to the Executive Office of the President (with only a handful of exceptions), as it does with cabinet appts.
They are independent and not accountable
The Presidency relies on powers that exceed the Constitution
Foreign policy and war powers often questioned
Presidential secrecy also questioned

4. Arguments: Imperial Presidency is Not Increasing
The Executive Office of the President (EOP) makes up only a very small part of the federal bureaucracy and the Pres has little influence over appts of most members of the federal bureaucracy
The number of people within the EOP is tiny and there is no institutional continuity at all
The organization and functioning of most of the Federal government is determined by federal law and the President has little power to reorganize most of the federal government

5. Is the president’s power really growing? – Maybe Not
Growth in the size and complexity of the federal bureaucracy
A battery of post-Nixon controls on executive power, including transparency rules and "watchdog bureaucracies“
Congressional Budget Office
More willingness to and protection of “whistle blowers”
Changes in technologies/media that amplify the effect of official dissent, and increase the capacity of opponents to mobilize against executive action
Declining public trust in federal authority
Declining executive discretion over the use of federal funds, which are increasingly committed to mandatory programs
More than half the budget

6. Dwight Eisenhower (1953-61) Orderly, military style
Delegated authority to trained specialists
Bumbling manner of speaking was disguise to avoid being “pinned down” in public

7. John Kennedy (1961-63) Bold, articulate, amusing leader
Improviser who bypassed traditional lines of authority
Surrounded himself with talented amateurs

8. Lyndon Johnson ( )
Master legislative strategist- great dealmaker
Washington insider
Tended to micromanage

9. Richard Nixon (1969-74) Expertise in foreign policy
Disliked personal confrontation
Deep suspicion of the media, opponents, and the bureaucracy
Tried to centralize power in the White House

10. Gerald Ford (1974-77) Discussion-oriented and genial
Decision structures not always coherent or utilized

11. Jimmy Carter (1977-81) Washington outsider (and proud of it!)
Tried to micromanage

12. Ronald Reagan ( )
Set policy priorities then gave staff wide latitude
Leader of public opinion
“The Great Communicator”

13. George H.W. Bush (1989-93) Hands-on manager
Considerable Washington experience

14. Bill Clinton (1993-2001) Good communicator Informal/ad hoc structure
Pursued liberal/centrist policies

15. George W. Bush (2001-09) Tightly ran White House
Agenda became dominated by foreign affairs post-9/11

16. Presidential “Rules of Thumb”
Move it or Lose It: get things done early in your term before influence erodes or other things come up
Avoid Details: better to have 3 or 4 top priorities and not get bogged down with the rest
Cabinets don’t get things done, people do – so choose wisely and keep an eye on them.