Going Public: New Strategies of Presidential Leadership

Samuel Kernell argues that Washington politics have undergone a structural change over the past half century. Traditionally, politics in Washington were conducted according to a system of mutually beneficial interactions and bargains. Kernell refers to this structure as institutionalized pluralism. Under such a system, the political elite are the ultimate decision makers. It is these elites that have access to a number of political resources that help shape and enforce their political power. As such, this early era Washington is essentially isolated from the core constituents. Party leaders and other senior political elites offer support to candidates who will not only tow the party line, but respect the seniority system already in place. Furthermore, institutionalized pluralism supports an environment in which coalitions form the spine of the system. The coalitions often shape the options available to the early presidents. Kernell describes the role of the President; "(he) seizes the center of the Washington bazaar and actively barter's with fellow politicians to build winning coalitions. He must do so...or he will forfeit any claim to leadership" (18). However, Washington politics has moved from a closely regulated environment of institutionalized pluralism to what Kernell refers to as individualized pluralism. A system of individual pluralism is one in which the system of strong parties, seniority and bargaining are in decline. In their stead has emerged a system of individualistic politicians which are driven not by coalition building and party support, but by maintaining the will of their constituent base. Kernell describes the institutionalized plural Washington as, "a political community constituted of independent members who have few group or institutional loyalties and who are generally less interested in sacrificing short-run, private career goals for the longer-term benefits of bargaining" (27). As such, a president is forced to deal with weakened leaders and weakened parties who may be unwilling or unable to deliver on proposed bargains. Kernell explains the change from institutionalized to individual pluralism as the result of an increased welfare state which "increased the size of the community and created large, interested constituencies outside of Washington" (28). In other words, Washington was no longer an isolated island of political elites. Secondly, individual pluralism emerged as a result of changes to communication and transportation. The President and elites had the means to communicate directly to the people. Lastly, Kernell argues that a decline in the strength of political parties in Washington as well as nationally fueled the evolution towards individualized pluralism. In the new era, the President and other major Washington players have evolved new leadership strategies. Going public can be described as political elites making a conscious appeal for support to their constituents, or as in the cas

Kernell's fine work is a wonderful addition to the scholarly literature in political science on the American presidency. It's well-written and well-organized. His insights into why, when and how presidents "go public" and take their case over the heads of congressmen to the people are informative and worthwhile. Not all of his observations fit the case studies he uses, and he sometimes exaggerates his case a bit, but overall he makes good points.Highly recommended for scholars of the presidency, or American politics in general. Also a good book for a knowledgeable layman interested in politics.

Sam Kernell's book is a must-read for students and scholars of the American Presidency. He artfully examines how modern American Presidents seek to persuade their constituents in a media-driven political environment. He takes Richard Neustadt's Presidential Power, and adds to it a crucial blend of modern circumstances in this evaluation. It is an enoyable read, chalked full of potentially valuable information for anyone seeeking to understand the modern Presidency and its persuasive difficulties.