Book ReviewAssignment Due on November 1For this assignment.docx

Book Review
Assignment Due on November 1
For this assignment select ONE of the following books and
write a book report on it. See the instructions below on how to
write a book review.
BOOKS: (can be obtained from libraries or purchased on
Amazon)
Larry Diamond, The Spirit of Democracy: The Struggle to Build
Free Societies Throughout the World
Paul Collier, Wars, Guns, and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous
Places Fareed Zakaria. The Future of Freedom: Illiberal
Democracy at Home and Abroad (Revised Edition)Francis
Fukuyama, Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of
Prosperity. New York: Free Press, 1995
James Pfiffner,. The Modern Presidency, 5th ed. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth, 2007.
Dennis Kavanaugh,. Thatcherism and British Politics: The End
of Consensus,2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Allwood, Gill, and Khursheed Wadia. Women and Politics in
France: 1958–2000. London: Routledge, 2000.
Fisher, Marc. After the Wall: Germany, the Germans, and the
Burden of History. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1995
Gifford, Rob. China Road: A Journey Into the Future of a
Rising Power. New York: Random House, 2007.
Zhao Ziyang, Bao Pu, Renee Chiang, and Adi Ignatius. Prisoner
of the State: The Secret Journal of Premier Zhao Ziyang. New
York: Simon and Schuster, 2009.Roderic Camp. Politics in
Mexico. New York: Oxford University Press,

2013Methodology:
The book review for this course should be approximately 10
pages in length. It should use APA format and be double-spaced
with an 11 or 12 font.
To get all the credit, you will need to relate the book to topics
and additional readings assigned during the semester. One way
to do that is
A book review describes, analyzes, and evaluates the quality,
meaning, and significance of a book. It is not a retelling. It
should focus on the book's purpose, content, and authority. A
critical book review is not a book report or a summary. It is a
reaction paper in which strengths and weaknesses of the
material are discussed and analyzed. It should include a
statement of what the author has tried to do, evaluates how well
(in the opinion of the reviewer) the author has succeeded, and
presents evidence to support this evaluation.
The following are standard procedures for writing book reviews;
1. Write a statement giving essential information about the
book: title, author, first copyright date, type of book, general
subject matter, special features (maps, color plates, etc.), price
and ISBN.
2. State the author’s purpose in writing the book. Sometimes
authors state their purpose in the preface or the first chapter.
When they do not, you may arrive at an understanding of the
book’s purpose by asking yourself these questions:
a. Why did the author write on this subject rather than on some
other subject?
b. From what point of view is the work written?
c. Who is the intended audience
d. Scan the Table of Contents, it can help understand how the
book is organized and will aid in determining the author's main
ideas and how they are developed - chronologically, topically,

etc.
e. How well has the book achieved its goal
f. Would you recommend this book or article to others? Why?
3. State the theme and the thesis of the book.
a. Theme: The theme is the subject or topic.
b. Thesis: The thesis is an author’s generalization about the
theme, the author’s beliefs about something important, the
book’s philosophical conclusion, or the proposition the author
means to prove.
5. Evaluate the book for interest, accuracy, objectivity,
importance, thoroughness, and usefulness to its intended
audience. Show whether the author's main arguments are true.
Respond to the author's opinions. What do you agree or disagree
with? And why? Illustrate whether or not any conclusions drawn
are derived logically from the evidence. Explore issues the book
raises. What possibilities does the book suggest? What has the
author omitted or what problems were left unsolved? What
specific points are not convincing?
7. Relate the book to themes, topics, research findings in other
articles and chapters assigned in the course (such as Hauss,
Dahl, VanCreveld, etc.)
6. Try to find further information about the author - reputation,
qualifications, influences, biographical, etc. - any information
that is relevant to the book being reviewed and that would help
to establish the author's authority. Can you discern any
connections between the author's perspective, life experience
and the reviewed book?
7. Summarize (briefly), analyze, and comment on the book’s
content. State your general conclusions. Pay particular attention
to the author's concluding chapter. Is the summary convincing?
How did the book affect you? Were any previous ideas you had
on the subject changed, abandoned, or reinforced due to this
book?

