The Presidency and the News Media

Abstract

Leo Strauss, often considered a critic of modernity, is famous for his claim that Machiavelli, in turning away from the classical tradition, is its originator. Yet his “Restatement on Xenophon's Hiero” presents a concise indictment of that tradition and a remarkably sympathetic account of the political and philosophic motives that led to the rupture. In light of this tension, Strauss's interest in Xenophon appears as a useful counterweight to both.     

The Presidency and Political Equality

When black Americans and white Americans want the president to do different things, who wins? When low-income earners prefer different government action than do middle and high-income earners, whose preferences are reflected in presidential behavior? Recent studies show that congressional behavior often most closely follows the preferences of the white and the wealthy, but we know relatively little about presidential behavior. Since the president and Congress make policy together, it is important to understand the extent of political equality in presidential behavior. We examine the degree to which presidents have provided equal representation to these groups over the past four decades. We compare the preferences of these groups for federal spending in various budget domains to presidents’ subsequent budget proposals in those domains from 1974 to 2010. Over this period, presidents’ proposals aligned more with the preferences of whites and high-income earners. However, Republican presidents are driving this overall pattern. Democratic presidents represent racial and income groups equally, but Republicans’ proposals are much more consistent with the spending preferences of whites and high-income earners. This pattern of representation reflects the composition of the president's party coalition and the spending preferences of groups within the party coalition.     

The Reagan Presidency, Growing Inequality, and the American Dream

For reasons that are not entirely clear, indices of inequality in the United States have increased since the 1970s. Evidence indicates that the policies of the Reagan administration were not the original cause of this inequality, but it does suggest that they contributed to that trend. This essay concludes that the political skills of the Reagan presidency, combined with the residual effects of the Democratic party's failure in the late 1970s, meant that Reagan was relatively immune to liberal attacks about growing inequality.     

James Naughtie,The Accidental American: Tony Blair and the Presidency

Abstract

The terms "justice" and "necessity" are often employed in discussions of war. The just war tradition seeks to delineate when wars are and are not just; other theologians who do not find this approach helpful may nevertheless resort to the logic of necessity. Although unjust, some wars may still be deemed necessary. Barth employs both the language and logic of justice and necessity in his approach to war. The purpose of this paper is to address Barth's exposition of war in relation to his approach to divine justice and the necessity of Christian affliction. It does not attempt to make any large claims about the just war tradition or other approaches to war. Rather, it is intended to be an immanent critique of Barth from Barth's own theology, showing that, although consistent with his view of church and state, Barth's theology of war is inconsistent with his view of both God's character as just and the external necessity of affliction to Christian witness.     

Religion and the US Presidency: Politics,the Media,and Religious Identity

Abstract

The relationship between religion and the presidency impacts both the viability of candidates and the manner in which decisions are made in the voting booth. Today we are living in culture where religion is front and center in politics. This article examines the role of religion in political discourse with special attention to the 2012 presidential election. It focuses on the manner in which religion and politics have become inextricably interwoven in the past sixty years. It begins by establishing the role of religion in the broader political arena. The article then turns to the manner in which religious identity and participation influence voting patterns, and how religious affiliation shapes the office of the presidency. The conclusion offers some reflections on the future of religion in presidential politics, an issue that will continue to be a significant factor in how and why voters support and marginalize particular candidates.     

Patterns of Political Support: Examining Congress and the Presidency

This paper examines political support toward Congress and the presidency. With data made available by Hibbing and Theiss-Morse (1995), I extend the work of Easton and Dennis (1969), demonstrating that there are distinct patterns of political support that correspond to diffuse support and to specific support for particular branches of the national government. The findings also support the arguments of Alwin et al. (1991) and others regarding generational assessments of political institutions. In particular, older citizens base their support toward Congress on perceptions of governmental performance.     

The Media and American Institutions: Introduction

Abstract

A striking feature of contemporary Christianity is the new consensus that has emerged about politics. Almost all churches and theologians now believe that the form of government most compatible with the Christian religion is democracy. Of course, an important difference still exists between Christians who support liberal democracy and those who cling to hopes for some kind of Marxist rule. But even this difference implies that the only serious debate is not whether democracy should be preferred to monarchy or to theocracy, but which kind of democracy is best—a democracy based on human rights (liberal democracy) or a democracy based on a more radical notion of human liberation (socialist democracy). For contemporary Christians, it seems obvious that the Gospel message of care for the poor and universal love implies democratic institutions.     

Realignment Theory and the Modern American Presidency: A Reformulation

Realignment theory must be adapted to take account of changes that have occurred in the nature of the American presidency. The modern presidency is characterized by a direct, near-exclusive relationship with the public, through use of the mass media. This relationship has fundamentally altered the President's relationship with other political institutions and distanced presidential politics from congressional and local politics. The American party system, in other words, now encompasses a number of separate political processes that need to be approached as distinct theoretical problems. Realignment theory successfully explains much of what has taken place in one of those processes, presidential politics, over the last twenty years. But, given the immediacy of the modern President's relationship with the voting public, we should no longer expect broad shifts in the character of presidential electoral coalitions to be reflected at other levels of the American party system.