How the Presidency Has Changed Since the 20th Century

Question One: Describe the major ways in which the presidency has changed since the beginning of the 20th century. Be sure to include a description of the changes and the reasons why these changes occurred. Include a conclusion to summarize your key points. 

Since the turn of the 20 th century, the U.S. presidency has undergone notable changes as the country’s democracy continues to age. The 20 th century U.S. presidency was ushered by the assassination of President Willian McKinley in 1901. The assassination of McKinley served as the foundation for the shift of the American presidency. The presidency between 1850 and 1901 was characteristically short, but after the accession of Vice President Theodore Roosevelt, the average tenure for President lengthened between 1901 and 1945 (Neale, 2019). Most early 20 th presidents who led the country before Franklin Roosevelt observed the two-term tradition set by their predecessors of the 19 th century. However, due to the failings of William Howard Taft, Roosevelt decided to run for another term in office. However, the Democratic National Convention blocked his bid by adopting a section of its 1912 platform that agitated for the constitution to be amended. The basis of the amendment was to make a President of the USA ineligible for reelection (Neale, 2019). However, the proposal did not go past the House Judiciary Committee, and it expired with the end of Congress in March 1913. It was Franklin D. Roosevelt who changed the tradition of the two-term presidential limit by vying for a third and fourth time. Roosevelt was reelected for a second term in 1936 and in 1940 and 1944 for his third and fourth tenures, respectively, all of which were informed by wars (Neale, 2019). The Twenty-Second Amendment that provided that no president would run for more than two terms was passed in 1951. The amendment also set conditions for presidents who succeed in the unfinished terms of their predecessors. All the presidents who came after Harry S. Truman served for a maximum of two terms, which differed with the previous leaders. The Twenty-Fifth Amendment was the last major change to the President that aimed at filling the void left by a vice president who succeeded a president due to the latter's health or death. The amendment allowed the immediate accession of a Vice President after the death of a sitting President. Also, if the office of the Vice President fell vacant, the President would nominate a successor (Neale, 2019). This amendment sought to preempt any leadership vacuum. 

In conclusion, the U.S. presidency has undergone significant changes since the turn of the 20 th century. The accession of Vice President Theodore Roosevelt set stable precedence for the respect of the two-term limit. However, Franklin Roosevelt changed the trend set by Theodore Roosevelt by vying for four consecutive terms. It is these political maneuvers that formed the basis for the Twenty-Second and Twenty-Fifth Amendments, which brought significant changes to the U.S. presidency. 

Question Two: Should federal bureaucrats be granted discretion in the implementation of public policies? 

Federal bureaucrats should not be granted discretion in the implementation of public policies. Although bureaucrats should be neutral public officers, they have great power due to their roles in formidable institutions. The power of bureaucrats stems from the resources they manage and their discretion on how to use these resources in policy implementation ( Koven, 2019 ). However, the key problem is ensuring that federal bureaucrats work for the interest of the people and do not use their power to bulldoze the will of the citizens. For a democracy to work as envisioned by the democratic theoreticians, the ability of federal bureaucrats to be insulated from popular oversight must be regulated. For this to happen, the citizenry must know how they are performing in their policy implementation roles ( Koven, 2019 ). Public accountability must be entrenched in the job mandate of federal bureaucrats. For example, federal bureaucrats in the law enforcement domain are allowed to exercise far-reaching discretion in their operations, which is concealed by the need for secrecy ( Koven, 2019 ). In the technologically driven society, this secrecy has been eroded because normal citizens can record police officers in their operations, which has raised the standards of accountability. Before the development of high-tech devices such as body cameras and smartphones, police in their discretion could manhandle and even murder suspects and get away with it. 

However, today they are more cautious about their actions because someone could be recording their actions. Hence, the officers in institutions such as the FBI are less concealed by the curtain of secrecy than before since they can be pinpointed from recording following an illegal behavior in public. Not allowing federal bureaucrats overt discretion to implement policies will instill self-correcting behaviors in federal officers, thus improving public trust for federal institutions. Checking on the discretion of federal bureaucrats will allow them to realize their misdeeds because there is an aspect of popular oversight ( Koven, 2019 ). For example, popular oversight allows the thriving of whistleblowers who should also be protected from the risks they face. Requiring federal bureaucrats to be accountable to the public of their decisions will work to streamline the relationship between the government and the people. 

Question 3: What demographic constituencies (body of voters) are represented by the mainstream American political parties? How have their geographic centers of strength shifted in the last half-century? 

