Evolution of the Modern Rhetorical Presidency: Presidential Presentation and Development of the State of the Union Address

Abstract

n i s study look at the structuraland rhetorical changes in the state of the union addressji-om George Washington to Bill Clinton. The authorfinds that beginning with early-twentieth-centuv presidents, the length of address drops sipificantly and the president increasingly attempts to i d n t h himseras one of the public in the speech. Among other things, thefindings suggest three distinctperiods in the evolution of the state of the union address: afoundingperiod, a traditionalperiod, and a modern period, H m e v q although early-twentieth-century presidencies may exhibit change in delivery and style of the state of the union address, it is unclear whether this can be credited to a specific modern rhetorical innovation or whether the traditionaVmodern paradip may necessitate rearahation. Keywort&: modern presidency; traditionalpresideng; stde of the union address; J e B q Elis; rhetorical presideng He [the president] shaU3om time to timegive to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shaUjudge necess a y and expedient. -US. Constitution, Article 11, Section I11More than the founders ever envisioned, the presidency is at the center of policy debates. From "going public"' to acheve his plans and goals as described by Samuel Kernell 1. Goingpublicis a term referring to the president's appeal to the public as an alternative to bargaining with the legislature or attempting to use conventional rules of government to accomplish goals.Ryan L. Teen is a Ph. D. candidate inpolitical science at Vanderbilt Uniuersi&. His research interests include presidential rhetoric and politid behavior. AUTHOR 'SNOTE: 7Ke authorwouldliketo thank Enya Eten forhersupportandencour~ement. Ihe author would also like to thank John Gen; Bruce Oppenheimn; Richard Pride, Lany Gnzn and Amy Car&, as well as the Presidential Studies Quarter& editor and anonymous miewer5 for a.ll of their thoughfil comments and suggestions. Residential StudiesQaartmb 33, no. 2 vane)

The Major Addresses of Modern Presidents: Parameters of a Data Set

“…The second approach, and probably the most common, is to rely on State of the Union addresses when studying presidential discourse—sometimes taking these speeches on their own and sometimes pairing them with inaugurals (e.g., Coe 2007; Coe and Domke 2006; Cohen 1995; Lim 2002; Teten 2003). This approach has clear advantages over using just inaugural addresses: the sample is larger; the speeches provide much broader content, especially with respect to policy; and the addresses occur regularly, providing a (nearly) annual measure of presidential rhetoric.…”

“…Perhaps the single most prominent strain of research on the presidency, at least in the discipline of communication, is the study of presidential rhetoric. Countless studies have examined speeches of individual presidents (for reviews, see Aune and Medhurst 2008; Stuckey and Antczak 1998), and a smaller but still substantial body of research has tracked broader trends in presidential speech over time (e.g., Campbell and Jamieson 2008; Domke and Coe 2008; Hart 1984; Lim 2008; Shogan 2006; Teten 2003). Studies that fall into this latter category—longitudinal analyses of presidential discourse—inevitably wrestle with a difficult issue: which presidential speeches should be analyzed?…”

“A Discovered Dissembler Can Achieve Nothing Great”; Or, Four Theses on the Death of Presidential Rhetoric in an Age of Empire

“…Tulis believes that direct appeals to the people have become such “an unquestioned premise of our political culture” that they carry the aura of naturalness and tradition (4). Other scholars have wondered when this shift occurred and have questioned the degree of effectiveness that any president actually has in using the rhetorical presidency to shape national debate, but there is general agreement that twentieth‐century presidents talked to the people more directly and more often than their predecessors (see Cook 2002; Druckman and Holmes 2004; Ellis 1998; Klinghard 2005; Ragsdale and Theis 1997; Teton 2003; Zarefsky 2000). The concern is that, when presidents try to persuade the people to apply pressure to their representatives, it may disturb the balance of power between the three branches.…”

Liberals Lecture, Conservatives Communicate: analyzing complexity and ideology in 381,609 speeches

“…For example, speeches by American presidents have become simpler over time because they became more directed toward the public rather than a small political elite [24][25][26][27]. Increased media attention also demands less complex language.…”