Content area
Full Text
Craig Rimmerman outlines a "presidency by plebiscite," which he believes has resulted from hero worship and ineffective citizen participation. His second chapter chronicles the rise of the plebiscitary presidency and places much of the failure on Congress and the Supreme Court for the modern growth in presidential power. According to the author, the following features characterize the presidency by plebiscite: "presidential power and legitimacy emanates from citizen support as measured through public opinion polls; in the absence of coherent political parties, presidents forge a direct link to the masses through television; and structural barriers associated with the Madisonian governmental framework make it difficult for presidents to deliver their policy promises to the citizenry" (p. 24).
While these arguments seem reasonable, Rimmerman makes the case too strongly and ignores the considerable empirical evidence contravening his assertions. The existing scholarly literature is much more mixed about the importance of public opinion polls (e.g., Edwards, Bond and Fleisher) and the impact of the media on such. Research on party platforms (e.g., Pomper) and campaign promises (e.g., Fishel) illustrate much more effective translation of rhetoric into policy than Rimmerman acknowledges. The "institutional perspective" in the subtitle of the book is not well developed and thus, while the arguments are provocative, they are not very convincing.
Chapter 1 covers the constitutional perspective on presidential power. We are never told why constitutional provisions are important to the plebiscitary presidency. Neustadt is not even mentioned in this context of...