Politics has always been one of the main topics of discussion for many scientists and philosophers. Throughout human history, various civilizations and countries have tried to implement different political systems in their societies. However, the most common form of government includes a single highest-ranking position – in Medieval times, there were kings and queens, and in the present, the majority of countries have a president. President’s rights and obligations may vary depending on the intricacies of the local governmental system. In their research, Stephen Skowronek and Richard Neustadt explore the nature of presidential power in the United States of America. Neustadt’s conservative view on the negotiable essence of such power corresponds with Skowronek’s concept of “political time”, even though Skowronek believes in the power of individuality more than the other author.
In his work Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents, Neustadt states that the most important feature the American president must possess is the ability to persuade and bargain. Neustadt (1990) argues that the president “does not obtain results by giving orders” (p. 212), which means that to implement change into a stable, even not effective, structure, the president has to negotiate his propositions and decisions with other governmental representatives. The government of the United States of America is a complex system consisting of separate institutions that must share power, which inevitably leads to internal conflicts (Neustadt, 1990). Yet, the president must be able to solve disputes while staying true to their own political ideas.
However, the talent for persuasion is not all a successful president should strive for – to persuade someone, they need to have enough authority and power. Neustadt (1990) mentions that the president should be careful regarding their reputation, meaning that while nobody is safe from making mistakes, there is a great difference between singular wrong-doings and set behavioral patterns. Such sequences may corrupt society’s attitude towards the president and the entire ruling branch. The president should focus on creating patterns that demonstrate effective problem-solving skills and the ability to predict logical outcomes and solutions for various issues. In addition, Neustadt makes a point about the president’s power over those he needs to persuade – not charisma or reasoning, but sensible usage of manipulation concerning others’ responsibilities or fears (Neustadt, 1990). In Neustadt’s opinion, these methods will help the president to create an authoritative persona, which will have a powerful impact on his opponents and the masses.
Skowronek’s work, Presidential Leadership in Political Time, views the issue of presidential power from a different angle – in correspondence with his theory of “political time”. Skowronek (2005) suggests that besides usual historical periods exist political periods, which the author describes as the periods that are “marked by the rise to power of new political coalitions” (p. 90). Skowronek makes a point about the cyclical, not linear, periodization of political time, meaning that there are patterns that help to categorize presidents by similarities of their political periods and political strategies. To demonstrate his theory, the author compares Franklin Roosevelt and Andrew Jackson. Both men came to power after the party that had been dominant for a long period was defeated at the polls and had to deal with the deep unsatisfaction of American citizens with the current state of the country (Skowronek, 2005). Skowronek accentuates the parallels between the presidents’ challenges – deconstructing the old regime and creating a new effective order. The writer’s idea of political time helps understand the constituents of presidential power by emphasizing different presidents’ most prominent features.
Thus, Skowronek’s idea of a “political time” does not necessarily challenge Neustadt’s theory concerning the president being a masterful negotiator and a knowledgeable manager of all the power branches in the United States. Moreover, these concepts complement each other, as every president had to devise different persuasion strategies for operating in their respective political climates. For example, Roosevelt, who came to power during the Great Depression, had a rather different program from Kennedy because his “political time” had different challenges and called for other actions than Kennedy’s (Skowronek, 2005). Skowronek and Neustadt’s theories can be combined to show that every new president should be aware of the country’s political reality. That way, they can effectively manage it, find the best possible solutions to existing dilemmas, and discover the most suitable methods of persuasion and defending their constitutional decisions.
Nevertheless, researchers have some differences in their views on the nature of presidential power as well. On the one hand, as stated before, Neustadt (1990) believes that the most important characteristic of a successful political leader is the power of persuasion. The author argues that the president should try to work within the system, emphasizing the importance of the way the president interacts with political elites. Neustadt (1990) concludes that the president of the United States does not and should not have too much executive power. The most useful skill the president can have is the ability to balance the powers of separate political institutions, maintain order within the country, and create an overall positive external image of themselves and the state.
On the other hand, Skowronek has a more individualistic outlook on presidential power. In his work, he accentuates the meaning of a competent leader who can pursue their ideas and plans effectively while implementing positive change into the current political system (Skowronek, 1990). Skowronek, on the contrary to Neustadt, sees presidential leadership more as a confrontation between the president and the system. Nevertheless, the writer does not deny the importance of negotiation and working with the representatives of different executive branches. In correspondence with his theory of political time, Skowronek points out that systems change, creating different conditions for every new president and, as a result, altering the challenges for leadership (Skowronek, 1990). While the author believes that the presidents should have their own stern stance and program, he also agrees with the negotiable and persuasive essence of presidential power.
To conclude, Skowronek’s and Neustadt’s ideas on presidential power do not necessarily challenge each other. Neustadt emphasizes the importance of the president’s ability to persuade and bargain, as the American political system consists of many branches that have to share powers. He also points out the significance of the president’s image and explains how they should use their knowledge and power to get the desired outcome. Skowronek implements his theory of political time to describe the cyclical and changing nature of the political system, which means that every new president can find helpful points in other leaders’ strategies if they look at the history of American politics critically. Combining these theories will help new leader understand the importance of being attentive to the political state of their country so that they can find the best possible solution to current problems and successfully implement the most suitable persuasion tactic.
References
Skowronek, S. (2005). Presidential Leadership in Political Times. In M. Nelson (Ed.), The Presidency and the Political System (8th ed., pp. 89–134). CQ Press.
Neustadt, R. E. (1990). Presidential power and the modern presidents: The politics of leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan. Free Press.