Constitutional Qualms or Politics as Usual The Factors Shaping Public Support for Unilateral Action
نویسندگان
چکیده
The formal institutional constraints that Congress and the courts impose on presidential unilateral action are feeble. As a result, recent scholarship suggests that public opinion may be the strongest check against executive overreach. However, little is known about how the public assesses unilateral action. Through a series of five survey experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we examine the extent to which Americans evaluate unilateral action based on constitutional, partisan, and policy concerns. We find that Americans do not instinctively reject unilateral action as a threat to our system of checks and balances, but instead evaluate unilateral action in terms of whether it accords or conflicts with their partisan and policy preference priors. Our results suggest that the public constraint on presidential unilateral action is far from automatic. Rather, the strength and scope of this check are variable products of political contestation in
منابع مشابه
Online Supporting Information for: Constitutional Qualms or Politics as Usual? The Factors Shaping Public Support for Unilateral Action
متن کامل
Mobilizing the Public Against the President: Congress and the Political Costs of Unilateral Action
Prior scholarship overlooks the capacity of other actors to raise the political costs of unilateral action by turning public opinion against the president. Through a series of five experiments embedded in nationally representative surveys, we demonstrate Congress’s ability to erode support for unilateral actions by raising both constitutional and policy-based objections to the exercise of unila...
متن کاملWe Need Action on Social Determinants of Health – but Do We Want It, too?; Comment on “Understanding the Role of Public Administration in Implementing Action on the Social Determinants of Health and Health Inequities”
Recently a number of calls have been made to mobilise the arsenal of political science insights to investigate – and point to improvements in – the social determinants of health (SDH), and health equity. Recently, in this journal, such a rallying appeal was made for the field of public administration. This commentary argues that, although scholarly potential should justifiably be redirected to ...
متن کاملThe Role of Courts in Shaping Health Equity.
United States' courts have played a limited, yet key, role in shaping health equity in three areas of law: racial discrimination, disability discrimination, and constitutional rights. Executive and administrative action has been much more instrumental than judicial decisions in advancing racial equality in health care. Courts have been reluctant to intervene on racial justice because overt disc...
متن کاملThe Politics and Analytics of Health Policy
Let us start with an example of health policy analysis in action. Within that category of countries loosely known as ‘the West’, quite basic differences exist in attitudes to health policy and also actual health policy. Comparing the US with mainland Europe and indeed Canada, for example, one perceives a difference in attitude on the part of the majority towards collectivism and individualism i...
متن کامل