Suchergebnisse

Since the rise of the behavioralist revolution in the 1950s and 1960s the political science discipline has struggled to find agreement on a uniform vision of the study of politics, particularly as it relates to the employment of methods. This article addresses behavioralism's influence on the decline of public law analysis in the field of presidential studies. Specifically, it focuses on the work of presidential scholars Edward Corwin and Richard Neustadt in highlighting the changes to the study of the presidency. Attention is also paid to the decline of normative types of public law analysis. The article concludes with a call for greater acceptance, and practice, of public law analysis.

A dozen years before thisPSsymposium, several political scientists came together in a similar manner to honor Louis Fisher's scholarship and highlight his contributions to the discipline (Spitzer 2000). Many wonderful insights and observations were made to shed light on Fisher's versatility and impact. However, that effort missed an opportunity to highlight a key contribution of Fisher's work: a revival of pre-behavioral era functions and concerns within political science. In many ways Fisher is a throwback to a traditional political science approach where scholars did not select subfields or specialties but sought to engage in broad public debates about governing and, most importantly, believed that normative and empirical studies could and should go hand in hand. With the latter approach Fisher has made his most important contribution to political science.

The power to nominate has often been a delicate issue to analyze. No doubt the Constitution gives to the president the ability to make formal nominations, but the question lingers as to whether or not the Senate can involve itself before that decision is made. This article examines the advice and consent clause through a constitutional, historical, and institutional perspective to address this question. Saying that the president has the final judgment in nominating does not preclude the Senate (or even the House of Representatives) from giving counsel during the decision‐making process for selecting a nominee. A president, however, may well decide to ignore congressional advice, but he should be mindful of the fact that the Constitution gives to the Senate the ability to reject his nominations and block other White House objectives, including legislation and treaties.