Name Sayantan DasGupta

PSCI 346 Instructor David Parker

12th December 2011

Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Greatness Paper

The two presidential models that I have chosen are that of James David Barber and Stephen
Skowronek. First through detailed description of the nature of these two political structures and
then through analyzing Theodore Roosevelts tenure with these two models, this paper tries to
establish the greatness of TRs presidency.
Barber and Skowronek: Describing the two models
Barber believes presidential personality is the most important shaper of his presidential behavior
in non-trivial matters and this personality can be patterned into various types to help us grasp the
executive psychology better. And Michael Nelson in his critique of Berber, states that a good
deal about the publics political psychology, in fact, is sprinkled through The Presidential
Character(The Psychological Presidency, 185). Much like Edwards, Nelson reaffirms the
belief that a healthy political personality turns out to be no guarantee of presidential success
(The Psychological Presidency, 181) as we found out with Ford and Carter. But he concurs that
the understanding of presidential characters is still necessary as politics is very much based on
public perception and mood that waver around conflict, conscience and conciliation(ala the
infamous Nixon demeanor during the first televised debate with JFK or the disastrous overconfident Al Gore against George W. Bush during the debates).

The best way to determine the presidents character, style and worldview is to see how they are

constructed in the first place.

Character It is the way the president orients himself towards the challenges of life (Presidential
Character and How to Foresee it, 5).
Style It is the Presidents habitual way of performing his three political roles: rhetoric, public
relations and homework (Presidential Character and How to foresee it, 5).
Worldview It consists of the presidents primary, particularly politically relevant beliefs like
social casualty, human nature and central moral conflicts of his time (Presidential Character and
How to foresee it, 5).

To predict such behaviors, Barber draws up four baselines to categorize each president into such
personality traits: active-positive, active-negative, passive-positive and passive-negative.
Active Positive presidents, according to Barber are most likely to succeed in office. They are
self-confident; flexible; create opportunities for action; enjoys the exercise of power, does not
take themselves too seriously; optimistic; they emphasize the "rational mastery" of their
environment; and use power as means to achieve beneficial results (Presidential Character and
How to foresee it, 9). The sunny-optimist, this presidency is epitomized by figures like
Jefferson, FDR, Truman, JFK and of course Teddy Roosevelt.

The Active Negative president are psychology most challenging. Often reactionary to life
struggles abusive childhood, poverty, depression, self-worthlessness, failed marriage etc), they
use power as means to self-realization; spend great energy on tasks but derive little joy because
of constant neuroticism and strive for perfection; preoccupied with self-image, success and
failure, very low self-esteem and inclined to rigidity and pessimism Their personalities are

vague and discontinuous; they are highly driven but often channel this drive through aggression.
The president with a chip on his shoulder is exemplified by the likes of Nixon, Lincoln, LBJ and
Wilson. (Presidential Character and How to foresee it, 9-10).

The Passive-Positive president is compulsive, receptive, complaint, affection seeking, easily

manipulated. He possess a low self-esteem which he tries to overcome by ingratiating
personality; reacts rather than initiates and is superficially optimistic. Passive-positive presidents
tend to soften the harsh edge of politics. But their dependence and fragility can lead to dire
consequences. Examples are James Madison, Howard Taft, Warren G. Harding, Ronald Reagan,
Bill Clinton. (Presidential Character and How to foresee it, 10).

Finally, the Passive-Negative president is withdrawn, reclusive, responds mainly to a sense of

duty; avoids power; has low self-esteem compensated by civic virtue; responds rather than
initiates; avoids conflict and uncertainty; emphasizes principles and procedures and an aversion
to politicking. Very indecisive in their success or failure, the examples of such presidents include
greats like Washington and Eisenhower, but also not-so-greats like Calvin Coolidge and Ulysses
Grant. (Presidential Character and How to foresee it, 10).
Due to the fact that success and failure of this system is quite elusive, with both examples spread
out in all four types, the question arises why then, is Barbers model important. The answer is the moment. The time and place, the cyclical ebb and flow of public opinion etc decides a
presidents success at that particular moment. So, no set of characteristic traits are infallible,
but learning about these traits will educate us on which type of personality is necessary during a
certain moment in political time. When we are voting for a Presidential candidate, in effect we

make a prediction, under some uncertainty, about the person who we think has the potential
character strength to hold the most prestigious office at the current environment that might range
from stable and peaceful to virulent and hostile. Presidential character resonates with the
political situation the president faces (Presidential Character and How to foresee it, 6).

