Hss assignment – Due 6/5
Download 1.3 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- And- Edwards votes neg- agenda setting is critical given finite PC
AT: EdwardsPresidential leadership still key- facilitates coalition building and important at the margins- conclusion of their cardEdwards, 9 – Distinguished Professor of Political Science at Texas A&M University, holds the George and Julia Blucher Jordan Chair in Presidential Studies and has served as the Olin Professor of American Government at Oxford [George, “The Strategic President”, Printed by the Princeton University Press, pg. 149-150] Even presidents who appeared to dominate Congress were actually facilitators rather than directors of change. They understood their own limitations and explicitly took advantage of opportunities in their environments. Working at the margins, they successfully guided legislation through Congress. When their resources diminished, they reverted to the stalemate that usually characterizes presidential-congressional relations. As legendary management expert Peter Drucker put it about Ronald Reagan, "His great strength was not charisma, as is commonly thought, but his awareness and acceptance of exactly what he could and what he could not do."134 These conclusions are consistent with systematic research by Jon Bond, Richard Fleisher, and B. Dan Wood. They have focused on determining whether the presidents to whom we attribute the greatest skills in dealing with Congress were more successful in obtaining legislative support for their policies than were other presidents. After carefully controlling for other influences on congressional voting, they found no evidence that those presidents who supposedly were the most proficient in persuading Congress were more successful than chief executives with less aptitude at influencing legislators.135 Scholars studying leadership within Congress have reached similar conclusions about the limits on personal leadership. Cooper and Brady found that institutional context is more important than personal leadership skills or traits in determining the influence of leaders and that there is no relationship between leadership style and effectiveness.136 Presidential legislative leadership operates in an environment largely beyond the president's control and must compete with other, more stable factors that affect voting in Congress in addition to party. These include ideology, personal views and commitments on specific policies, and the interests of constituencies. By the time a president tries to exercise influence on a vote, most members of Congress have made up their minds on the basis of these other factors. Thus, a president's legislative leadership is likely to be critical only for those members of Congress who remain open to conversion after other influences have had their impact. Although the size and composition of this group varies from issue to issue, it will almost always be a minority in each chamber. << It is important to note that it is not necessary to take an ex-treme position to obtain a better understanding of the nature of presidential leadership. There are times, of course, when presidents do persuade some members of Congress to change their votes. A famous example of apparent large-scale changeoccurred over the Panama Canal treaties, ratified in 1978. Inthe fall of 1976, shortly before Jimmy Carter became president,forty-eightsenatorsintroducedaresolutionpledgingnottoap-prove any change in the existing treaties regarding the canal. After a full-court press, Carter obtained the two-thirds vote inthe Senate to ratify the new treaties.¶ 137¶ The issue for us is not whether persuasion is¶ ever ¶ successful in moving a member of Congress. Instead, the question is whether persuasion is typically the key to presidential success in Congress. Examples such as the Panama Canal treaties are rare. Whatever the circumstances, the impact of persuasion on the outcome is usually relatively modest. As Calvin Mouw and Michael MacKuen concluded, “presidential influence in Congress does not rely on persuasion.”¶ 138¶ Although potentially important, conversion is likely to be at the margins of coalition building rather than at the core of policy change. Presidential legislative leadership is more useful in exploiting discrete op-portunities than in creating broad possibilities for policy change And- Edwards votes neg- agenda setting is critical given finite PCEdwards, 9 – Distinguished Professor of Political Science at Texas A&M University, holds the George and Julia Blucher Jordan Chair in Presidential Studies and has served as the Olin Professor of American Government at Oxford [George, “The Strategic President”, Printed by the Princeton University Press, pg. 149-150] Setting priorities.¶ New presidents are wise to resist the tempta-tions to try to deliver on all their campaign promises immedi-ately following their elections and to accede to the many de-mands that interests make on a new administration. Instead, it is important to establish priorities among legislative proposals.In addition, because the Washington community pays dispro-portionate attention to the first major legislative initiatives, it is especially critical to choose early battles wisely. Setting priorities in the early weeks of a new administrationis also important because during the first months in office thepresident has the greatest latitude in focusing on priority legis-lation. After the transition period, other interests have moreinfluence on the White House agenda. Congress is quite capa-ble of setting its own agenda and is unlikely to defer to thepresident for long. In addition, ongoing policies continually force decisions to the president’s desk.If the president is not able to focus Congress’s attention onhis priority programs, they may become lost in the complex and overloaded legislative process. Congress needs time to di-gest what the president sends, to engage in independent analy-ses, and to schedule hearings and markups. Unless the presi-dent clarifies his priorities, Congress may put the WhiteHouse’s proposals in a queue. Setting priorities is also important because presidents and their staff can lobby effectively for only a few bills at a time. The president’s political capital is inevitably limited, and it is sensible to focus on the issues he cares about most. Setting priorities early also can reduce intra-administration warfareover the essence of the administration Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 1.3 Mb. Share with your friends:
|