An analysis of presidential vetoes from FDR to Jimmy Carter which clarifies the problems caused by the veto and reveals how it has shaped public policy, Watson concludes that the veto power has operated well both in terms of public policy and relations between Congress and the president and argues that it would be a mistake to alter it through the adoption of an item veto.

"While veto threats have a long history, presidents have come to be more reliant on this bargaining tool in the last few decades. Veto Rhetoric therefore serves as a nice companion to Sam Kernell′s classic study, Going Public, which documented a similar trend with regards to presidential public appeals. Kernell′s current study will no doubt once again lead presidential scholars to rethink how they understand and conceptualizing presidential-congressional relations." - Joel Sievert, Texas Tech University In Veto Rhetoric, Samuel Kernell offers a fresh, more sanguine perspective to understanding national policy making in this era of divided government. Contrary to the standard "separation of powers" representation of the veto which deals presidents a weak "take it or leave it" hand, Kernell shows that veto rhetoric forces Congress to pay careful heed of the president’s objections early in deliberations as legislation is forming. Moreover, the book introduces original statistical analysis to test the argument and extends previously reported analyses to include the Biden presidency. Veto Rhetoric will change the way students of Congress and the presidency assess their respective roles in making national policy.

Combining game theory with unprecedented data, this book analyzes how divided party Presidents use threats and vetoes to wrest policy concessions from a hostile congress.

This is the first modern study of the veto. In addition to tracing the genesis and historical evolution from Ancient Rome, through the ultimate inclusion in the Constitution, it also explores the veto’s consequences for modern presidents. In doing so, Spitzer promotes a key argument about the relation between the veto power and the Presidency — namely, that the rise of the veto power, beginning with the first Chief Executive, is symptomatic of the rise of the strong modern Presidency, and has in fact been a major tool of Presidency-building. A special and revealing irony of the veto power is seen in the finding that, despite its monarchical roots and anti-majoritarian nature, the veto has become a key vehicle for presidents to appeal directly to, and on behalf of, the people. Thus, the veto’s utility for presidents arises not only as a power to use against Congress, but also as a symbolic, plebiscitary tool.