A Review of “Partisan Balance: Why Political Parties Don't Kill the U.S. Constitutional System”

How, and why, do presidents use the rhetorical content in signing statements for strategic purposes? The article analyzes the rhetorical content of the 985 signing statements from FDR through Carter and argues that the president's rhetoric is an effort to frame the accomplishment that has just occurred with an eye toward maximizing prospective power and building legacy. The article explores the impact of different political contexts (divided government and elections) on several important rhetorical characteristics found in signing statements. In addition, the study delves into three interesting cases related to presidential credit claiming and attribution. LBJ and Carter were the most likely to attribute credit to members of Congress, while Nixon was the most likely to claim credit for himself. The findings help illuminate the various motivations that presidents have to use signing statements for reasons beyond constitutional challenges.

Successful political leaders do not necessarily do more than other leaders; successful leaders control the political definition of their actions, the terms in which their places in history are understood. The failures are those who, upon leaving office, look to some time in the distant future when people might begin to appreciate the wisdom of what they did. (Skowronek 1997 Skowronek, Stephen. 1997. The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to Bill Clinton, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  [Google Scholar], 17–18)     

A Review of “Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal”

Abstract

Existing scholarship on the electoral careers of U.S. Senate appointees has made progress toward identifying the determinants of appointee success and failure in the electoral arena. This study builds on these analyses by considering the universe of Senate appointees and examining each stage of the electoral process, including the decision to run. In addition, appointee personal characteristics, including gender and dynastic familial relationships, which have not been investigated in past work are examined here. The results demonstrate the centrality of personal attributes, specifically previous elective office and familial connections, to the electoral fate of appointees. These findings have implications for governors who make appointments, the role of family dynasties in elections, and the elements of incumbency that help to create electoral advantage.     

A Review of “Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency,the Supreme Court,and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History”

In 1974 David Mayhew proposed that incumbency was increasingly important in deciding elections to the House of Representatives. One cause of this increase, he speculated, might be more effective use of the resources of office by incumbents bent on improving their electoral position. These suggestions heavily influenced subsequent research on congressional elections, and helped shape the design of the 1978 national election survey by Michigan's Center for Political Studies. This essay surveys that line of research, except for the recent articles making use of the 1978 data or dealing specifically with campaigning, which will be treated in a sequel. Full length books, articles before Mayhew's, and unpublished papers are excluded, except for certain works of particular relevance.