Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan

“Power I defined as personal influence of an effective sort on governmental sort. This I distinguished sharply—a novel distinction then—from formal ‘powers’ vested in the Presidency by constitutional or statute law and custom.”

When the 1960 edition of Presidential Power was released, this distinction made by Neustadt was novel and important. The distinction between power as a form of influence and formal powers of the president mirrors the role of the book’s inauguration of a focus on practical politics of the presidency at a time when leading political scientists were still focused on a highly formalistic view of the office.

“Presidential weakness was the underlying theme of Presidential Power. This remains my theme. […] Weakness is still what I see: weakness in the sense of a great gap between what is expected of a man (or someday a woman) and assured capacity to carry through. Expectations rise and clerkly tasks increase, while prospects for sustained support from any quarter worsen as foreign alliances loosen and political parties wane.” 

This definition of the presidency as “weak” is particularly important to Neustadt’s conception of the office and his focus on the individuals who fill it because it shapes his concept that the president must bargain with others in government to secure the support necessary to achieve results in the policy arena.

“In 1960 my concern with personal power turned upon the problem of enhancing or conserving it prospectively taken in strategic terms, ‘looking toward tomorrow from today.’ Presidents, I argued, ought to think about their prospects for effectiveness as they make current choices—deriving either cautions for the future or guidance for the present. The better they think about power in prospective terms, the likelier they are to buttress future influence and also chosen policies. They need to do the thinking for themselves, since in our system they can count on no one else to do it for them in their terms. They ought to concentrate such thoughts on their own choices, since in our system these are the only means under their personal control by which they can affect the acts of government. That was and remains the skeleton of my argument.” 

This is probably the clearest statement of Neustadt’s argument that appears anywhere in the book. It also reflects his continued endorsement of his initial argument, with minor adjustments, 30 years later. In sum, presidents should carefully consider every choice they make not just because of policy but because every decision has the potential to strengthen or undermine the president’s power. Neustadt urges presidents to make decisions with a mind toward the future and how every choice will affect both their power and others’ perceptions of that power.