<i>The Contemporary Presidency</i>: The Personnel Process in the Modern Presidency

Lewis, David E.

doi:10.1111/j.1741-5705.2012.03993.x

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The number of federal political appointees increased steadily during the 1950s–1980s, while overall government employment decreased relative to the U.S. population (Richardson and Pfiffner, , p. 179). While the number of appointees has remained relatively stable since the 1980s, today, an incoming president fills almost 4,000 appointed positions—double the number of such positions as during the middle of the twentieth century (Lewis, , p. 587; Lewis, , p. 48–49).…”

Section: Literature Review and Projected Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which government officials leak unauthorized information to the press in Washington?

Alaimo

2015

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Every modern president of the United States has been bedeviled by unauthorized leaks of government information to the press. Who is responsible for such leaks? Presidents of the United States have accused civil servants of attempting to undermine them. However, journalists have suggested that the presidents' own political appointees leak more. Using interviews conducted in 2013 with both presidential political appointees and civil servants who worked in public affairs for the U.S. Treasury Department during the administrations of Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush, as well as interviews with reporters with whom the Treasury officials interacted frequently, this case study finds that political appointees and civil servants leak unauthorized information that does not serve the president's interests to the press with roughly the same frequency. The findings shed light on behavior that is typically shrouded in secrecy and call into question the effort by modern U.S. presidents to gain greater control of the federal government by hiring record numbers of political appointees. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Literature Review and Projected Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which government officials leak unauthorized information to the press in Washington?

Alaimo

2015

Journal of Public Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…By the 1950s, the federal merit system had expanded to cover most executive branch workers. But beginning with the creation of Schedule C positions in 1953, the number and levels of political appointments increased, and by the twenty‐first century there were approximately 4,000 positions that presidents could fill, far more than any other contemporary democracy (Lewis 2012; Moynihan 2021; Pfiffner 2020).…”

Section: The Deep Versus the Shallow Statementioning

confidence: 99%

President Trump and the Shallow State: Disloyalty at the Highest Levels

Pfiffner¹

2022

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

President Donald Trump often complained about the "deep state" of career civil servants who, he asserted, were determined to undermine his presidency. But it was his own presidential appointees who most visibly resisted his directives. Political appointees are expected to be the most loyal advocates of a president's policy agenda, riding herd on the many bureaucracies of the executive branch. This article analyzes resistance to Trump's policy directives by his own appointees in the White House, cabinet, military, and intelligence community. It concludes that this level of resistance is unprecedented in the modern presidency.President Donald Trump often complained about the "deep state" of career civil servants who, he asserted, were determined to undermine his presidency. But it was his own presidential appointees who most visibly resisted his directives. Political appointees are expected to be the most loyal advocates of a president's policy agenda, riding herd on the many bureaucracies of the executive branch. Yet Trump's appointees in the White House, cabinet, military, and intelligence community refused to carry out many of the president's directives to an extent unprecedented in the modern presidency. President Trump's appointees went well beyond the normal disagreements about policy that characterize every administration; they resorted to slow-walking orders, refusing to comply with directives, and even outright sabotage (e.g., removing documents from the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office). Even Vice President Mike Pence, under Trump's pressure, refused to break the law when presiding over the formal counting of electoral votes on January 6, 2021. Leadership is central to the 573 Presidential Studies Quarterly

show abstract

“…Having laid out the significance of descriptive representation in government, we turn to our theoretical expectations for the role of selection method in promoting diversity among state executive leaders. In making appointment decisions, governors are not unlike presidents filling positions in the federal government, and when presidents make cabinet appointments, they consider diversity among other things such as loyalty, competency, and abilities (Lewis 2012; Patterson and Pfiffner 2001). For example, President Bill Clinton was vocal about his goal for a demographically diverse executive branch (Weko 1995).…”

Section: Theoretical Expectationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diversity and Power: Selection Method and Its Impacts on State Executive Descriptive Representation

Rhinehart

Geras

2019

State Politics & Policy Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores diversity within top leadership positions in state governments, specifically, the role that position selection method plays in promoting the inclusion of racial and ethnic minorities into positions of power. We hypothesize that minorities will be more likely to serve in appointed positions as governors consider diversity in making appointments and less likely to serve in elected positions due to the additional hurdles for candidates of color. Using an original data set of state executive leaders from 2001 to 2017 from all 50 states, we find evidence that institutional design influences levels of diversity among state executive leaders. Racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to be appointed than elected to state executive leadership positions. In addition, we find that Democratic governors are more likely than Republican governors to appoint minorities. Ultimately, this evidence is important for understanding how institutional design can have consequences for descriptive representation, specifically for groups that have been historically excluded from political life.

show abstract

The Contemporary Presidency: The Personnel Process in the Modern Presidency

Cited by 13 publications

References 34 publications

Which government officials leak unauthorized information to the press in Washington?

Which government officials leak unauthorized information to the press in Washington?

President Trump and the Shallow State: Disloyalty at the Highest Levels

Diversity and Power: Selection Method and Its Impacts on State Executive Descriptive Representation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About