The past half a century has seen the demographic outlook of the U.S. change, with the country becoming more racially and ethnically diverse. The shift in the demographics is also reflected in the mainstream part representation. Today, non-Hispanic voters are 70 percent of all registered voters down from 84 percent in 1992. The number of Hispanic voters doubled to 9 percent from 5 percent, while black voters stand at 12 percent from 10 percent ("Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy," 2016). These shifts in racial demographics have also changed the composition of the major political parties, the Republican and Democratic parties, with the latter being more impacted than the former. Between 1970 and 1992, 76 percent of whites, 17 percent of blacks, and 6 percent of Hispanic voters were associated with the Democratic party. According to recent surveys, the demographics of Democratic party voters are characterized by increased diversity. Fifty-seven percent are whites, 21 percent are blacks, 12 percent are Hispanics, 3 percent Asians, while the rest are members of the mixed-race demographic group. Similarly, the composition of Republican party voters has also grown, albeit not as significantly as that of Democratic party supporters. As of 1992, 93 percent of Republican voters were white with that share reducing to 86 percent as of today. Hispanic voters increased from 3 to 6 percent while the number of African Americans supporting this party has not changed ("Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy," 2016). 

Over the years, geographic centers of strength for the Republican and Democratic parties have undergone significant changes. According to Perry (2016), the current political control at the state level by Republicans is the largest since 1978. At the state level, the Republicans control 24 states against Democrats who control six states. In 1978, the Republicans controlled four states while the Democrats controlled 25 states. Differently, between 1976 and 1990, Republicans never controlled more than five states while during Regan's tenure, there were four red states. Between 1978 and 2016, Democrats controlled a minimum of 6 states in two bi-annual periods, which is 2000-2002 and in 2016. Since 1980, Alabama, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas have consistently been voting Republican while Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, Rhodes Island, Washington, and Wisconsin have been voting Democratic since 1988 (Sullivan, 2016). The above trends show that party politics in the U.S. are constantly changing with the expectations of the voters. 

Question Four: What is the national party convention, and how much control does it exert over nominees and state and local party organizations? What are national party committees, and what do they do? In what ways have they become increasingly important? What are congressional campaign committees, and what do they do? How are they related to the national party convention and the national party convention? What do the connections between these national party bodies say about the organizational structure of the parties? 

The main political parties in the U.S., Republican, and Democratic parties hold convention during the summer of a presidential election year. Each party has delegates whose major role is to ratify their party's presidential candidate and nominate a vice president. Much of the conventions' focus is on national presidential campaigns but does not choose presidential nominees; thus, they do not have control over state and local party organizations ( Heaney et al., 2012 ). Differently, national party committees are organizations created by the bylaws of a party to manage the day-to-day functions of the party at the national level. These committees are critical because they are involved in the nomination of candidates for federal offices in various states. National committees are increasingly important because they control the party's resources during presidential campaigns (Galvin, 2014). 

Congressional campaign committees are national political bodies that are subsidiaries of political parties that aim to support the campaign of candidates vying under those parties. These committees function as official campaign arms of Republican and Democratic in the House of Representatives. Therefore, the committees serve to support each of their members by fortifying and expanding their membership. The congressional party committees play crucial roles in recruiting candidates and fundraising for campaigns. From this, one acknowledges the crucial role that the congressional party committees play. For instance, in the last elections, the Democratic Congressional Party Committee was in charge of nominating candidates. The committee also oversaw how campaign resources were utilized ( McCoy & Kanter, 2018 ). The national party conventions rely heavily on the strength of the candidates approved by the congressional party committees. This is because the national party convention is in charge of presidential elections, which are dependent on how the popularity of parties in Congress. The connections between these national party bodies show that the structure of parties in the U.S. is complex. These bodies have their tentacles spread from the grassroots to the national levels, and they also determine how each party fairs in the presidential elections. 

Question Five: Explain how social movements affect democracy, and how women's movement and the civil rights movement have affected democracy 

Social movements are crucial pillars for democratization processes because they intervene in opposition to emerging or existing authoritarian regimes. Also, social movements are essential in the transitional period to democracy, democratic amalgamation, and democratic deepening. Although different social movements have different underlying reasons, they have a single definitive characteristic; they are spontaneous ( Cordis.europa.eu, 2016 ). Social movements impact democracy by injecting intense emotions into the democratization processes. They help change how people perceive their environments while also influencing their motivations, perceptions, and interests. Through these shifts, people gradually begin to own the processes to fight for or protect their democratic process being threatened by authoritarian regimes. Even in an age characterized by populism, there are progressive social movements. For example, the catastrophic effects of the 2008-2009 financial crisis saw several social movements that challenged and changed the established political systems of Southern Europe ( Cordis.europa.eu, 2016 ). These movements created a supportive environment in which democratic thoughts could thrive. 