Stephen Skowroneks regime theory attributes the presidents regime affiliation and the standing
of that regime in public eyes on what he can and cannot do in office.
Regimes comprise a particular public philosophy, like the New Deal's emphasis on government
intervention on behalf of citizens. And a regime contains a "carrier party," a party energized and
renewed by introducing the new program. At the beginning, the new political regime is put in
place by a charismatic leader. A new coalition" and new set of political ideologies commence
and "reset the very terms and conditions of constitutional government" (Presidential Leadership
in Political Time, 38-39). The party becomes the vehicle for ideas with which everyone has had
some experience -- say, the Medicare amendment of the Social Security Act, or the tax cuts under
the Reagan administration. George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, FDR and Ronald Reagan are
some examples of the reconstructive president. They come in office with a huge mandate, under
extra-ordinary circumstances (Independence, Civil War, Great Depression etc) and are blessed
with a tremendous amount of political leverage which enables them to transcend and transform
the presidency. Reconstructive presidents are the most successful in history.

The role of the articulation presidency that comes in next, lives room for improvement and
carrying on the regimes ideals. The articulator is constrained in the fact that he cannot start a new

dialogue and he has to pick choose between the decaying ideas and the still dominant one of the
regime. This according to Skowronek is called factional ruptures" (Presidential Leadership in
Political Time, 41). Harry Truman, LBJ, George H.W. Bush, Theodore Roosevelt are all
examples of articulators. This uncertainty (chance of both success and failure) provides a perfect
measuring stick for the success or failure of an articulator president.

After one or multiple articulators, comes the pre-emptive president. He belongs to the opposition
party, but he is not trying to change the dialogue in place, as the regimes policies are still
favorable to the public. He is rather trying to maintain a third way politics, trying to woo in the
centers of both the conservative and liberal factions. He rules from the center and legislatively
Bill Clinton and Dwight Eisenhower are perfect examples of moderately successful pre-emptive
presidents.

Late in the life of a regime, the once-dominant but actually quite brittle governing party stands
for worn-out ideas. The disjunctive presidents are most constrained in office by the burdens of a
failing ideology and are bound to fail according to Skowronek. He has no choice but to affiliate
with the weak regime and try to muddle through. He characteristically does that by stepping
away from the regime's stale public philosophy, emphasizing instead his administrative
competence but most often the public still view him as the symbolical figure-head of a dying set
of beliefs and this public perception inevitably leads to failure. Two great examples are Jimmy
Carter and Herbert Hoover.

In his research, Douglas J. Hoekstra says that for Skowronek, much of presidential success is

determined by the ways in which presidents seek to legitimate their actions. And that depends
crucially on a presidents relation to established political commitments (The Politics of Politics:
Skowronek and Presidential Research, 658). This affiliation or disassociation with the existing
set of dialogue, political structure and commitments, and whether those commitments are
resilient or vulnerable under the current political environment, determine the type of presidency
in political history.

Hoekstra also says that, Skowronek's approach sweeps across the entirety of the presidency. It
rests on an epistemology of historical pattern to locate (or to impose) the critical links of political
circumstance and presidential action, which comprise the heart of his cyclical theory; and at the
heart of presidential power, Skowronek finds not only the usual hard-headed deployment of
power resources but also gifts historical and even literary in nature (The Politics of Politics:
Skowronek and Presidential Research, 658) : "authority holds priority in determining the politics
of leadership," and crucial to such authority is a president fully engaged in the arts of
constructing and sustaining a "narrative" relating the presidents' intentions to his historical place
(Presidential Leadership in Political Time, 24).

Even though Skowronek holds back from making clear predictions, according to the presidential
flowchart, it is only fair to assume that the conservative regime put in place by the Reagan
revolution that has dominated our political conversation for the past 3 decades is in decline. The
argument, whether an order-shattering, transformational presidency is still possible or not
remains unclear as Skowronek debates both sides of the coin in the last chapter. But it is agreed
upon that executive ability to create a transformational presidency shrinks over time. As time

elapses it becomes much harder to get rid of the systems that are solidly entrenched in our
political society. The order-shattering nature of say, the Jacksonian Democracy during Americas
adolescence is almost impossible to recreate in the 21st century. Something similar to the
dismantling of the Second Bank is not possible in todays climate. Institutions that are put in
place by previous regimes get harder to dislocate over time. Even Reagan, the last reconstructor,
did not attempt to outright destroy the welfare state put into motion by the New Deal regime that
the Republicans so opposed. Skowronek concludes that only time will tell if at the end of the
Reagan Revolution, a new liberal reconstruction can possibly thrive.

