Skip to main content
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Modern Reconstructive Presidential Leadership: Reordering Institutions in a Constrained Environment

  • Curt Nichols is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Baylor University, where he specializes in American Political and Constitutional Development and Presidential Studies. His work has appeared in American Politics Research, Polity, and Presidential Studies Quarterly. As Kinder Research Fellow at the University of Missouri, Columbia in the fall of 2014, he will begin work on a book concerning the American Governing Cycle.

     EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: August 8, 2014
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Author Information Explore this Subject
The Forum
From the journal The Forum Volume 12 Issue 2

Abstract

Modern “reconstructive” presidents face an institutional environment that affords strong veto possibilities to defenders of the status quo, making today’s politics resistant to the “order shattering” and “order creating” style of change most frequently associated with the leadership type. This project responds to the possibility that the rise of these conditions suggests the end of such reconstructive politics. It applies fresh insights gleaned from historical-institutionalist scholarship to investigate the full range of options that are available to presidents inheriting the opportunity to reorder politics. Mathematical simulation, via Polya’s urn model, is used to demonstrate how institutional displacement, layering, conversion, and drift can be used – independently and together – to recalibrate the equilibrium of a “path-dependent” system and thus alter developmental pathways. This not only suggests that modern presidents can still reorder and rejuvenate politics in a constrained environment; it updates expectations and warns of potential dangers.

Corresponding author: Curt Nichols, Political Science Department, Baylor University, Waco, Texas, USA, e-mail:

About the author

Curt Nichols

Curt Nichols is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Baylor University, where he specializes in American Political and Constitutional Development and Presidential Studies. His work has appeared in American Politics Research, Polity, and Presidential Studies Quarterly. As Kinder Research Fellow at the University of Missouri, Columbia in the fall of 2014, he will begin work on a book concerning the American Governing Cycle.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks Dave Bridge, Timothy Burns, Pat Flavin, Sergiy Kudelia, Steven Schier, Stephen Skowronek, Robert Spitzer, and the editors and anonymous reviewers at The Forum for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article.

References

Arthur, W. Brian. 1994. Increasing Returns and Path Dependence in the Economy. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.10.3998/mpub.10029Search in Google Scholar

Balkin, Jack M. 2012. “What It Will Take for Barack Obama to Become the Next FDR.” Accessed August 11, 2013. http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/11/what-it-will-take-for-barack-obama-to-become-the-next-fdr/264195/.Search in Google Scholar

Balkin, Jack M. 2014. “The Last Days of Disco: Why the American Political System is Dysfunctional.” Boston University Law Review 94: 101–140.Search in Google Scholar

Bridge, Dave. 2014. “Presidential Power Denied: A New Model of Veto Overrides Using Political Time.” Congress & the Presidency 41 (2): 149–166.10.1080/07343469.2014.894155Search in Google Scholar

Capoccia, Giovanni, and R. Daniel Kelemen. 2007. “The Study of Critical Junctures Theory, Narrative, and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism.” World Politics 59 (3): 341–69.10.1017/S0043887100020852Search in Google Scholar

Collier, Ruth B., and David Collier. 1991. Shaping the Political Arena: Critical Junctures, the Labor Movement, and Regime Dynamics in Latin America. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Cook, Daniel M., and Andrew J. Polsky. 2005. “Political Time Reconsidered: Unbuilding and Rebuilding the State Under the Reagan Administration.” American Politics Research 33 (4): 577–605.10.1177/1532673X04270520Search in Google Scholar

Crockett, David A. 2002. The Opposition Presidency: Leadership and the Constrains of History. College Station, TX: Texas A&M University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Crockett, David A. 2012. “The Historical Presidency: The Perils of Restoration Politics: Nineteenth-Century Antecedents.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 42 (4): 881–902.10.1111/j.1741-5705.2012.04023.xSearch in Google Scholar