Civil rights and women movements have been instrumental in the fight for a more democratic America. The women’s movement was particularly at the center of the activisms for a better country. The movement which was intertwined with feminist philosophies fought for reproductive rights, maternal leave, equal pay for women, and against sexual harassment and sexual violence. All these were pertinent issues that sought to position women at the same democratic level as men. The movements served as a platform to catapult women into the political arena, thus amplifying their voice for gender equality ( History.house.gov, n.d. ). The Civil Rights Movement was also a notable campaign that contributed to the creation of a highly democratic nation. For instance, the movement is known to fight against segregation trends in institutions such as schools and social amenities. Both women and men participated in this movement, which, together with the feminist campaigns of the 1970s, achieved a lot in the fight for democracy. 

Question 6: How does public opinion influence the Court? Give examples of this throughout history. Should public opinion influence the Court? Explain why or why not. 

The decision of the U.S. courts, especially the Supreme Courts, are often characterized by controversy. For example, U.S. history is tainted with instances when public debates influenced the Supreme Courts' functioning and its role in democracy. It is, however, important to note that, in principle, courts have lifetime immunity from the vagaries of public opinion. Nevertheless, as new issues are brought to Court due to emerging trends in society in conjunction with evolving norms and values, public opinion has a significant impact on the court system. Stemming from the 1973 ruling of Roe versus Wade, the 2012 landmark ruling on the Affordable Care Act was defined by a standoff between the public and the Court's legitimacy. In this ruling, Court seemed to redeem itself from the low public approval rating whereby before this particular ruling, the American people were divided on how the Court should handle the issue ( Liptak & Parlapiano, 2020 ). From the Affordable Care Act Supreme Court ruling, one recognizes the power of public opinion on the decisiveness of the Court, especially on several rulings made in 2013. In Trump versus Mazars USA, the Court's decision was that Mr. Trump can block disclosure of his financial records to House committees (Wihbey, 2013). The Court's ruling was in favor of the conservative block whose opinion had greater weight compared to the liberal block. In the 1857 Dred Scott versus Sandford, the Supreme Court sided with the majority and powerful white supremacists in entrenching slavery ( History.com, 2020 ). The above cases notwithstanding, courts' decisions should not be influenced by public opinion, but they should follow the U.S. Constitution and facts laid before them. This is because the Court needs to always affirm the constitutional rights of the unpopular minorities while also safeguarding its legitimacy. 

References 

Cordis.europa.eu. (2016).  CORDIS | European Commission . [online] Available at: <https://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/197534-mobilising-for-democracy-the-power-of-social-movements-and-civil-societyhttps://cordis.europa.eu/article/id/197534-mobilising-for-democracy-the-power-of-social-movements-and-civil-society> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

Galvin, D. J. (2014). The Transformation of the National Party Committees.  Guide to U.S. Political Parties , 185. 

Heaney, M. T., Masket, S. E., Miller, J. M., & Strolovitch, D. Z. (2012). Polarized networks: The organizational affiliations of national party convention delegates.  American Behavioral Scientist ,  56 (12), 1654-1676. 

History.com. (2020).  Dred Scott Case . [online] Available at: <https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/dred-scott-case> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

History.house.gov. n.d.  The Women's Rights Movement, 1848–1920 | U.S. House Of Representatives: History, Art & Archives . [online] Available at: <https://history.house.gov/Exhibitions-and-Publications/WIC/Historical-Essays/No-Lady/Womens-Rights/> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

Koven, S. G. (2019).  The Case Against Bureaucratic Discretion . Springer. 

Liptak, A. and Parlapiano, A., (2020).  The Supreme Court Aligned With Public Opinion In Most Major Cases This Term . [online] Nytimes.com. Available at: <https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/15/us/supreme-court-major-cases-2020.html> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

McCoy, M. S., & Kanter, G. P. (2018). Campaign Contributions From Political Action Committees to Members of Congressional Committees Responding to the Opioid Crisis.  Jama ,  320 (14), 1489-1491. 

Neale, T. (2019).  Presidential Terms and Tenure: Perspectives and Proposals for Change . 2nd ed. [ebook] Federation of American Scientists. Available at: <https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40864.pdf> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

Perry, M. (2020).  Interactive Map: Changes in U.S. Political Party Control at The State Level, 1978 To 2016 . [online] American Enterprise Institute. Available at: <https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/political-party-control-us-state-level-1978-2016/> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy. (2016).  The Changing Composition of the U.S. Political Parties . [online] Available at: <https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2016/09/13/1-the-changing-composition-of-the-political-parties/> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

Sullivan, R., 2016.  How The Red and Blue Map Evolved Over The Past Century . [online] America Magazine. Available at: <https://www.americamagazine.org/content/unconventional-wisdom/how-red-and-blue-map-evolved-over-past-century> [Accessed 20 August 2020]. 

Wihbey, J. (2013).  The Supreme Court, Public Opinion And Decision-Making: Research Roundup - Journalist's Resource . [online] Journalist's Resource. Available at: <https://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/polarization/research-roundup-supreme-court-public-opinion/> [Accessed 20 August 2020].