Theodore Roosevelt under Barber and Skowronek:

Under the Barber model, Theodore Roosevelt is an active- positive president. Theodore
Roosevelt was a man of action. He was a man of military discipline with an uncanny foresight
and a rock-solid resolution. Ever since the Rough Rider days, Colonel Roosevelt, who so
bravely led the nation to decisive victory in San Juan Hill, was perceived by public as forceful,
articulate, strong, unwavering, imposing and full of charisma. And Roosevelt took full advantage
of this perception. According to Samuel Kernell, he was probably the first president to
appreciate the value of public opinion in leading Washington. Certainly, he was the first to
cultivate close ties with Washington correspondents and consequently was the first important
transitional figure in presidential-press relation (Going Public, 83). He also took great efforts in
his train rides all across the country and gave historical speeches which satiated what Barber
would call the demand for reassurance, progress and action. Perhaps his most optimistic
speech was given in France after his presidency, It's not the critic who counts, not the man who

points out how the strong man stumbled, or when the doer of deeds could have done better
(Citizenship in a Republic, Man in the Arena portion).

As Barber says, his staunch and decisive character influenced his policies both at home and
abroad. He engineered theblue-water Great White Fleet of the US Navy circumnavigated the
Earth from 1907 to 1909 showcasing the American military power to the entire world. Regarding
the Californian desegregation, The Gentlemans Agreement of the previous year had failed to
eliminate tensions between the United States and Japan ( T.R. The Last Romantic, 605). So this
expedition provided a steadfast warning to the Imperial Japanese Navy that any invasion from
the Pacific would be met with an utter and resolute force. "The most important service that I
rendered to peace" was Roosevelt's comment about his ordering the fleet around the world (The
Life and Times of Teddy Roosevelt,490).

As an active president with Republican majority in both houses, Roosevelt took to the task of
legislator-in-chief to push his progressive reforms. A negative president might have been more
subdued and would not have been able to exploit these same opportunities. Roosevelt introduced
the domestic Square Deal program to instigate conservation, control corporations and provide
consumer safety and well-being. No other President has rivaled his diversity of interests or his
physical energy; and none made a deeper imprint on the outlook and opinions of his
contemporaries (The Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt, 457). Through his trust buster
schemes, Roosevelt was bent on weeding out corruption. In fact, Wall Street looked upon him
as a dangerous socialist. This was an exaggeration. Roosevelt's "Square Deal" was essentially a

middle-class program, aimed as much at "unruly labor leaders" as at "the predatory rich ( The
Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt, 471).

The larger-than-life presidency of this great man who immortalized the phrase "Speak softly
and carry a big stick; you will go far," can be summarized by the events of October 14, 1912.
While campaigning in Milwaukee for the progressive Bull Moose Party, Roosevelt was shot in
the chest by a mentally unstable saloonkeeper named John Schrank. A fatal injury to the lungs
was avoided as the bullet went through his thick glass-case and a 50 page speech document.
Ignoring all appeals to visit a hospital immediately, Roosevelt addressed the public for almost an
hour and half without even removing the bloodstained shirt .His opening comments to the
gathered crowd were, Ladies and gentlemen, I don't know whether you fully understand that I
have just been shot; but it takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose. He was a man of destiny
(Theodore Rex, 747) the political moment required a decisive optimist, TRs character fulfilled
that requisite and together, this perfect blend of character and context steered the country
towards greatness.

The Theodore Roosevelt presidency follows to the tow Skowroneks presidential model in
political time. William McKinley won the fiercely fought 1896 elections and established the
post-reconstruction, progressive Republican coalition that would dominate American politics till
the Great Depression and the FDR New Deal takeover. After re-election in 1900, McKinley, the
re-constructor of this regime, was assassinated by an anarchist in September of the following

year. McKinleys vice-president, a young Teddy Roosevelt was thrust into office at the age of 42.
What started off as accidental ascension, became one of the greatest instances of articulation in
presidential history. Building on the unfinished legacy of McKinley, Roosevelt would go on to
transform the entire executive branch and lay down the foundations for the first modern
presidency - a presidency that would morph beyond the clear delineations of the constitution and
wander in the realms of inherent powers and presidential prerogatives. In domestic affairs and
especially in foreign powers, Roosevelt would consolidate the Hamiltonian axiom of a strong
national government run by a robust presidency. In a way, Roosevelt was continuing McKinleys
efforts of military reforms and modernization to help create a strong foreign policy worthy of an
ascendant global power-player. The army and the navy are the sword and the shield which this
nation must carry if she is to do her duty among the nations of the earth (A Strenuous Life,
Speech). Roosevelt was a proponent of radical international involvement, interventionism and
moral expansionism befitting a responsible colonial power. The Roosevelt statecraft was
satirically illustrated as big stick diplomacy.
Circumstances: Due to an expanding military might, fueled by the unprecedented success of the
socio-economic industrial machine, Theodore Roosevelt found himself leading a country which
was all of a sudden in the forefront of world politics. Now, the dominance of the presidency in
matters of foreign policy had always been the norm. Its extent was in full display during the Civil
War and even the Supreme Court validated the deferring of power to the President in times of
external threat or rebellion. But most importantly, this presidential privilege of the 19th century
could only be utilized under extraordinary circumstances by presidents with extraordinary
personalities, like Abraham Lincoln; and rolled back during the reign of weak Presidents. Teddy
Roosevelt took this extension of executive authority over foreign affairs and solidified it into an

