gdi-2011-politics-master-file-mercury

The demands by tea party senators for passage of the

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: the whip, and, although they growl and roar, they still get up on their tiny little stools and perform. But if a president looks like Gulliver, a pitiful, helpless giant dominated by Congressional Lilliputians, then watch out . Winning in this regard does not mean forcing sweeping proposals, in toto, down the throats of lawmakers. It means compromising, cutting back, and ceding ground to build majorities, but doing so in ways that make it clear that you are in control. Perception of successful policy boosts president’s power to control agenda Rosati, University of South Carolina Government and International Studies professor, 04 (Jerel A., THE POLITICS OF UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY, 2004, p. 98) It was the sense of national emergency associated with the cold war during the fifties and sixties, after all, that was the ultimate source of presidential power and American global leadership following World War II. This means that the fragmented and pluralist political environment that has prevailed since Vietnam will likely continue in the post-cold war future, posing greater foreign policy opportunities and political risks for presidents and American leadership abroad. And as the American public focuses its concern increasingly on “intermestic” (and especially economic) issues, presidents who are perceived as dealing successfully with those issues are likely to enjoy an increase in their popularity and ability to govern in foreign policy and in general. But much will depend on the image that Americans have of a president’s policies and of their relative success, at home and abroad – a function of the turn of events and the strength of presidential leadership. Gonzaga Debate Institute 2011 240 Mercury Politics Link Turn – Winners Win – Lobby Version Attacking lobbies bolsters support for Obama’s agenda Thurber, American University Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies Director, 11 (James, Presidential Studies Quarterly 41, no. 2 (June), “Changing the Way Washington Works? Assessing President Obama’s Battle with Lobbyists,”, http://www.american.edu/spa/ccps/upload/Thurber-psq-article.pdf, p. 361, date accessed - 7-9-11, GJV) The president has also used attacks on lobbyists to build support for his policy agenda, especially in the battles over health care and financial regulation. During his first two years in office, President Obama attacked lobbyists dozens of times for hindering or even stopping his policy agenda (e.g., cap and trade legislation), stating that they undermined democracy and the public interest. However, he used them when needed to help push through historic reforms. He used criticisms about the role of lobbyists and money in politics to his advantage in building support for health care reform and financial regulation reforms, but he was later criticized for “selling out” to the special interests when compromises were necessary and when their support was essential for passage of these historic acts. For example, in a speech on the need for health care reform on Marc...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 01/14/2013 for the course POL 090 taught by Professor Framer during the Spring '13 term at Shimer.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online