The Administrative Presidency

How Trump has used the federal government to promote conservative policies The presidency of Donald Trump has been unique in many respects—most obviously his flamboyant personal style and disregard for conventional niceties and factual information. But one area hasn't received as much attention as it deserves: Trump's use of the “administrative presidency,” including executive orders and regulatory changes, to reverse the policies of his predecessor and advance positions that lack widespread support in Congress. This book analyzes the dynamics and unique qualities of Trump's administrative presidency in the important policy areas of health care, education, and climate change. In each of these spheres, the arrival of the Trump administration represented a hostile takeover in which White House policy goals departed sharply from the more “liberal” ideologies and objectives of key agencies, which had been embraced by the Obama administration. Three expert authors show how Trump has continued, and even expanded, the rise of executive branch power since the Reagan years. The authors intertwine this focus with an in-depth examination of how the Trump administration's hostile takeover has drastically changed key federal policies—and reshaped who gets what from government—in the areas of health care, education, and climate change. Readers interested in the institutions of American democracy and the nation's progress (or lack thereof) in dealing with pressing policy problems will find deep insights in this book. Of particular interest is the book's examination of how the Trump administration's actions have long-term implications for American democracy.

The first book to explore the tension between presidents and federal agencies from the perspective of careerists in the executive branch. Winner of the Herbert A. Simon Book Award of the American Political Science Association Why do presidents face so many seemingly avoidable bureaucratic conflicts? And why do these clashes usually intensify toward the end of presidential administrations, when a commander-in-chief’s administrative goals tend to be more explicit and better aligned with their appointed leadership’s prerogatives? In Rethinking the Administrative Presidency, William G. Resh considers these complicated questions from an empirical perspective. Relying on data drawn from surveys and interviews, Resh rigorously analyzes the argument that presidents typically start from a premise of distrust when they attempt to control federal agencies. Focusing specifically on the George W. Bush administration, Resh explains how a lack of trust can lead to harmful agency failure. He explores the extent to which the Bush administration was able to increase the reliability—and reduce the cost—of information to achieve its policy goals through administrative means during its second term. Arguing that President Bush's use of the administrative presidency hindered trust between appointees and career executives to deter knowledge sharing throughout respective agencies, Resh also demonstrates that functional relationships between careerists and appointees help to advance robust policy. He employs a “joists vs. jigsaws” metaphor to stress his main point: that mutual support based on optimistic trust is a more effective managerial strategy than fragmentation founded on unsubstantiated distrust.

"The growth of the administrative state and legislative gridlock has placed the White House at the center of environmental policymaking. Every recent president has continued the trend of relying upon administrative tools and unilateral actions to either advance or roll back environmental protection policies. From natural resources to climate change and pollution control, presidents have more been willing to test the limits of their authority, and the role of Congress has been one of reacting to presidential initiatives. In The Administrative Presidency and the Environment: Policy Leadership and Retrenchment from Clinton to Trump, David M. Shafie draws upon staff communications, speeches and other primary sources. Key features include detailed case studies in public land management, water quality, toxics, and climate policy, with particular attention to the role of science in decisionmaking. Finally, he identifies the techniques from previous administrations that made Trump's administrative presidency possible. Shafie's combination of qualitative analysis and topical case studies offers advanced undergraduate students and researchers alike important insights for understanding the interactions between environmental groups and the executive branch as well as implications for future policymaking"--

The growth of the administrative state and legislative gridlock has placed the White House at the center of environmental policymaking. Every recent president has continued the trend of relying upon administrative tools and unilateral actions to either advance or roll back environmental protection policies. From natural resources to climate change and pollution control, presidents have more been willing to test the limits of their authority, and the role of Congress has been one of reacting to presidential initiatives. In The Administrative Presidency and the Environment: Policy Leadership and Retrenchment from Clinton to Trump, David M. Shafie draws upon staff communications, speeches and other primary sources. Key features include detailed case studies in public land management, water quality, toxics, and climate policy, with particular attention to the role of science in decisionmaking. Finally, he identifies the techniques from previous administrations that made Trump’s administrative presidency possible. Shafie’s combination of qualitative analysis and topical case studies offers advanced undergraduate students and researchers alike important insights for understanding the interactions between environmental groups and the executive branch as well as implications for future policymaking.

A deep look into the agency that implements the president's marching orders to the rest of the executive branch The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is one of the federal government's most important and powerful agencies—but it's also one of the least-known among the general public. This book describes why the office is so important and why both scholars and citizens should know more about what it does. The predecessor to the modern OMB was founded in 1921, as the Bureau of the Budget within the Treasury Department. President Franklin D. Roosevelt moved it in 1939 into the Executive Office of the President, where it's been ever since. The office received its current name in 1970, during the Nixon administration. For most people who know about it, the OMB's only apparent job is to supervise preparation of the president's annual budget request to Congress. That job, in itself, gives the office tremendous influence within the executive branch. But OMB has other responsibilities that give it a central role in how the federal government functions on a daily basis. OMB reviews all of the administration's legislative proposals and the president's executive orders. It oversees the development and implementation of nearly all government management initiatives. The office also analyses the costs and benefits of major government regulations, this giving it great sway over government actions that affect nearly every person and business in America. One question facing voters in the 2020 elections will be how well the executive branch has carried out the president's promises; a major aspect of that question centers around the wider work of the OMB. This book will help members of the public, as well as scholars and other experts, answer that question.

In examining the administrative presidency from the seldom-analyzed perspective of careerists in the executive branch, in unpacking the concept of trust in unconventional ways, and in linking this expanded definition of trust to intellectual capital development as a precursor to successfully advancing presidential agendas administratively, this dissertation combines insights from cognate research fields of organization theory, social psychology, management studies, and social capital theory to offer a unique framework for studying the administrative presidency. This work investigates the means and extent by which the George W. Bush administration, during its second term, was able to increase the reliability, and reduce the cost, of information to achieve its policy goals through administrative means. More precisely, I examine how Bush's use of the "administrative presidency" conditioned levels of trust between appointees and careerists, which subsequently conditioned the level of explicit and tacit knowledge sharing within organizations.

The first book to explore the tension between U.S. presidents and federal agencies from the perspective of careerists in the executive branch. Why do presidents face so many seemingly avoidable bureaucratic conflicts? And why do these clashes usually intensify toward the end of presidential administrations, when a commander-in-chief’s administrative goals tend to be more explicit and better aligned with their appointed leadership’s prerogatives? In Rethinking the Administrative Presidency, William G. Resh considers these complicated questions from an empirical perspective. Relying on data drawn from surveys and interviews, Resh rigorously analyzes the argument that presidents typically start from a premise of distrust when they attempt to control federal agencies. Focusing specifically on the George W. Bush administration, Resh explains how a lack of trust can lead to harmful agency failure. He explores the extent to which the Bush administration was able to increase the reliability—and reduce the cost—of information to achieve its policy goals through administrative means during its second term. Arguing that President Bush’s use of the administrative presidency hindered trust between appointees and career executives to deter knowledge sharing throughout respective agencies, Resh also demonstrates that functional relationships between careerists and appointees help to advance robust policy. He employs a “joists vs. jigsaws” metaphor to stress his main point: that mutual support based on optimistic trust is a more effective managerial strategy than fragmentation founded on unsubstantiated distrust. “An original and valuable book that extends the literature on the administrative presidency. A must-read.” —Hal G. Rainey, The University of Georgia, author of Understanding and Managing Public Organizations