Running head: THE MODERN PRESIDENCY
1
THE MODERN PRESIDENCY
2
American presidency has been researched on for the past three
decades. Major developments in the central government have
attracted a lot of attention in the office of the president. The
Modern Presidency, Fifth Edition, 2007 is a text written James
Pfiffner. It is a refined text written to the point on issues of
presidency. It illustrates case studies on various aspects of the
presidency and process of decision making. The book has been
extensively updated from 2006 to 2010, and its contents include
presidents such as George W. Bush and Barrack Obama.
Published by Thomson Wadsworth and copyrighted in 2008, the
book entails large institutions that comprise the modern
presidency. It does not concentrate on the individual presidents.
James P. Pfiffner is a top scholar on presidency. He is a
university professor at School of Public Policy at George Mason
University. He was also one of the lecturers at the University of
California, Riverside and California State University, Fullerton.
His major concentrations are on the presidency, the national
government of America and public management. He is also
elected on the National Academy of Public Administration.
The book explains how the modern presidency has developed
over the years through different administrations. Pfiffner
divides his thoughts into three major themes and discusses them
throughout the eight chapters of the book. For instance, in
chapter one and two, Pfiffner explains how the relationship
between the president and the people has evolved. This has been
developed through people’s democratic right to vote. He
continues to elaborate the institutions that have been developed
by the presidents to assist in decision making. He mentions how
the presidency has increased the executive powers in chapter
three and five. Chapter six to eight, Pfiffner looks into the

separation of power system and how this has limited the power
of the president. He also examines how the balance of powers
between the branches of the government has changed in the shift
towards modern presidency.
Chapter one of the book comprise of the summary of the eight
chapters in the first half. The rest of the chapter elaborates on
the origin and powers of the President. Pfiffner is of the opinion
that the presidency has limited powers due to the congress and
multiple party systems. This hinders the president from
exercising complete control over the government. The historical
changes that occur over the years in terms of international
relations and technology affected the office of the presidency.
In the author’s sentiments, there was a need to expand the
national government to handle the changes. For instance, the
central government lacked the power to recognize currency from
other states and could not regulate money or impose taxes on
other states. The economy was bad, and the national debt was
increasing. According to Pfiffner (2007), all these issues were
brought by the lack of an independent executive to address
these problems. A meeting was held in Philadelphia in 1787 by
the framers with an intention of creating an executive branch
that had more powers than either the states or the central
government.
According to Pika (1990), in his article, Researching and
Teaching the American Presidency: an Overview of
Trends,President Richard Nixon administration brought a lot of
interest to the presidency. Analyst had some doubts on whether
giving more powers to the president was necessary. Nixon’s
conduct of action on the war in Southeast Asia brought a lot of
conflict with the Congress over powers. Nixon’s affirmation of
presidential powers and executive dispensation challenged
unofficial and undocumented agreements with the United States
Congress that had been discussed by his predecessors. For many
years, controversies have surrounded the presidency bringing
out scholarly interest on the subject. Many scholars have
independently researched on the issue of presidency. Both

