This brief, thought-provoking text evaluates the performance of recent presidents from Johnson to Bush, finding that, overall, each has failed to live up to public expectations. Written by one of the top presidency scholars today, The Presidential Dilemma reflects on the idea that as our country's problems grow, our politicians seem to shrink. Arguing that American presidents of the last 40 years have largely failed to meet the needs, expectations, and responsibilities placed upon them, the book discusses how presidents might better maximize their opportunities for leadership and suggests a distinctive theory of presidential politics: presidents, facing a system of multiple veto points, seek to maximize power and influence.The third edition of Genovese's stimulating book is thoroughly updated to reflect presidential development in recent years, and a new introduction brings his arguments current. As he demonstrates, the emergence of democracy as a new social and political paradigm undermined traditional authority and legitimacy. Subjects no longer automatically follow; now citizens must be persuaded. They may give to a leader their authority and power, or not. As Genovese notes, in a world of mass consumerism, those wishing to lead have precious little to offer by way of inducement.Genovese's goal is to examine the reasons why the performance of recent presidents has been underwhelming, discuss how they might maximize their opportunities for leadership, and ask a key question: Can presidents be both powerful and accountable? The book follows a clear format and tries to show why America's officeholders have so rarely been leaders and how presidents can become leaders instead of mere officeholders.

What does Walter Mondale's career reveal about the dilemma of the modern Democtratic party and the crisis of postwar American liberalism? Steven M. Gillon 's answer is that Mondale's frustration as Jimmy Carter's vice president and his failure to unseat the immensely popular President Reagan in 1984 reveal the beleaguered state of a party torn apart by generational and ideological disputes. The Democrats' Dilemma begins with Mondale's early career in Minnesota politics, from his involvement with Hubert Humphrey to his election to the United States Senate in 1964. Like many liberals of his generation, Mondale traveled to Washington hopeful that government power could correct social wrongs. By 1968, urban unrest, a potent white backlash, and America's involvement in the Vietnam war dimmed much of his optimisim. In the years after 1972, as senator, as vice president, and as presidential candidate, Mondale self-conciously attempted to fill the void after the death of Robert Kennedy. Mondale attempted to create a new Democratic party by finding common ground between the party's competeing factions. Gillon contends that Mondale's failure to create that consensus underscored the deep divisions within the Democratic Party. Using previously classified documents, unpublished private papers, and dozens of interviews -including extensive conversations with Mondale himself- Gillon paints a vivid portrait of the innerworkings of the Carter administration. The Democrats' Dilemma captures Mondale's frustration as he attempted to mediate between the demands of liberals intent upon increased spending for social programs and the fiscal conservatism of a president unskilled in the art of congressional diplomacy. Gillon discloses the secret revelation that Mondale nearly resigned as vice president. Gillon also chronicles Mondale's sometimes stormy relationships with Jesse Jackson, Gary Hart, and Geraldine Ferraro. Eminently readable and a means of access to a major twentieth-century political figure, The Democrats' Dilemma is a fascinating look at the travail of American liberalism.

Throughout their time in office, American presidents are often forced to choose between leading the nation and leading their party. In an earlier time when the major parties were less polarized, this leadership dilemma, while challenging, was not nearly as vexing as it is today. American presidents now find themselves with little room to maneuver, compelled to serve the Constitution on the one hand and yet caught within bitter partisan disputes and large numbers of unaffiliated voters on the other. The contributors to this volume investigate how recent presidents have navigated these increasingly rocky political waters. Focusing on campaign strategy, presidential rhetoric, relations with Congress, domestic and foreign policy, The Presidential Leadership Dilemma presents a wide-ranging, detailed, and fascinating study of how contemporary presidents face the challenge at the heart of every presidency.

In Putin's Labor Dilemma, Stephen Crowley investigates how the fear of labor protest has inhibited substantial economic transformation in Russia. Putin boasts he has the backing of workers in the country's industrial heartland, but as economic growth slows in Russia, reviving the economy will require restructuring the country's industrial landscape. At the same time, doing so threatens to generate protest and instability from a key regime constituency. However, continuing to prop up Russia's Soviet-era workplaces, writes Crowley, could lead to declining wages and economic stagnation, threatening protest and instability. Crowley explores the dynamics of a Russian labor market that generally avoids mass unemployment, the potentially explosive role of Russia's monotowns, conflicts generated by massive downsizing in "Russia's Detroit" (Tol'yatti), and the rapid politicization of the truck drivers movement. Labor protests currently show little sign of threatening Putin's hold on power, but the manner in which they are being conducted point to substantial chronic problems that will be difficult to resolve. Putin's Labor Dilemma demonstrates that the Russian economy must either find new sources of economic growth or face stagnation. Either scenario—market reforms or economic stagnation—raises the possibility, even probability, of destabilizing social unrest.