absolute executive discretion. This was an immense precedent for the 20th century presidents who
commanded a superpower engaged in constant international commitments amidst a Cold War
with an ever changing nature of warfare. By the time Korea came by, the president superseded
Congress on deciding whether to undertake military action or not.

The centerpiece of Theodore Roosevelts muscular foreign policy was the Monroe Doctrine and
the Roosevelt corollary added to it. The Roosevelt corollary proclaimed the obligation of the US
to counteract European wrongdoings in the Western Hemisphere, thereby assuming a sphere of
influence over Latin America and establishing US hegemony in the Americas, especially the
Caribbean Islands. This undertaking also left its mark as the central strategy of containment
during the Cold War. With a unified government by his side, Roosevelts weapon of choice in his
quest of domination was the executive agreement. In 1905 Roosevelt ignored the Senate and
made an executive agreement with Santo Domingo by which the US became the countrys
financial protector and helped them repay the massive debt they owed to the European powers,
and ensured the functioning of the government (Senate eventually ratified the Treaty in 1907).
This marked the first practical application of the Roosevelt Corollary in the face of imminent
European encroachment. Roosevelts decisive action probably stemmed from his memories of
the 1896 German Naval threat that loomed upon the Caribbean and Atlantic (Theodore Rex,
560). The second event was the military intervention in Cuba which lasted from September 1906
to January 1909. In 1898 Roosevelt was too eager to intervene in Cuba, now he evinced the
greatest reluctance (T.R. the Last Romantic, 569). Roosevelt had no imperial designs for Cuba;
he maintained that these actions were to protect peace and order in the region and to spread
liberty, democracy and self-determination, just like Philippines. Thus, a staple political rhetoric

was being set by TR (for good or for bad) which will ensure the immortality of his regime.
During the Cold War, very similar rhetoric was used by Presidents when it came to containing
the spread of Communism. Bush used the same pretext for Iraqi Freedom- to liberate the
civilians from totalitarian tyranny. The building of the Panama Canal is perhaps the single most
identifying characteristic of the TR presidency. It is also created the ground work for a stalwart
diplomacy that future presidents followed to the toe.

The construction of the Panama Canal was the biggest, costliest, and most difficult public works
project ever undertaken by the American people. Of all Roosevelts achievements, it was the one
closest to his heart (The Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt,465). When Colombia rejected
the Hay-Herran treaty to build the Panama Canal; Roosevelt supported the New Panama Canal
Company in its secessionist movement. Rebellion spread on November 3rd and by November 6th,
1903 Panama declared independence from Colombia. The new government gave the zone to US
for perpetuity in exchange of an investment of only 10 million dollars, almost 3 million less than
the initial agreement. Muscular diplomacy, aiding of secessionists, intervention in case of
national interest despite absence of direct threat; all these traits were used time and again in face
of the Soviet threat. Whether aiding the Contras in Nicaragua or the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan,
the expanded Roosevelt Corollary was another everlasting essence of the TR foreign policy.
These actions displayed the immense power of a strong regime to set terms of the debate and
drive public towards it.

The 1903, 1905 and the 1907 Congress enjoyed Republican majority over both the House and
the Senate, rendering TRs pushing of the envelope much more feasible than it would have been

in a divided government, especially the anti-monopoly and trust-busting legislations. He was the
first president to successfully invoke the Sherman Antitrust Act against monopolies and
continued to restrict businesses throughout his presidency. In 1902, he intervened in the United
Mine Workers Strike and helped the labor force in achieving a wage increase and shortened
workday. The highly contested Hepburn Act of 1906 empowered the ICC (Interstate Commerce
Commission) summarily and effectively prevent the imposition of unjust or unreasonable rates
(The Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt, 472) to help small shippers. Again, the political
climate (unified government) played a massive role in these legislative successes.