President Carter and Ford presented scholars such as James P.
Pfiffner with the chance to examine and analyze case studies of
unsuccessful presidencies. President Reagan era had a
significant impact on the scholar’s research. His experience was
different from that of President Nixon. Reagan experience was
filled with inventive administrative practices, which encouraged
students of presidential management to reconsider a number of
old assumptions. Reagan’s time in office increased research on
presidential associations with the public. There was also a
redirected dialogue on president’s management because of his
inventive and occasionally borrowed techniques intended to
attain his purposes. Pfiffner claims that Article II of the
constitution that provides the powers of the president is short
and vague as compared to Article I in terms of powers given to
the Congress. The article stipulates that the US President has all
the powers. The author criticizes the Article; he claims that it is
vague and unclear whether the “executive powers” means
powers given to the president or merely a title. The president as
the commander-in-chief has the power to “direct the armed
forces of the US at his or her discretion” (Pfiffner, 2007, p. 11).
The author is elaborate in terms of the presentation of
controversies in the twenty-first century during President
George W. Bush reign. He argues that President Bush utilized
his powers in an unprecedented manner. The president and his
vice President Cheney thought the previous presidents did not
utilize their executive powers fully because of interference from
the Congress (Pfiffner, 2007). After the 9/11 attacks, there was
a need to implement secret presidential actions. The
administration was filled with republicans who were unwilling
to challenge President Bush. The people were traumatized and
placed their faith on President Bush; hence claiming that his
actions were not well intended at the defense of the state
(Pfiffner, 2007, p. 14).
Pfiffner is of opinion that President George W. Bush applied
“plebiscitary presidency”, which meant that once he was
elected, congress or the law had no right to restrict him.

Pfiffner does not elaborate on how plebiscitary presidency
refers to the expansion of the federal government and increases
the responsibilities of the president. His argument is correct
when he mentions that the plebiscitary presidency creates more
expectations of the president from the people. The expectations
are more than the resources presidents have to attain them. For
example, President Bush administration relied heavily on
federal bureaucracy. He respected the spirit of permanent
institutions. President Bush appointment criterion was different
from that of President Reagan. President Reagan advocated for a
conservative moment and ideological change. President Bush,
on the other side, appointed people who could lead agencies.
His administration was also based on loyalty, diversity and
competence.
The author is also critical and explicit in the manner he
discusses the relationship between the President and the people.
He also discusses the evolution of democracy and the impact on
development. According to Pfiffner (2007), communication and
Public Liaison Offices in the White House have devised ways to
come up with new communication technologies to control
media’s outlook of the administration. This enables the office
to control what is revealed to the public and what is not. This
will help shape people’s opinion as well as the approval of the
president performance. Pfiffner explains how democratization
has changed over the years. He describes the congressional
nomination process during the early 1800s to the party-
dominated convention towards the current primary-dominant
nomination. Although the author elaborately discusses the
element of democracy, his claims that the framers would find
the new system to be too democratic is unjustified. This is
because he fails to comment on people that are excluded from
the highest office due to their race, gender or their non-
European heritage. His surveys about the opinion of the
President as the only national leader elected through a
democratic process is biased and do not reflect the interest of
the people. However, the author is right to condemn the

obsession the President and the administration have on the
opinion polls. He says that they should stop looking for the
highest opinion ratings and concentrate on long term needs of
the nation.
Pfiffner also talks about the White House staff and the
Organization. During Nixon presidency, the White House staff
increased more than the previous administration to include the
chief of staff; a position that became essential. A chief of staff
became the most defining character in the Modern Presidency.
Pfiffner insists on the importance of a chief of staff in any
presidential administration. He mentions how presidents Ford
and Carter failed during their administration when they decided
not to elect a chief of staff. Pfiffner describes the chief of staff
as a competent individual who can efficiently give order issues
pertaining development, accessibility to the president and
resolution to the administrative disputes (Pfiffner, 2007, p. 87).
Here, his subject on White House staff is captivating in the
sense that there are individuals next to the President who have
potential in terms of policy, politics and performance in the
administration duties. However, the author loses track when he
over credit the chief of staff and disregards the rest of the staff.
Perhaps, the reason Pfiffner insisted on the importance of chief
of staff is that the failure or the success of a presidency depends
on the chief of staff.
Subsequently, Pfiffner talks about “The Institutional
Presidency.” Here, he examines the presidential branch as
described by scholar Nelson Polsby. It comprises of the White
House Office and the
Executive Office of the President. The author explores the size
and complexity aspects of the six units of the presidency. The
White House Office staff has grown from approximately sixty
members during Carter, Reagan and Bush administration to
around 400-500. Pfiffner concludes that the difference in staff
number is as a result of response to the changing political and
governmental environment. Apart from giving advice to the
president, Pfiffner is worried about the quality of advice given

