|
Insufficient presidential focus tanks the agenda
Beckman 10 – Professor of Political Science
(Matthew N. Beckman, Professor of Political Science @ UC-Irvine, 2010, “Pushing the Agenda: Presidential Leadership in U.S. Lawmaking, 1953-2004,” pg. 152)
Americans never see a shortage of national problems needing solutions. Reviewing Gallup's time-honored question about the "most important problem facing the country today" reveals that postwar Americans, in addition to frequently viewing the economy as problematic, have at various points also cited civil rights, energy, health care, crime, and welfare as being among their most pressing concerns. And, however much the omnibus categories paper over the particulars (e.g., inflation versus unemployment versus taxes), they nonetheless capture the essential point: salient, substantial problems always await American presidents. Before spelling out which problems are ripest for presidential pick- ing, I should first note that presidents must pick; they must prioritize. On this score, President Jimmy Carter's experience is instructive. Asked by a reporter if he would "be able to keep fully all [his] campaign promises," President Carter expressed his intention sincerely: "My determination is to keep all those promises" (23 February 1977). As became readily apparent, by insufficiently prioritizing certain initiatives, the Carter administration was unable to target resources effectively, from start to finish, earlygame to endgame. This basic error helps explain why so much of President Carter's legislative agenda languished on Capitol Hill.
New issues tradeoff with congressional agenda
Feehery ‘9
(John, president of Feehery Group, a Washington-based advocacy firm that has represented clients including the News Corp., Ford Motor Co. and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Commentary: Obama enters 'The Matrix', http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/21/feehery.obama.matrix/)
The legislative calendar is simply not that long. A new administration has a little less than a year to pass its big-ticket items, mostly because it is very hard to get major initiatives done in an election year. Take away the three months it takes to hire key staff, a couple of months for the various congressional recesses, and you have about six months to really legislate. Since Congress is supposed to use some time to pass its annual spending bills (there are 12 that need to be passed each year, not counting supplemental spending bills), time for big initiatives is actually very limited. Each day the president takes time to travel overseas or to throw out the first pitch at an All Star game, he is taking time away from making contacts with legislators whose support is crucial for the president's agenda. Time is not a limitless resource on Capitol Hill.
AT: Focus
Light ‘99
(Paul Light, Director of Governmental Studies at Brookings Institute, The President’s Agenda)
The President’s agenda is a remarkable list. It is rarely written down. It constantly shifts and evolves. It is often in flux even for the President and the top staff. Items move onto the agenda one day and off the next. Because of its status in the policy process, the President’s agenda is the subject of intense conflict. The infighting is resolved sometimes through mutual consent and “collegial” bargaining, sometimes through marked struggle and domination. It is not surprising that we know so little about it.
Newstex ‘9
(June 23, 2009, LN)
For now, the White House should have as little to do as possible with the various legislative products. Let the committees absorb the blows of the bad weeks. Let the early coalitions present themselves. Let the Republicans show their strategy in the mark-up sessions. Let the CBO score all the different options. Let the legislature familiarize itself with different revenue options. Wait. Wait and wait and wait. Wait until Congress has pushed this as far upfield as it's able. Then open up the White House. Then have Obama on TV. Then have Rahm on the phone with legislators. Then take Olympia Snowe for a ride on Marine One. The White House can exert explosive force on a piece of legislation, but it can only do so effectively for a short period of time. That was the mistake Clinton White House made in 1994. By the time their legislation was near reality, administration officials were so deeply involved that they couldn't add external momentum. It is not a mistake that Rahm Emmanuel, who watched it all happen firsthand, means to repeat.
Focus links not true for Obama
Herald Times ‘9
(April 29, 2009, LN)
I don't think any of us were quite prepared for the sheer energy this new president demonstrated in his first 100 days. The number of press conferences, policy speeches, cross-country and international travels on top of new initiatives to bolster financial markets has been mind-boggling. Obama said he would close down Guantanamo Bay, and the process is under way. He said he would extend health care to children, and he has signed into law a program that will provide more than 11 million children with health care. He said he would assess the situation in Iraq and provide a plan to bring our troops home safely. He said he would reverse many of George W. Bush's executive orders on stem-cell research and did that, too. One astute political observer recently told me that Obama reminds her of an octopus with eight arms, all doing different things, but each done with agile efficiency.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