David, Paul. 1985. “Clio and the Economics of QWERTY.” American Economics Review 75: 332–337.Search in Google Scholar

Dietz, Henry A., and David J. Myers. 2007. “From Thaw to Deluge: Party System Collapse in Venezuela and Peru.” Latin American Politics & Society 49 (2): 59–86.10.1111/j.1548-2456.2007.tb00407.xSearch in Google Scholar

DiSalvo, Daniel. 2012. Engines of Change: Party Factions in American Politics∼1868–2010. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199891702.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Eberly, Todd. 2010. “A Reconstructive President? Not in this Political Time.” Accessed August 11, 2013. http://freestaterblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/reconstructive-president-not-in-this.html.Search in Google Scholar

Galvin, Daniel J. 2010. Presidential Party Building: Dwight D. Eisenhower to George W. Bush. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400831173Search in Google Scholar

Hacker, Jacob S. 2005. “Policy Drift: The Hidden Politics of US Welfare State Retrenchment.” In Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. edited by Wolfgang Streeck, and Kathleen Thelen, 40–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hall, Peter A., and Rosemary Taylor. 1996. “Political Science and the Three New Institiutionalisms” Political Studies 44 (5): 936–957.10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb00343.xSearch in Google Scholar

Hand, Chris. 2006. “History Matters: Modelling Path Dependence on a Spreadsheet.” (sic). Computers in Higher Education Economics Review 18 (1): 19–24.Search in Google Scholar

Horowitz, David 2009. Barack Obama’s Rules for Revolution: The Alinsky Model. Sherman Oaks, CA: The David Horowitz Freedom Center.Search in Google Scholar

Johansson, Jon. 2014. U.S. Leadership in Political Time: Space: Pathfinders, Patriots & Existential Heroes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137386830Search in Google Scholar

Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226452739.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Laing, Matthew. 2012. “Towards a Pragmatic Presidency: Exploring the Waning of Political Time.” Polity 44 (2): 234–259.10.1057/pol.2011.24Search in Google Scholar

Landy, Mark K., and Sidney M. Milkis. 2000. Presidential Greatness. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Stein Rokkan. 1968. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments” In Party System and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives. edited by S. M. Lipset and S. Rokkan, 1–64. New York: Free Press.Search in Google Scholar

Mahoney, James, and Kathleen Thelen. 2010. Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511806414Search in Google Scholar

March, James, and Johan Olsen, 1984. “The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life.” American Political Science Review 78 (3): 734–749.10.2307/1961840Search in Google Scholar

McCaffrie, Brandan. 2012. “Understanding the Success of Presidents and Prime Ministers: The Role of Opposition Parties.” Australian Journal of Political Science 47 (2): 257–271.10.1080/10361146.2012.677005Search in Google Scholar

McCaffrie, Brandan. 2013. “A Contextual Framework for Accessing Reconstructive Prime Ministerial Success.” Policy Studies 34 (5): 617–637.Search in Google Scholar

Nathan, Richard P. 1983. The Administrative Presidency. New York: Macmillian Publishing Co.Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Curt. 2012. “The Presidential Rankings Game: Critical Review and Some New Discoveries.” Presidential Quarter Studies 42 (2): 275–299.10.1111/j.1741-5705.2012.03966.xSearch in Google Scholar

Nichols, Curt, and Adam S. Myers. 2010. Exploiting the Opportunity for Reconstructive Leadership: Presidential Responses to Enervated Political Regimes.” American Politics Research 38 (5): 806–841.10.1177/1532673X09357502Search in Google Scholar

North, Douglass C. 1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808678Search in Google Scholar

Pfiffner, James P. 1996. The Strategic Presidency: Hitting the Ground Running. 2nd ed. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Search in Google Scholar

Pierson, Paul. 2004. Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400841080Search in Google Scholar