by the huge number of staff in the White House. Pfiffner also
analyzes the Cabinet and the Executive branch and examines the
procedure through which the cabinet turns down the primary
advisory role to the President during the 1960s and 1970s. The
president began integrating policy control in the White House.
Cabinet secretaries and other sub-cabinet level appointees
greatly influenced the presidency during the 1960s. The book is
also elaborating the manner in which Pfiffner introduces a
discussion on the origin of the cabinet. He says that the cabinet
is a deliberative body, which creates the conflict between
departmental secretaries and the White House staff. He reviews
the president appointment system on how he appoints competent
individuals to lead the government. He claims that, for a
successful presidency, the president should minimize his
involvement in non-presidential matters and delegates them to
the cabinet, delegate the sub-cabinet appointments to the
department and agency heads and collaborate with the career
bureaucracy. The author also explores the transformation of
Roosevelt individual role as a chief legislator in the 1930s into
a fully professional office. He continues to examine how the
president and the congress worked and the issue of a divided
government. The author introduces five case studies of
presidential leadership of congress. “Kennedy and the House
Rules Committee,” LBJ Activist approach: the 1964 Civil
Rights Act”, “Richard Nixon: The Politics of Confrontation”,
Jimmy Carter: The Moral Equivalent of War’’, and Ronald
Reagan: The 1982 Budget Juggernaut.” Pfiffner claims that the
framers put congress in Article one of the Constitution in order
to take over the national policy agenda.
Pfiffner continues to state that the president has dominated the
foreign policy of United States. The president has powers to
engage nations in war. He argues that the president has sent
troops to war more times than the congress. Pfiffner reviews
other constitutional foreign affairs powers. These powers
include treaty negotiation, signing and termination, legitimate
recognition of foreign governments, their ambassadors and

prime ministers, and appointment of ambassadors to other
nations.
The expansion of resources of the presidency and the constant
conflicts of powers between Congress and the White House over
national and international agenda has both positive and negative
effect on the American people. Perhaps, this is the reason the
author focuses on the negative effect and also examines two
serious cases of corruption in the presidency that is Watergate
and Iran-Contra. For instance, in chapter eight, Pfiffner touches
on abuse of power and presidential reputation. He believes that
decreasing cynicism and increasing realism in United States are
important tasks among the American people. This can only be
possible when the presidents stop giving promises they cannot
keep and the citizens lowering their expectations of presidents.
From his observations, Pfiffner thinks that high expectations of
the president will continue, and this may pose danger or
opportunity to the United States president. The question that
arises is whether this will affect the United State president only
or may affect other states across the globe.
The Modern Presidency illustrates unique challenges to scholars
who conduct research on organizations. There is evidence of a
classic bureaucracy, which is strangely receptive to the power,
and pressure of passing presidents. For instance, Reagan’s
leading techniques became the center of widespread scrutiny.
Samuel Kernell’s (2006) study, Going Public: New Strategies of
Presidential Leadership, documented that President Ronald
Reagan was unusually fine suited by experience, temperament,
and ideology to lead by going public (Kernell, 2006, p. 111). To
Pfiffner, this is a tactic that sought to force conformity from
other Washington presidents by appealing to their constituents
(Pfiffner, 2007). This approach has been applied by various
presidents in passing. Pfiffner also ought to understand that
Reagan’s presentation as the Great Communicator, a title given
by the media, became a standard for prospect presidents but also
exposed the innate unpredictability of this approach to ruling.
In this case, Kernell’s book is significant in elaborating modern

