George W. Bush, the Party System, and American Federalism

George W. Bush's presidency presents two major puzzles. TheRepublican Party has traditionally stood for "limited government,"but Bush's principal legacy for federalism is centralizationof power in the federal government and the executive branch.Most modern presidents have neglected their partisan duties,but Bush has been a uniquely vigorous party leader. Here, weshow that Bush's puzzling lack of attention to federalism issuesis in large part the result of his efforts to strengthen theRepublican Party to cope with the political and electoral challengescharacteristic of the contemporary political context. We explainwhy the Bush administration's strategy for redressing the Republicanparty's shortcomings has presupposed the deprecation of federalism,and consider the implications of our argument for the developmentof federal arrangements.     

Mission Accomplished: Die Wiederwahl von George W. Bush

Ohne Zusammenfassung „A date which will live in infamy.“ (Franklin D. Roosevelt über den 7. Dezember 1941) „The Pearl Harbor of the 21 ^st century took place today.“ (George W. Bush am 11. September 2001) Für Anregungen bin ich Thomas Gschwend, Max Kaase, Albert-Leo Norpoth und Altfrid Norpoth dankbar.     

Why George W. Bush Is a Unilateralist and How It Will Affect the 2004 Presidential Election

ABSTRACT

U.S. President George W. Bush has had a stormy relationship with Europe. Bush campaigned on a theme of putting America's interests first and eschewing multilateralism when necessary. Since taking office, Bush has been true to his campaign pledges. Bush's style and substance have caused many in Europe to regard him as a “buffoon” at best and a dangerous cowboy at worst. What the Europeans do not seem to understand is that, for better or worse, George W. Bush's view of the world is held by a substantial portion of the American people, and even when the U.S. had a more Euro-friendly leader in President Bill Clinton, America's policies were often at odds with those preferred by its allies in Europe. This is due to a fundamental difference that has developed between Europe and the United States over the last century. Today, no matter who occupies the White House, American foreign policy is likely to be in conflict with Europe's. Far from being a liability, this difference is likely to be a political asset to George W. Bush in the 2004 presidential election.     

Beyond the Cartoon: George W. Bush and his Biographers

Many people seem to see George W. Bush as little more than a caricature. While I acknowledge that Bush's electoral success is quite confounding, I argue that a more nuanced and deeper understanding of Bush is required to account for this success and to better comprehend how he makes political decisions. To go beyond the cartoon caricature, I examine the biographies on Bush to explore three key elements of his background and character: Bush's relationship with his father; his personal faith; and his development of a Texan persona. Unfortunately this analysis can only be taken so far given that much of the biographical literature is excessively partisan and poorly researched. Thus I conclude by calling for more serious scholarly investigation into Bush's personal history and political record.     

Congressional Preemption During the George W. Bush Administration

President Bush approved 64 preemption acts during 2001–2005.Fifteen acts were responses to the September 11, 2001, terroristattacks, and five acts extended sunset provisions. The otheracts removed specified powers from states in the fields of banking,commerce, energy, environmental protection, finance, foreigncommerce, health, intellectual property, safety, taxation, telecommunications,and transportation. Only the two Internet taxation prohibitionacts have a major impact on state governments by depriving themof billions of dollars in tax revenues that could be used toexercise their reserved powers. The other acts are minor oneson the periphery of state exercised powers compared to lawsenacted in the period 1964–1999.     

Using Parallel Strategies to Promote Change: Forest Policymaking under George W. Bush

This study of policy change examines the parallel strategies the administration of President George W. Bush has used to substantially alter the direction of forest policy during his first term. Using the Healthy Forests Initiative as a case study, this analysis explains how, by framing the problem of wildfires and forest health in terms of process and pointing blame at environmental groups misusing appeal procedures, the administration was able to emphasize process, rather than the content of existing forest policy. It also provided a reasonable explanation for the president to take a lead in seeking both legislative as well as regulatory change. We contend that the use of two parallel policymaking paths—legislative and administrative—enabled the president to pursue policy change more rapidly, and, from a strategic standpoint, more effectively, than by relying upon the legislative process alone. We offer that the Bush administration's approach to changing forest policy represents a redirection that is likely to serve as a template for further environmental policy change.     

The First MBA President: George W. Bush as Public Administrator

President Bush was praised early in his first term as a tough-minded decision maker who knows how to get things done. This essay argues that President Bush possesses formidable political skills that have helped him achieve many of his policy goals, focusing on his most important national security policies: the war in Iraq, the war on terrorism and the treatment of detainees, the use of intelligence leading up to the war, and the reorganization of the executive branch. In the end, however, President Bush's deficiencies as a public administrator have undermined his policy successes.