Perspective on Politics

by Dean T. Hartwell

Truth Matters Analyzes Presidential Leadership

In my book, Truth Matters, I recognize strong presidential leadership when three factors are present: specificity, call for sacrifice and advocacy of social value.  In short, the president must be specific in explaining an idea or decision.  The public should know how it is being led.  The president must ask the public to make a sacrifice since it takes sacrifice to make progress towards a goal.  And, the president should put aside the temptation to call opponents names and instead advocate ideas that help people who need help.
I have translated each of these factors into numbers and multiplied them to get a final score.  The specific factor runs from 1 to 4, with 4 a decision the president explains to the public in clear and sufficient detail.  Sacrifice goes from 1 to 5, with 5 a decision in which the president asks for the public to give something up to help reach the goal.  Social value runs from 1 to 5, with 5 a decision that significantly betters the lives of a large group of people without significantly harming others.  The maximum score possible is 100.
Below is a chart with some of President Bush's decisions along with those of other presidents.  After it is a table that shows the numbers I used and an analysis of these presidential decisions.

G.W. Bush Administration Specific (1-4) Sacrifice (1-5) Social Value (1-5) Truth Matters Score
G.W. Bush - $1.3 trillion tax cut 4 1 3 12
G.W. Bush - Withdrawal - ABM 4 1 2 8
G.W. Bush - Force in Afghanistan 3 3 2 18
G.W. Bush - Force in Iraq 2 2 3 12
Past Presidents
Lincoln - Emancipation Proclamation 4 3 4 48
JFK - USA on Moon by 1970 4 5 3 60
LBJ - Civil Rights Act 3 5 5 75
Nixon - Opens Trade with China 4 4 4 64
Ford - Pardon of Nixon 4 3 2 24
Carter - Return Canal to Panama 4 5 3 60
Reagan - Force in Grenada 3 3 3 27
G.H.W. Bush - Desert Storm 2 2 3 12
Clinton - Welfare Reform 3 5 4 60

Analysis:

President Bush has failed to ask the public to make any kind of substantial sacrifice in the three decisions noted above.  His tax cuts have come at a time of high government debt and will make future generations pay more than they would otherwise have had to.  His decision to abandon the ABM Treaty with Russia relieves the United States of an obligation.  In terms of social value, the tax cuts rank the average three since a group of people (mostly the wealthy) benefit from the decision even though their children and grandchildren will not.

President Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation called for the freedom of slaves and thus scores high on specifics.  However, in terms of sacrifice, it scores only a three because the only people who still had slaves, the Confederates, did not believe in Lincoln's authority.  John F. Kennedy (JFK) scored high in specifics for his pledge to get to the moon by 1970, as did Carter in asking the Senate to return the Panama Canal to Panama.  The latter decision involved a big sacrifice since the United States gave up territory.  Only Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) reached the maximum for social value with his push for Civil Rights laws like Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts.  These laws properly empowered individuals who, as a group, had rights taken from them.

How does President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq rank under these standards?

Specific statement – The President was not always clear about the purpose of fighting Iraq.  Is it to disarm or is to cause a “regime change”?  When an administration changes reasons, the public and the rest of the world have trouble following the message.

None of the Bush Administration’s reasons for going to war made much sense.  If the need to remove Hussein was urgent, why did the United States waited so long?  It had been almost twelve years since the U.S. defeated Iraq in the Persian Gulf War and almost two since the Administration came into power.

If the U.S. had to attack because Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, how could it have been certain he would not attack us in response with those weapons?

If the United States was concerned about his nuclear capacity, why didn’t it show the same concern for the many other nations (like India and Pakistan) who have them?

Too many questions linger because President Bush has not been clear about his purpose.  To lead effectively, he must describe his goals with more specificity and consistency.

Score: (Scale of 1-4): 2

Sacrifice – President Bush used force against Iraq, but failed to acknowledge the sacrifice of U.S. and Iraqi lives that it required.  He also ignored the high economic cost of war, especially significant during a time of budget deficit and slow economic growth.

A call for sacrifice would have involved an acknowledgment of the loss of U.S. and Iraqi lives.  The lack of war service among many in the Administration may well explain the lack of focus upon the sacrifice of lives.

Score: (Scale of 1-5): 2

Present ideas of value to society – If society benefited from the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, it needed to hear how that would be the case.  President Bush said little about the aftermath of such an action, which casts doubts upon its value.

Who would replace Hussein?  If the plan involved a person of the United States’ choosing, it risked the possibility that some people in Iraq would resent a U.S. “puppet” and start their own overthrow attempt.  On the other hand, staying out of the process of picking Iraqi’s leader would have risked the Iraqis selecting a leader like Hussein.

How long should the U.S. stay in Iraq after its overthrow?  The longer it stays, the greater the financial costs.  But, leaving quickly could give pro-Hussein elements a chance to seize power again.  In any event, the benefits to the Iraqis and to the rest of the world of a post-Hussein Iraq should have been articulated.

Score (Scale of 1-5): 3

Under the Truth Matters Presidential Leadership Test, President Bush’s handling so far of the situation with Iraq scores low.  He could have bettered his score, and thus his leadership, by clarifying his purpose, acknowledging the sacrifice and by answering questions about his goals.

Final Score: 12