Pierson, Paul, and Theda Skocpol. 2002. “Historical Institutionalism in Contemporary Political Science.” In Political Science: the State of the Discipline, edited by Ira Katznelson and Helen V. Milner, 693–721. New York: W.W. Norton.Search in Google Scholar

Polsky, Andrew J. 1997. “The 1996 Elections and the Logic of Regime Politics.” Polity 30 (1): 153–166.10.2307/3235325Search in Google Scholar

Polsky, Andrew J. 2012. “Partisan Regimes in American Politics.” Polity 44 (1): 51–80.10.1057/pol.2011.18Search in Google Scholar

Schickler, Eric. 2001. Disjointed Pluralism: Institutional Innovation and the Development of the U.S. Congress. Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Schier, Steven E. ed. 2011. Transforming America: Barack Obama in the White House. Landham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Sheingate, Adam. 2014. “Institutional Dynamics and American Political Development.” Annual Review of Politics 17 (1): 461–477.10.1146/annurev-polisci-040113-161139Search in Google Scholar

Skowronek, Stephen. 1997. The Politics Presidents Make: Leadership from John Adams to George Bush. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Skowronek, Stephen. 2011. Presidential Leadership in Political Time: Reprise and Reappraisal. 2nd ed. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Search in Google Scholar

Skowronek, Stephen. 2014. “Twentieth-Century Remedies.” Boston University Law Review 94: 797–807.Search in Google Scholar

Skoronek, Stephen, and Matthew Glassman. 2007. Formative Acts: American Politics in the Making. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Search in Google Scholar

Streeck, Wolfgang, and Kathleen Thelen 2005. Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Thelen, Kathleen. 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511790997Search in Google Scholar

Tsebelis, George. 2002. Veto Players: How Political Institutions Work. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400831456Search in Google Scholar

Tulis, Jeffery K. 1987. The Rhetorical Presidency. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Weingast, Barry R. 2002. “Rational Choice Institutionalism.” In Political Science State of the Discipline, edited by Ira Katznelson and Ira V. Milner, 660–692. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Whittington, Keith. E. 2007. Political Foundations of Judicial Supremacy: The Presidency, the Supreme Court, and Constitutional Leadership in U.S. History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400827756Search in Google Scholar

Zinman, Donald A. 2011. “The Heir Apparent Presidency of James Madison.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 41 (4): 712–726.10.1111/j.1741-5705.2011.03911.xSearch in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2014-8-8
Published in Print: 2014-7-1

©2014 by De Gruyter

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Introduction
  4. Even the Geeks are Polarized: The Dispute over the ‘Real Driver’ in American Elections
  5. The Evolution of Mass Ideologies in Modern American Politics
  6. Mobilizing Marginalized Groups among Party Elites
  7. Modern Reconstructive Presidential Leadership: Reordering Institutions in a Constrained Environment
  8. Independent Spending in State Elections, 2006–2010: Vertically Networked Political Parties Were the Real Story, Not Business
  9. The Paradoxes of Politics in Colorado Springs
  10. Disclosing Disclosure: Lessons from a “Failed” Field Experiment
  11. Book reviews
  12. Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War
  13. How Change Happens – Or Doesn’t: The Politics of US Public Policy
https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2014-5004

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Introduction
  4. Even the Geeks are Polarized: The Dispute over the ‘Real Driver’ in American Elections
  5. The Evolution of Mass Ideologies in Modern American Politics
  6. Mobilizing Marginalized Groups among Party Elites
  7. Modern Reconstructive Presidential Leadership: Reordering Institutions in a Constrained Environment
  8. Independent Spending in State Elections, 2006–2010: Vertically Networked Political Parties Were the Real Story, Not Business
  9. The Paradoxes of Politics in Colorado Springs
  10. Disclosing Disclosure: Lessons from a “Failed” Field Experiment
  11. Book reviews
  12. Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War
  13. How Change Happens – Or Doesn’t: The Politics of US Public Policy
Downloaded on 20.4.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/for-2014-5004/html
Scroll to top button