Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T19:22:00.218Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reforming the “President”: The Individual as Leader

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 November 2022

George C. Edwards III*
Affiliation:
U.S. Military Academy and Texas A & M University

Extract

Proposals to reform the presidency fall into three increasingly exclusive categories. The most inclusive are those that focus on reforming the American political system and by doing so altering the balance of power within the government, usually in favor of the chief executive. The effort to strengthen the party system is probably the most prominent representative of this orientation. Other proposals, such as a presidential item veto, would increase the president's power on a more modest scale but still require change in the fundamental rules of the game.

A second class of proposals has the narrower aim of reforming the presidency as an institution. Rather than emphasizing increased power for the president, these recommendations attempt to aid the chief executive in carrying out his responsibilities more judiciously. They often focus on providing the president more or better decision-making resources. Plans for reorganizing or otherwise improving the White House staff system or the Executive Office of the President or for insulating the president from parochial demands through a single six-year term are notable examples of suggestions for institutional reform.

The variety of reformist proposals that is most common and most restricted in scope concentrates on improving the presidency by changing the characteristics of the individuals who occupy the Oval Office. Some would have us pay more attention to the character or personality of candidates for the office, while others stress the importance of choosing presidents who possess the proper skills for governing. To achieve these goals, proponents of change advocate reforms ranging from alterations in the processes by which we select presidents to candidate psychoanalysis.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

CBS News/The New York Times Poll. December 1, 1986. News Release.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. III. 1988a. At the Margins. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. 1988b. Presidential Leadership of Congress. In Jones, Bryan, ed., Political Leadership from Political Science Perspectives. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, George C. 1985. Comparing Chief Executives. Public Opinion. June/July: 5051, 54.Google Scholar
Fleisher, Richard and Bond, Jon. 1986. Presidential Leadership Skill and Success in Congress. Presented at the annual meeting of the Southern Political Science Association, Atlanta, Georgia.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin. 1986. Beyond 1984: The Anomalies of American Politics. PS: Political Science & Politics, 19: 222236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, William. November 7, 1985. The Voters' Mood 1986: The Six-Year Itch. National Journal.Google Scholar
Sorensen, Theodore C. 1965. Kennedy. London: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar
Supporting a Greater Federal Role. April 18, 1987. National Journal, p. 924.Google Scholar