Throughout his tenure, former President George W. Bush had relied on members of the Republican Party to pass his initiatives, however during his last years in office relationships between the president and his Republican supporters in Congress were not sufficient enough for Bush to further elements of his agenda. For instance, in 2006 President Bush was forced to settle on legislation concerning immigration that was far more punitive than he had hoped (Lowi, Ginsberg, Shepsle, and Ansolabehere 280). While this may have had something to do with his “lame duck” status, but most likely had more to do with diminishing public support that had resulted from the ongoing conflict in Iraq and the federal response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 (Renka par. 6). Eroding public confidence may have played a significant role in shifting the relationship between the president and his Republican supporters in Congress, but this appears to have been highly unusual given the president had enjoyed a highly cooperative relationship with Congress which was managed by a highly conservative faction of the party, that is until the 2006 mid-term elections when the Democrats took control of the House (Renka par. 7).
In order to garner support for the invasion of Iraq, President Bush, and his administration, was highly effective at popular mobilization. As Lowi, et al. note, “Every president since Roosevelt has sought to craft a public relations strategy that emphasized his strengths and maximized his popular appeal” (283). The former president was able to capitalize on the public’s perception of his strength, as well as his determination, after the attacks on American soil on September 11, 2001. The attacks radically altered the public’s opinion of Bush, and with an over-riding sense of vengefulness, public support for the president shot up to as much as 86 percent and allowed Bush to ramp up his authority to exercise military force to combat terrorism as well as to eventually invade Iraq (Remez par. 2). But, as quickly as the president was to have enjoyed his appeal with the public, he would also come to deal with the consequences of an invasion that the pubic quickly came to view as a quagmire. By 2003, his approval ratings began to spiral and by 2005 they had dwindled even further to the upper 30s (Lowi, et al. 285). The fallout from the Bush Administration’s failure handling the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina was arguably highly pivotal in his diminishing appeal and, combined with the public’s disillusion with the ongoing war in Iraq, and led to further difficulties advancing his domestic agenda and a complete failure to partially privatize Social Security (Remez par. 3).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"The Modern Presidency: George W. Bush".
As has been noted, the modern presidency is recognized for increasing the administrative capabilities through an expansion of the role that executive orders play when individual presidents attempt to forward their mandates (Lowi, et al. 286). But, modern presidents also seek to gain control over the federal bureaucracy which, in the case of George W. Bush, bears further scrutiny. Federal agencies have traditionally been recognized for their unique characteristics, meaning they do not necessarily share similar political ideologies. For example, the Department of Justice tends to lean towards conservatism, whereas the Department of Health and Human Services are known for being liberal. Modern presidents attempt to alter this dynamic through their appointments and, once entering the oval office, George W. Bush was particularly aggressive in his efforts for this change once entering the oval office. Bastions of liberal policies, such as the Department of Education and Environmental Protection Agency, fast became controlled by appointees who were staunch social and political conservatives (Lewis 67).
- Lewis, David E. “Revisiting the Administrative Presidency: Policy, Patronage, and Agency Competence.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 39.1 (2009): 60-73. ProQuest. Web. 14 Nov. 2016.
- Lowi, Theodore J., Benjamin Ginsberg, Kenneth A. Shepsle, and Stephen Ansolabehere. American Government: Power and Purpose (Full Thirteenth Edition (with policy chapters), 2014 Election Update). 13th ed. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2015. Print.
- Remez, Michael. “Bush and Public Opinion.” Pew Research Center. Pew Research Center, 18 Dec. 2008. Web. 14 Nov. 2016.
- Renka, Russell D. “Powers of the Modern Presidency.” Russell D. Renka. Southeast Missouri State University, 28 July 2009. Web. 14 Nov. 2016.