The President's Dilemma in Asia provides one of the first comprehensive and comparative theory of presidential government formation. In the authoritarian era, presidents had greater control over key institutional actors in the process, such as the legislature, the ruling party, and the bureaucracy. However, after democratic transition, they have to navigate competing pressures from these political institutions. This book highlights the major trade-off that presidents of new democracies face in their relationship with the different political institutions, the so-called ?president's dilemma,? and their strategy in dealing with the dilemma. Existing studies of presidential government formation in new democracies have largely overlooked the entirety of the structure of the political institutions surrounding the president and its impact on the president's government formation strategy. This book offers a view that government formation is a window to understanding how presidents weigh the benefits of appointing ministers representing different political institutions under a variety of given institutional circumstances. The question of which institution presidents attempt to accommodate through government formation is a high stakes one, and addressing it is important, because particular patterns of personnel distribution can influence the kind of policies political leaders adopt and the level of accountability and responsiveness to constituents these policies represent. Comparative Politics is a series for researchers, teachers, and students of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. Global in scope, books in the series are characterized by a stress on comparative analysis and strong methodological rigour. The series is published in association with the European Consortium for Political Research. For more information visit: www.ecprnet.eu. The series is edited by Nicole Bolleyer, Chair of Comparative Political Science, Geschwister Scholl Institut, LMU Munich and Jonathan Slapin, Professor of Political Institutions and European Politics, Department of Political Science, University of Zurich.

Assessing the legal and practical questions posed by the use of artificial intelligence in national security matters The increasing use of artificial intelligence poses challenges and opportunities for nearly all aspects of society, including the military and other elements of the national security establishment. This book addresses how national security law can and should be applied to artificial intelligence, which enables a wide range of decisions and actions not contemplated by current law. James Baker, an expert in national security law and process, adopts a realistic approach in assessing how the law—even when not directly addressing artificial intelligence—can be used, or even misused, to regulate this new technology. His new book covers, among other topics, national security process, constitutional law, the law of armed conflict, arms control, and academic and corporate ethics. With his own background as a judge, he examines potential points of contention and litigation in an area where the law is still evolving and might not yet provide clear and certain answers. The Centaur's Dilemma also analyzes potential risks associated with the use of artificial intelligence in the realm of national security—including the challenges of machine-human interface, operating (or not operating) the national-security decision-making process at machine speed, and the perils of a technology arms race. Written in plain English, The Centaur's Dilemma will help guide policymakers, lawyers, and technology experts as they deal with the many legal questions that will arise when using artificial intelligence to plan and carry out the actions required for the nation's defense.

Newton Minow’s long engagement with the world of television began nearly fifty years ago when President Kennedy appointed him chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. As its head, Minow would famously dub TV a “vast wasteland,” thus inaugurating a career dedicated to reforming television to better serve the public interest. Since then, he has been chairman of PBS and on the board of CBS and elsewhere, but his most lasting contribution remains his leadership on televised presidential debates. He was assistant counsel to Illinois governor Adlai Stevenson when Stevenson first proposed the idea of the debates in 1960; he served as cochair of the presidential debates in 1976 and 1980; and he helped create and is currently vice chairman of the Commission on Presidential Debates, which has organized the debates for the last two decades. Written with longtime collaborator Craig LaMay, this fascinating history offers readers for the first time a genuinely inside look into the origins of the presidential debates and the many battles—both legal and personal—that have determined who has been allowed to debate and under what circumstances. The authors do not dismiss the criticism of the presidential debates in recent years but do come down solidly in favor of them, arguing that they are one of the great accomplishments of modern American electoral politics. As they remind us, the debates were once unique in the democratic world, are now emulated across the globe, and they offer the public the only real chance to see the candidates speak in direct response to one another in a discussion of major social, economic, and foreign policy issues. Looking to the challenges posed by third-party candidates and the emergence of new media such as YouTube, Minow and LaMay ultimately make recommendations for the future, calling for the debates to become less formal, with candidates allowed to question each other and citizens allowed to question candidates directly. They also explore the many ways in which the Internet might serve to broaden the debates’ appeal and informative power. Whether it’s Clinton or Obama vs. McCain, Inside the Presidential Debates will be welcomed in 2008 by anyone interested in where this crucial part of our democracy is headed—and how it got there.