The resurgence of Congress may seem to be merely the temporary result of Clinton’s repudiation by November voters. But it is more likely to prove the crowning blow to what Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in his 1973 book called “The Imperial Presidency” – the phenomenon in which an outsize share of political power came to be vested in one office.
The Founders deliberately limited presidential authority. Abraham Lincoln expanded his to fight the Civil War, but that was quickly dissipated by a parade of successors – Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur – who deferred to Capitol Hill in a period Woodrow Wilson called “congressional government.” Theodore Roosevelt and Wilson ruled in heroic fashion, but after them, the office shrank into its old template, shackled by a Congress grown averse to presidential meddling in economics and world affairs.
The grandiose presidency owed its birth to the Great Depression, when Congress gave Franklin Roosevelt extraordinary power in domestic affairs, and World War II, when it did the sameon the world stage. After VJ Day, the presidency might have receded to its modest origins. But by then, most Americans thoughtthat FDR had done a better job than Congress of fighting depression and fascism.
The cold war injected new adrenaline into the presidency and swelled the executive branch. Citing Soviet advances in Europe and Asia, Harry Truman insisted on bipartisanship in foreign policy, but what he really wanted – and got – was congressional deference to the White House. The wildly increased postwar federal budget gave presidents new opportunities to impose their priorities on American life. Duringthe liberal solstice of the 1960s, Americans exalted the president’s ability to rise above the narrow bickering and petty compromises of congressional barons and earls: without the stewardship of President Lyndon Johnson, would we have seen the Civil Rights or Voting Rights acts?
During these years, the presidency acquired a mystique that Congress could not hope to match. Television gave presidents a potent means to impress the public, squeezing members of Congress to the periphery like Hollywood extras. Journalists and historians began writing about the “Leader of the Free World.” A newly redesigned presidential seal appeared on matchbooks, cuff links, swizzle sticks and golf balls. West Wing functionaries invoked cliches like the “awesome burdens” of the “loneliest job in the world” to shake off annoyances. This lurch toward grandeur reached its zenith with Richard Nixon, who waged the most serious effort of any U.S. president to grab power, by means legal and not, culminating in Watergate.
That scandal did much to deflate the office – and as Congress took a lead role in forcing Nixon’s resignation, it seemed to be reasserting itself. But after a few token reforms, Congress returned to its genteel ways. This was in keeping with its courtliness on foreign policy. Against LBJ’s and Nixon’s undeclared war in Indochina, the House and Senate could only muster piecemeal statutes against U.S. involvement and the dubious War Powers Act. That enabled Congress to demand removal of U.S. troops deployed without its consent, but also allowed presidents to dispatch troops for 90 days on their own authority.
Today, our presidents can brandish no American-Soviet confrontation to provide cover for their domestic and foreign-policy mistakes. The entire executive branch is under attack – even by Bill Clinton. The president has now become flypaper for everything Americans hate about politics. In our current adoration for the grass roots, the chief bogeyman is the one who seems most distant from the people. Talk radio and hundreds of cable channels give voice and face time to thousands of competing leaders, from the 535 members of Congress to Rush Limbaugh.
This week the Congress is asserting itself in a way it did not dream of doing after Vietnam and Watergate. Are we embarking upon a new era of congressional government? The true test won’t come until the same party seizes control of both the White House and Capitol Hill. It takes less hubris for Republicans in Congress to steal power from their nemesis Clinton than from a President Dick Cheney – or a President Bob Dole. Gingrich shrewdly notes that some elements of his program, such as the line-item veto and repeal of War Powers, may actually give more power to the president. There is also the possibility Americans will conclude the 104th Congress muffed its big chance, and demand that the next president clean up the mess.
