Conclusions

Abstract

AbstractHow does the evidence presented in this book square with existing debates over presidential performance? And what new hypotheses, if any, are generated by the preceding case studies? This chapter attempts to tackle these questions. It begins with some important caveats and a brief review of the conventional wisdom. It then argues that presidents do matter for the nation’s economic performance. Most clearly, presidential (in)action during economic crises appears to matter most. Otherwise, a president’s effectiveness as an economic leader flows from three less obvious sources. First, the president’s vision for the country, for the federal government, and for the presidency itself are far more important than other factors, even his policy agenda. Second, political skill and enthusiasm matter, for leadership success is partly a function of a president’s willingness and ability to forge and leverage coalitions with other important political-economic actors, including the American people. Thus, the president’s role as an educator is a significant component of his leadership ability. Finally, trust is all-important. As economic actors, we value the predictability and reliability of others in the economy as well as that of the major political-economic institutions upon which our economic activities rely. Hence a president’s ability to build or maintain trust in institutions such as the financial system, the American currency, the federal government, even the presidency itself is crucial. In sum, not only do presidents matter for the nation’s economic performance, but they matter in subtle and unexpected ways.