presidency because it has undergone two successive editions
and turn out to be a vital addition to the original Neustadtian
opinion on how presidents carry out themselves in office to
accomplish success. James Pfiffner (1996) convincingly
disputed in The Strategic Presidency: Hitting the Ground
Running that Ronald Reagan’s success was moderately
attributable to the widespread preparation that came after his
inaugural ceremony. He gave him time to focus on the energy of
the administration towards creating opportunity in the early
months of an administration (Pfiffner, 2007, p. 159).
Students of political management will identify that presidential
changeover are a unique trait of the American political system.
Elected presidents spent several weeks organizing the
administration. Administrations that have succeeded in
becoming more methodical in their approach in organizing the
office and the Reagan attempt became particularly victorious.
Pfiffner described various major approaches adopted in 1981
that were essential to the success of the administration. He
states that Reagan established an effective White House staff
organization focused on "triumvirate" of Edwin Meese, James
Baker III and Michael Deaver. This people had early efficiency
in running the President’s affairs differed completely with
issues that occurred during Reagan’s second term, particularly
when Don Regan served as a single chief of-staff (Pfiffner,
2007). The White House took over the assortment of political
appointees based on individual and ideological loyalty and then
prepared and arranged a system of Cabinet councils intended to
organize contact with the bureaucracy (Pfiffner, 2007). By
quickly controlling the budget after the inauguration, Reagan
modified the bad budget created by Carter. This gave Reagan
the chance to define his own priorities throughout his first year
as President. He was highly motivated and centered on the
legislative agenda by making use of any resources available.
Reagan’s success was seen as a platform for other presidents.
Pfiffner echoed on lessons from the Bush and Clinton
changeover experiences, and discovered that a new president’s

capability to make calculated choices relies deeply on the
chance he gets upon entering office, not just the strategies
adopted.
The age of modern scholarship on the presidency can, without
doubt, be traced to the publication of Richard Neustadt’s
Presidential Power: the Politics of Leadership in 1960. The
outstanding characteristic of Neustadt’s analysis is positioning
the president inside the white house. Perhaps the most
prominent feature of that analysis was to locate the president
within circumstances of numerous people whose support had to
be acquired in order for a president to accomplish his purposes
(Neustadt, 2007). It was the candidate’s role to persuade the
public to choose him. Various presidential scholars sought to
observe one or more of these interactions described by Neustadt
in detail, with an aim to utilize, frequently techniques more
consistent with behavioral political science. Richard Neustadt
had a long experience and impact in presidential studies sector.
The most recent amendment of Presidential Power comes into
view in 1990 and with an increase of interest, predominantly
over the past three decades. Presidential studies now expand
beyond the boundaries of Neustadt’s inventive treatment.
The writing portrayed by James P. Pfiffner in this book is clear,
easily accessible and interesting to other readers apart from
political scientists. The high level of literacy is evidenced from
his earlier writings. The graphs, figures, appendices easily
harmonize the text. A conclusive listing of figures and tables at
the beginning of the text would have strengthened the book.
References
Kernell, S. (2006). Going public: new strategies of presidential
leadership, 4th edition. San
Diego, CA: C Q press.
Neustadt, R. E. (2007). Presidential power: the politics of

leadership. New York: Springer
Pfiffner, J. (2007). The Modern Presidency, 5th ed. Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Pfiffner, J. P. (1996). The strategic presidency: hitting the
ground running (studies in government
and public policy). Kansas: University of Kansas.
Pika, J. (1990). Researching and teaching the American
presidency: an overview of trends. In,
recent trends in studying the presidency: Reagan and beyond.
American Studies International, 28(1); 13-31.

Book ReviewAssignment Due on November 1For this assignment.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Book ReviewAssignment Due on November 1For this assignment.docx

Similar to Book ReviewAssignment Due on November 1For this assignment.docx (20)

More from hartrobert670

More from hartrobert670 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Book ReviewAssignment Due on November 1For this assignment.docx