FDR to Clinton, Mueller to ?: a Field Essay on Presidential Approval Author(S): Paul Gronke and Brian Newman Source: Political Research Quarterly, Vol
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Utah FDR to Clinton, Mueller to ?: A Field Essay on Presidential Approval Author(s): Paul Gronke and Brian Newman Source: Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 56, No. 4 (Dec., 2003), pp. 501-512 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of the University of Utah Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3219810 Accessed: 21/06/2010 14:03 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sage. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. University of Utah and Sage Publications, Inc. are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Political Research Quarterly. http://www.jstor.org FIELDESSAY FDR to Clinton, Mueller to ?: A Field Essay on Presidential Approval PAUL GRONKE, REEDCOLLEGE BRIAN NEWMAN, DUKEUNIVERSITY Since the 1930s, polling organizations have asked Americans whether they "approveor disapprove of the job [the incumbent]is doing as president."In the early 1970s, John Muellerstarted an academicindustry by askingwhat drivesthese evaluations.American politics and the tools availableto examineit have changeddra- maticallysince then, inspiringa burst of researchon presidentialapproval in the 1990s. We reviewthis new body of literature, arguing that it builds on but differs importantly from earlier approval studies. Since Mueller's writing,scholars have expandedhis relativelysimple model, takingaccount of presidents'goals and personal characteristics,other political actors, the ubiquitousmedia, and an inattentivepublic. We describethree waves of research,focusing on the most recentwave. We suggestthat history,along with new intellectualcurrents, data,and methodshave enabledeach wave to incorporatemore of political,social, and psychologicalreality. Finally,we identifythe issues most likely to motivatepresidential approval research for the next ten years. In the 1930s, the Gallup organization began asking study of the Americanpresidency, Richard Neustadt (1980: Americans "do you approve or disapprove of the way 81, n. 9) arguedthat reportsof these ratings"are very widely [the incumbent] is handling his job as president?"Since read in Washington"and are "widelytaken to approximate then, the question has been asked "with tenacious regular- reality."Higher approvalratings tend to pay off electorally, ity" (Mueller 1973: 196). In the early 1970s, John Mueller both for the president and for his party in Congress (1970, 1973) sparked something of a political science (Gronke, Koch, and Wilson 2003; Newman and Ostrom movement when he treatedthe Gallupapproval ratings as a 2002; Sigelman 1979) and also affectthe president'spolicy- and success in dependent variable. Coalitions of minorities, rallying making goals, legislativestrategy, promoting aroundthe flag, economic decline, and war, Muellerargued, his agenda.2 drove changes in approvalover time. The American political universe has undergone impor- Since then, scholarly studies of presidential approval tant changes since the early 1970s, and the presidency has has have been almost equally tenacious and regular.In fact, a not been immune. The office of the president endured conservative estimate finds over 70 books, articles, and two major crises. RichardNixon resigned, almost certain to chapters that attempt to explain approval ratings.' The be impeached, and left office with 24 percent approval. attention is well placed. In the era of "the public relations William Jefferson Clinton was impeached, yet ended his presidency"(Brace and Hinckley 1993: 382), approvalrat- second term with a 64 percent approvalrating, the highest on In has ings play a critical role in presidentialpolitics. The presi- final rating record. addition, presidentialapproval dent's performance in this "new referendum"(Brace and become increasingly volatile. One President Bush experi- after first Gulf Hinckley 1992: 18) is a key to understandingpresidential enced almost universal acclaim the War, power in the postwar era (Neustadt 1980). In his classic only to watch this support whither by over 50 percentage points in a matter of months. A second PresidentBush was The actualnumber is certainlyhigher. We included only a subset of these studies in the bibliography.We apologizein advancefor the many books, 2 These claims are established in the voluminous literatureon elections, articles,and workingpapers that we have omitteddue to spacerestrictions. presidentialapproval, and presidentialleadership. Four recent volumes NOTE: An earlierversion of this articlewas presentedat the 2000 Annual include Brody (1991), Braceand Hinckley (1992), Kernell (1997), and Meeting of the AmericanPolitical Science Association, Washing- King and Ragsdale(1988). On how popularityaffects legislative strategy, ton, D.C. The authors thank Matt Baum, RichardBrody, Harold see Canes-Wroneand Shotts (2002); on legislative success, see Canes- Clarke,Jeffrey Cohen, RobertEisinger, Constantine Spiliotes, and Wrone and de Marchi (2002). Additional treatments include Kernell anonymous reviewers for their comments and Carrie Liken and (1997); Peterson (1990); Rivers and Rose (1985); Rohde and Simon Jennifer Merolla for their research assistance. This research was (1985). Many argue that those effects are variableand not always sub- supported in part by the National Science Foundation SBR- stantial (e.g., Bond and Fleisher 1990; Cohen 1997). We consider the 9730854, the NSF Research Experiences for Undergraduates debate over approval'sinfluence on Americanpolitics a significanttopic, (REU)program, and the Stillman-DrakeFund at Reed College. one that makes studying approvalas a dependent variablemeaningful. However,we cannot do this topic justice in the space providedand focus PoliticalResearch Quarterly, Vol. 56, No. 4 (December 2003): pp. 501-512 on literaturetaking presidentialapproval as the dependent variable. 501 502 POLITICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY catapulted to 90 percent approval just after the terrorist the quarter century since. Despite his sparse and self- attacks of September 11th and retained remarkablyhigh described "irreverent"approach, Mueller anticipatedmany approvalfor more than a year afterwards.Further, the "ava- of the ways his model would be extended, refined, and lanche of opinion polls" (Jacobsand Shapiro2000, xi) pro- enriched.Analytically, he tried to account for the seemingly vides an almost daily rendering of the president'sapproval inevitable decline in approval over each presidentialterm. rating. During the Lewinsky scandal, for instance, John He arguedthat this was most likely the result of a "coalition Zaller(1998) examined more than 30 differentpolls over a of minorities"that builds during an administrationas the 20 day period, all of which dealt with Clinton'sjob per- president is forced to act on controversialissues, conse- formance. Presidents'private polling has also dramatically quently alienatinggroups of real or potentialsupporters. He increased, as has scholarly attention to these activities operationalizedthe "coalitionof minorities"thesis simply as (Jacobsand Shapiro2000). time in office. Second, he noticed that approval increases In the academicworld, new analyticaltools have shaped during foreign crises, the "rally round the flag" effect.4 approvalstudies. Longer time series have provided greater Muellerwas the first,but certainlynot the last, to realizethat leverage on comparisons across administrations. Rich measuringrally events is fraughtwith difficultyTo resist the datasetsderived from presidentialarchives have provided a temptation to find a rally point to match every bump in far more detailed treatmentof presidentialagendas. Increas- approval, fitting the model to sample data, he adopted a ingly sophisticated analytical methods have been intro- priori criteria for rally events, a recommendationthat has duced and applied to these new data sources, as well as pro- been followed irregularlysince.5 Third, Muellerargued that vided a fresh look at the traditionalGallup series. "aneconomy in slump harmsa president'spopularity, but an Scholarly scrutiny of the presidency and presidential economy that is improvingdoes not seem to help his rating" approvalhas intensifiedin response to these developments (1973: 215).6 Finally,given his interest in public opinion and especiallyin reactionto the GeorgeH. W Bushand Clin- during wartime, he included dummy variables for the ton presidencies.What has not occurred,however, is a com- KoreanWar and Vietnamconflict. Ultimately,he found that prehensiveoverview and criticalexamination of the literature all of these variablessignificantly affected