404. Does the President Matter as Much as You Think?

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: The episode examines how much the U.S. president really matters across the economy, foreign policy, executive management, the judiciary, domestic politics, and even presidential virtue. Three experts argue presidential power is real but bounded: the president can shape priorities, appointments, and rhetoric, yet larger forces, Congress, courts, and bureaucracy often limit direct impact. Trump is presented as unusually divisive, but not always more powerful than predecessors.

Main Topics: Presidential power in the economy (Priority: 5/5): Glenn Hubbard argues presidents influence expectations, regulation, taxes, and trade, but broad economic outcomes are mainly driven by larger forces like technology and globalization. Foreign policy as the president’s strongest domain (Priority: 5/5): Eric Posner says presidents have the most leverage in foreign affairs, where vagueness in constitutional authority and executive discretion allow rapid unilateral action. Expansion of executive and appointment power (Priority: 5/5): Bernadette Myler explains that gridlock and Senate rule changes have pushed more authority into executive orders and made judicial and executive appointments easier for presidents to control. Congress, courts, and the shrinking legislative center (Priority: 4/5): The conversation stresses that congressional paralysis has increased the judiciary’s influence, since many major disputes now end up being resolved by courts rather than legislation. Trump as an unusually aggressive but not always effective president (Priority: 4/5): The guests assess Trump as divisive, rhetorically forceful, and effective in some areas like deregulation and judicial appointments, but often limited by institutions and policy uncertainty. The role of presidential virtue and the bully pulpit (Priority: 3/5): The episode distinguishes between policy power and personal character, arguing that Trump uses the bully pulpit to divide rather than unify, which affects public trust and polarization.

Key Arguments: The president matters less than many people think because long-run economic outcomes are shaped mostly by big structural forces, not individual leaders. Presidents matter more than many people think in areas under the administrative state, appointments, and foreign policy, where they can move quickly and unilaterally. Gridlock has shifted power toward executive action and the courts, because Congress often cannot pass clarifying legislation. Senate rule changes that eliminated the filibuster for many nominations significantly strengthened presidential control over the judiciary. Trump deserves some credit for resetting business expectations, passing the 2017 tax cut, and confronting China, but tariffs created uncertainty and were the wrong tool. Obama also expanded executive power through executive orders and actions like DACA and the Paris Agreement, which later made reversal easier for Trump. The judiciary has gained the most power over the last two decades because Congress increasingly cannot resolve disputes or override courts. Trump’s greatest leverage is in foreign policy, executive management, and judicial appointments; his weakest area is budgeting, where Congress still constrains him. Presidential rhetoric matters: the bully pulpit can unify a country or intensify division, and Trump uses it more to polarize than to persuade broadly. Presidential virtue should be treated as its own category because dishonesty, cruelty, and norm-breaking can damage institutions even when formal policy achievements are limited.

Data Points: President power rating, economy (Posner/Myler/Hubbard): 3 / 7 / 6-7 - Experts rated how much the president matters economically on a 1-10 scale. President power rating, foreign policy (Posner/Myler/Hubbard): 7-8 / 8 / 9-10 - Experts agreed foreign affairs is where presidents matter most. President power rating, management of executive branch: 6 / 8 / 5-6 - Ratings of presidential leverage over the administrative state. President power rating, judiciary control: 7 / 8-10 / 8 - Judicial appointments and influence were seen as highly consequential. President power rating, domestic affairs / bully pulpit: 9 / 2-3 / 7 - Marked disagreement on domestic rhetorical and political influence. President power rating, virtue: 8 / 9 / 7 - All three agreed character matters substantially, though not uniformly. Trump appellate judges confirmed: 50 - Within three years of his first term, Trump had 50 appeals court judges confirmed. Obama appellate judges confirmed: 55 - Obama confirmed 55 appeals court judges across two terms. Trump share of sitting circuit court judges: 1 in 4 - By the episode’s framing, one-quarter of sitting circuit judges were Trump appointees. Obama executive orders: 276 - Total executive orders issued during Obama’s two terms. George W. Bush executive orders: 291 - Used as comparison for executive order volume. Bill Clinton executive orders: 254 - Used as comparison for executive order volume. Taiwan election healthcare usage increase: nearly 20% - Cited as evidence that elections can stress people and raise health care use.

Pivotal Quotes: "How much does the president of the United States really matter?" — Stephen Dubner: The episode’s central question introducing the discussion. "I think President Trump's leadership style is different from many leaders." — Glenn Hubbard: Hubbard’s balanced assessment of Trump’s economic leadership. "there are certain elements of dictatorship in it" — Eric Posner: Posner describing what he calls presidential primacy.

Implications: Listeners are encouraged to separate symbolic outrage from institutional reality: presidents can reshape appointments, regulation, and foreign policy, but they do not control everything. The episode suggests future elections may matter most through the courts, executive branch, and norms of trust.