Matthew Eshbaugh-Soha

Presidents and the Economic Agenda

The president’s ability to influence the national policy agenda is an important component of presidential power. Although some maintain that presidents are favorably situated to set agendas, others demonstrate that the president’s agenda-setting skills vary considerably by policy area. What is more, scholars have yet to examine the impact presidents have had focusing attention on the economy, an issue of vital importance to their political success. Extending previous research on presidential agenda setting that did not address economic policy (Edwards and Wood 1999; Wood and Peake 1998), we test the impact that the president’s public statements on the economy have on media and congressional attention to the economy. Using Vector Autoregression (VAR), we demonstrate that although presidents have some influence over the economic agenda, presidents are primarily responsive to media coverage of the economy.

The Agenda-Setting Impact of Major Presidential TV Addresses

The ability to set the national agenda is an important power of the modern presidency. Policy-specific, nationally televised speeches provide presidents with the best rhetorical opportunity to set the national agenda; however, research on presidential agenda setting has not systematically explored their effects. Although the conventional understanding of presidential agenda setting suggests that presidents should be able to focus media attention through televised addresses, research paints a mixed picture of the presidents ability to do so. We answer the following questions: Are televised presidential speeches effective in increasing news coverage of presidential priorities? And what explains the likelihood that a national address will significantly increase media attention? We find that 35% of the presidents national addresses across four policy areas increase media attention in the shortterm, with only 10% of the speeches in our sample increasing media attention beyond the month of the speech. We also find that the likelihood that a national address will increase media attention hinges on previous media attention, public concern, and, to a lesser extent, the presidents approval ratings.

Presidential Success on the Substance of Legislation

The topic of presidential success in Congress is central to the study of American politics. Yet existing research does not sufficiently assess the presidents success at shaping the substance of legislation. To help remedy this deficiency, the authors measure the degree of presidential success on 191 important statutes from 1965 to 2000 and find that presidents typically accept significant concessions to ensure passage of legislation. Using factor and regression analyses, the authors demonstrate that several factors—including the presence of unified government, the presidents approval ratings, and the point in a presidents tenure—affect the extent to which the president receives what he wants concerning legislative content.

The Politics of Presidential Agendas

Past research holds that if presidents are to increase their success in Congress, they must set the policy agenda in their favor. But what determines the propensity of presidents to propose or support different policies? Because presidents influence the agenda-setting stage of the policy process, presidents develop their yearly domestic policy agendas in anticipation of each policy’s success or failure in Congress. After all, presidents want to emphasize their strengths to achieve their goal of policy enactment in Congress. From this assumption, I devise a typology of long-term and important presidential policies, and argue that political limitations and fiscal constraints influence the president’s yearly domestic policy agenda. I show that presidents offer different types of policies as part of their yearly domestic agendas given Congressional makeup and the federal budget deficit.

Presidential Influence Over the Systemic Agenda

One of the most widely accepted sources of presidential power is agenda setting. Being able to affect the medias agenda on key issues–influencing the systemic agenda and expanding the scope of conflict–has enormous consequences for the presidents ability to govern effectively. Yet the literature to date has not conclusively determined the extent to which presidents consistently set agendas, especially over the media, because it has not explicitly considered variation in agenda setting influence by policy type. For these reasons, we test whether presidential public statements have increased the medias attention to three policy areas. Using Vector Autoregression (VAR) analysis, we demonstrate that presidents have some influence over the systemic agenda, at least in the short term, with policy type being an important predictor of presidential influence. Understanding when and why presidents may or may not be successful agenda setters is crucial to explaining the varying legislative impacts of presidential speech making.

The Tone of Local Presidential News Coverage

There is little research on the tone of local news coverage of the presidency, despite the publics preference for local rather than national news. I use theories of media politics, based primarily on the profit-seeker model of news coverage, to explore the impact of newspaper characteristics, audience preferences, and story characteristics on local newspaper coverage of the presidency. Based on a sample of 288 stories taken from the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, I demonstrate that everyday local newspaper coverage of the presidency is slightly more negative than positive and that audience support for the president, newspaper resources, and corporate ownership affect the tone of local newspaper coverage of the presidency.

The Politics of Presidential Speeches

Speeches are vital to modern presidential governance. We know that speeches inform others of presidents’ policy preferences and allow them to meet public expectations; yet we do not know precisely what influences presidents’ tendencies to deliver them. This article argues that presidents consider the potential benefit or cost of delivering speeches. Deteriorating conditions in the political environment should cause a change in presidential behavior, while improvements may encourage presidents to continue their current course of action. Using time series analysis, I find that this is indeed the case. Typically, low presidential approval ratings and a poor economy encourage presidents to deliver more and fewer policy-based speeches, respectively. Even though the “golden age” of presidential politics also matters to presidential speechmaking, individual presidents do not significantly explain speechmaking over time.

Presidential Influence of the News Media: The Case of the Press Conference

Can presidents influence news coverage through their press conferences? Scant research has explored this question leaving two possible answers. On the one hand, presidential news management efforts, combined with norms of journalistic professionalism and the cost of producing news, suggest that the nightly news will cover presidential press conferences. On the other hand, the costs of delivering press conferences espoused by some scholars insinuate that press conferences will have little impact on news coverage. To determine whether the press conference influences news coverage, I use plagiarism detection software to assess the propensity of television news to incorporate the presidents rhetoric into stories that cover the presidents press conferences. I find that news reports on the press conference rely heavily on the presidents words, indicating that it is an important event for presidential influence of the news media and perhaps eventually the public.

Presidential Agenda-Setting of Traditional and Nontraditional News Media

The president’s ability to influence the news agenda is central to the study of American politics. Although there is a large literature that examines presidential agenda-setting vis-à-vis traditional news sources, such as newspapers or broadcast television networks, there is little research that explores the effects of presidential agenda leadership of nontraditional media whether online or cable television. This study remedies this state of affairs by examining the relationship between the president’s daily agenda and traditional and nontraditional daily news agendas. I argue that although the president should find similar space on all news for topics he raises in his speeches, nontraditional sources are more likely to cover other stories that reference the president. Analysis of 748 stories on the presidency for 63 days in early 2012 from 7 traditional, cable, and online news sources provides support for my argument, with cable news providing the most presidential news coverage. I conclude with some implications about what my findings mean for presidential leadership of nontraditional media.

ON THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC OPINION AND DECISION MAKING IN THE U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS

The authors explore whether the federal courts act as countermajoritarian institutions by investigating the influence of public mood on decision making in the U.S. Courts of Appeals from 1961 to 2002. The results indicate that public opinion affects courts of appeals decision making indirectly through judicial replacements and institutional constrains from Congress, but the authors fail to uncover evidence that courts of appeals judges respond directly to changes in public opinion. They conclude that, absent membership turnover in the circuit or in Congress, the courts of appeals are not responsive to the will of the public.