Information to Users

INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter 6ce, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back o f the book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6” x 9” black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zed> Road, Ann Arbor MI 48106-1346 USA 313/761-4700 800/521-0600 THE CONTEXT OF CHOICE: UNDERSTANDING THE PRESIDENTIAL DECISION MAKING PROCESS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Rebecca C. English Deen, M.A. ***** The Ohio State University 1997 Dissertation Committee: Approved by John H. Kessel, Advisor Dean Lacy Randall B. Ripley Adviser Department of Political Science UMI N tim ber: 9 8 1 3 2 4 8 UMI Microform 9813248 Copyright 1998, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeh Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 ABSTRACT Presidential decision making has been studied primarily in the context of crises and in foreign policy. This dissertation expands our understanding of the process by which presidents make decisions in two key ways. Using the administration of Gerald R. Ford, I examine the decisions he faced across the entire span of his administration. Also, I present analyses of his decision making in domestic policy. This project begins with a discussion of the research process. These data were gathered from the Gerald R. Ford Library, in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The first chapter provides an extensive chronicling of my research experience, including my observations about working in a presidential library. In the second chapter, I detail exactly what President Ford addressed. From these results, I develop a typology of presidential decisions and describe the distribution of these decisions across the typology. 11 This chapter also provides a description of what the President chose to do. The president's decisions are conceptualized as a trichotomy of action, delay and not acting. The characteristics of the policy and decision making environments in which President Ford made decisions are important to this process. This chapter also details these components. The third chapter contains an investigation of the bivariate relationships between the environment and the decision types and between the environment and presidential choice. The results show that both opportunities for choice and what President Ford chose were differentiated by components of the policy and decision making environments. The fourth chapter shows that when decision making is examined in a full multivariate model, factors from both environments remain influential. Using logit estimation, I find that when a decision constitutes a change in the status quo and when it is taken later in Ford's term, he is more likely to act on the decisions. When his staff present him with options which are explicitly linked with one another, he is less likely to act. From the results of the multivariate model, I selected two issue areas in which to cull particular decisions from my dataset: energy and economic policy; and agricultural policy. In these two case studies I find confirmation of my model of decision making. In searching for workaible policies which iii satisfied multiple goals. President Ford was constrained in decision making by the relatedness of items. In decisions opportunities where his staff presented him with related opportunities, he was more likely not to have acted. In decisions taken later in the term and which would change the status quo, the President was more likely to have acted. These results point to the complexity of presidential decision making. This dissertation shows that there are a variety of forces which work to influence what the President decided and that these forces are at play across the entire span of the administration. IV Dedicated to my family who has grounded me and to the teachers who first made my ideas take flight ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am fortunate to have a wide intellectual and emotional support network. My advisor, John Kessel, has shared selflessly his wisdom and guidance. He spent innumerable hours helping me with this research and the dissertation is markedly better as a result. I am grateful for his support, not only in this work but also over the course of my graduate school experience. I would also like to thank Dean Lacy and Randall Ripley for their advice and helpful comments throughout this project. David Kimball, Laura Arnold and Zoe Oxley were especially instrumental to the success of this project. Unfailing in their insights and in their confidence in the project, their support was extremely important and for this I am grateful. I am also thankful for the support of the many friends and fellow graduate students at Ohio State. I also wish to thank the staff at the Gerald R. Ford Library, especially William McNitt. Their professionalism not only facilitated the research process, but also created an hospitable atmosphere in which to work. This research was funded, in part, by travel grants from the Gerald R. Ford Foundation and from the Ohio State University's Graduate Student Research Award. I am grateful for this financial assistance which allowed me the freedom for this type vi of data collection. Janet English has always been committed to my success; the extent to which I am, I credit to her love and confidence. Finally, words cannot convey my deep gratitude to Scott Carpenter for his patience, understanding and unwavering love. VII VITA March 21, 1970 B o m - Cebu City, Cebu, The Philippines. 1992 B.A. Political Science, Denison University, Granville, Ohio. 1995 M.A. Political Science, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio. FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Political Science Vlll TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A b s t r a c t ..................................................... ii Dedication ..................................................... v Acknowledgments............................................... vi V i t a ....................................................... viii List of Figures ............................................... xi Chapters : 1. Introduction ................................................1 1.1 Literature Review ................................... 4 1.1.1. Inputs into the decision making environment .............................. 5 1.1.2. Outputs of the decision making process . 8 1.1.3. The decision making process ........... 11 1.2 Research process and considerations ............. 14 1.2.1. Theoretical approach .................. 15 1.2.2. Selection of data s o u r c e s ............. 18 1.2.3. Research experience .................... 25 2. A description of decisions, outcomes, and factors influencing presidential choice ....................... 50 2.1 Presidential decisions ............................ 51 2.1.1. Decision outcomes ...................... 63 2.2 Decision making environment ...................... 69 3 . The context of decision making and decision types and presidential choice .................................... 78 3.1 Decision types and the decision making environment 80 3.2 Decision outcomes and the decision making environment ...................................... 95 4. Testing a multivariate model of presidential decision making ................................................... 107 IX 5 . Decision making on energy policy in the Ford administration ........................................ 142 5.1 Data c o l l e c t i o n .................................... 143 5.2 Energy and economics ................................153 5.2.1. The Ford p l a n ............................158 5.2.2. Congressional response and Ford's Compromise ..............................164 5.2.3. Particular decisions ............... 169 6. Decision making on agriculture policy in the Ford administration ........................................ 185 6.1 Meat I n d u s t r y ...................................... 186 6.1.1. Ford's agriculture policy ............. 18 9 6.1.2. Particular decisions ............... 195 7. Conclusion ...............................................210 7.1 Next s t e p s ...........................................222 Appendix A, Example of Decision Making Bundle ........ 225 Appendix B, Frequency distribution of decisions .... 235 Appendix C, Frequency distribution of decision making

Load more