This article applies a concept of "presidential leverage" to the inner workings of the White House, specifically decisions regarding the location of policy formulation. The guiding question addresses how a president's leverage in the political system influences decisions regarding policy making. Findings support the propositions that (1) leverage has a systematic impact on presidential policy formation, (2) divided government has little or no impact on policy making location, and (3) presidents who are ideologically compatible with Congress are less likely to centralize. I conclude with some general thoughts on the current state of presidential leverage.
During the first Congress of the United States, two measures to amend Article I of the Constitution were considered which, if ratified, would have limited the number of successive terms held by senators and representatives. Those measures were defeated and the issue was not considered again for over 150 years. However, since 1943 when the proposal was first resurrected in Congress, interest in the idea has grown to the point that from January 1981 through February 1992 no less than 69 proposals to limit the tenure of our national legislators were introduced into Congress (Richardson 1991, 80-90, 93-100; Richardson 1992, 1).Today the idea of limiting the number of successive terms a member of Congress may hold is hotter than ever. Fanned by the support of the 1988 and 1992 Republican National Conventions, and fueled by the efforts of several special interest groups, the idea has achieved high levels of public support nationally. A nationwide poll of likely voters conducted two weeks before the 1992 elections showed that 79% favored congressional term limitations (Shafer 1992). In an impressive burst of voter resolve, 15 states have passed amendments to their constitutions that attempt to limit the number of successive terms that their own U.S. representatives and senators may serve in office.
Recently, there has been renewed interest in the question of party ownership of economic prosperity, which Petrocik argued was a performance issue subject to the flow of events over which administrations have no control. Using Gallup Polls administered between 1955 and 2013, we investigate public opinion on whether Republicans or Democrats would do a better job of keeping the country prosperous. Using error correction analysis, we test political and economic variables to assess the political legacy of the Great Depression and New Deal. Our analysis shows that Democrats owned prosperity before the 1980s, but have since lost momentum in public opinion on the issue. New generations have no personal memories of the Great Depression or the ensuing partisan realignment. The Baby Boomer and so-called X generations, instead, experienced the stagflation of the 1970s during their young adulthood, frequently associated with the Carter Administration. A persistent legacy of the Great Depression, however, is
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.