The presidents ability lies with his association with the regime and the state of the regime in
public eyes. As an articulator of a very strong reconstructive regime TRs office moved the
country towards progressivism and set the terms of the political dialogue, some of which (like
environmentalism) even last to this day, just like his foreign policy legacy.. In 1908, Roosevelt
created another landmark of his presidency, the National Conservation Commission to protect
lands by creating national parks, monuments and advocating a responsible use of nations
resources. Today, the conservation movement is ever important in the face of an exponential
population growth matched with scarcity of resources. It has evolved into heated debates on
Global Warming and has given rise to a genre of highly polarizing Green Politics. Now that is
the hallmark of a successful presidency.

Even the final point of articulation was solidified in this presidency with the rift between Howard
Taft (once TRs chosen successor) and Roosevelt himself mainly on progressive issues that tore
the party apart. Skowronek states the biggest problem of articulation is the path to choose- which

policies of the regime to support whole-heartedly and which ones to discard as anachronistic?
This often creates a base-fracture within the party. Despite his strong reform record, President
Howard Taft lost support within the Republican Party and among Progressives. Although he
wanted lower duties on imports, he was unable to stop the conservative Republicans from
pushing through the Payne-Aldrich Tariff (1909) which kept rates on some products high over
the objections of the progressives (TR: The Last Romantic, 673). Taft fired Roosevelts close
friend Chief Forester Gifford Pinchot when he had clashed with the Department of Interior over
conservation issues. The final nail in the coffin was Tafts use of the Sherman Anti-Trust Act to
break up JP Morgan owned US Steel, which was approved by Roosevelt himself as a good trust
during the Panic. All these led to the conservative-progressive split within the Republican Party
and Roosevelt went on to create the Progressive Bull Moose Party. Even though he received
more votes than any Third Party candidate during the presidential elections of 1912, Woodrow
Wilson emerged the winner. TRs Bull Moose Party is the textbook example of Skowroneks
articulation rift.

In conclusion, Roosevelts presidency could achieve such heights because the time
was ripe, the regime was new and enjoyed popular support (with TR giving one of the first major
instances of going public) and Americas ascendancy as an industrialized military power who
could dictate the terms of global affairs over any European state. TRs active-positive role
mashed perfectly with the demands of his time. The impact of the decisive victory over the
Spanish Empire elevated the United States as an imperial power, all of a sudden in possession of
and bearing the responsibilities of colonies such as Cuba, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Philippines
and the public was ready to For example, In 1823, when President James Monroe articulated the

US policy of intervention in case of any act of colonial aggression by European powers in the
Western Hemisphere, the executive branch had very little power to back it up. But during TRs
presidency the political climate was all the difference. TR was not bound by the decay of
disjunction, the appeasement of pre-emption, and the constraints of an unfavorable articulation.
So the key to the success of TRs articulation presidency, according to Skowroneks model attests
to his comprehension of the limits (or lack thereof) of the executive office, understanding and
undertaking the overhaul of public sentiment, re-aligning public policy with the new progressive
ideologies and thus setting the political agenda for decades to come, and most importantly
exploring this lack of constraints in the office to strike while the iron is hot ( Russo-Japan war,
Great White Fleet, Trust busting, National Parks etc). The Progressives vision of a new
democracy led by a more powerful presidency was tied to a sharp critique of the constitutional
determinism of the 19th century (Presidential Leadership in Political Time, 21). And because he
set the precedent for this bold transformation of the office that would be carried on throughout
the 20st century by Democrats and Republicans as the country tried to grasp the role of a super
power a lasting legacy of the TR presidency.

Bibliography :
1) Brands, H.W. T.R. The Last Romantic. New York : Basic Books, 1997.
2) Lorant, Stefan. The Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt(1958). New York: DoubleDay and
Company, 2004.
3) Morris, Edmund. Theodore Rex . New York: Random House, 2001.
4) Roosevelt, Theodore. Excerpts from Speech in Hamilton Club. The Strenuous Life. Chicago,
Illinois. 10 April 1899

5) Roosevelt, Theodore. Excerpt from the speech "Citizenship In A Republic".THE MAN IN

THE ARENA. Sorbonne in Paris, France. 23 April 1910 .
6) Kernell, Samuel. Going Public: New Strategies of Presidential Leadership. Washington D.C. :
CQ Press, 2007
7) Skowronek, Stephen. Presidential Leadership in Political Time. Kansas: University Press of
Kansas, 2011
8) Hoekstra, Douglas J. The Politics of Politics: Skowronek and Presidential Research.
Presidential Studies Quarterly. Vol. 29, No. 3, Sep., 1999, pp 657-671
9) Nelson, Michael. The Psychological Presidency. ( In-class assignment article)
10) Barber, James David. Presidential Character and how to foresee it (In-class assignment
article)