Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Presidential Activism and Veto Power in Central and Eastern Europe

Part of the book series: Palgrave Studies in Presidential Politics ((PASTPRPO))

  • 186 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter introduces the topic of the book and outlines the scope of analysis. It asserts that despite the centrality of presidential powers to academic debates, only few scholars have focussed on how presidents actually use them. Based on existing studies, it provides a new, non-normative and less ambiguous definition of presidential activism and explains the suitability of Central and East European democracies for its study. The chapter also summarises the theoretical approach of the book which draws on variations in the institutional setting, most notably the mode of election, and changes in the political environment to explain the use of the two most common and prominent presidential powers: the power to veto legislation and the appointment and censure of governments and cabinet members. It outlines the rationale of the mixed-methods research design and presents the original quantitative and qualitative data used in the study. Finally, it offers a brief chapter-by-chapter overview of the book’s structure and supplementary material available in the appendices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    These are Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.

  2. 2.

    Nevertheless, the refusal to perform such duties might arguably qualify as activism.

  3. 3.

    Although it can be argued that the Bulgarian president possesses a partial veto (Tsebelis and Rizova 2007), this right is not codified in the constitution and only present in parliamentary standing orders.

  4. 4.

    A full list of respondents is available in Appendix D. More detailed information about the interviews can also be found in Köker (2014) and at http://presidentialactivism.com/elite-interviews/.

References

  • Bahro, H., Bayerlein, B. H., & Veser, E. (1998). Duverger’s Concept: Semi-presidential Government Revisited. European Journal of Political Research, 34(2), 201–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baylis, T. A. (1996). Presidents versus Prime Ministers: Shaping Executive Authority in Eastern Europe. World Politics, 48(3), 297–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, S. A. (1987). The Limits of Presidential Activism: Lyndon Johnson and the Implementation the Community Action Program. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 17 (3), 541–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beliaev, M. V. (2006). Presidential Powers and Consolidation of New Postcommunist Democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 39(3), 375–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg-Schlosser, D. (2012). Mixed Methods in Comparative Politics: Principles and Applications. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (Ed.) (2006). Mixed Methods. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnham, P., Lutz, K. G., Grant, W., & Layton-Henry, Z. (Eds.) (2008). Research Methods in Politics. 2nd, comprehensively revised and updated edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, C. M. (2009). The Presidential Veto. In Howell, W. & Edwards, G. C. III. (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of the American Presidency. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 362–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, C. M., & McCarty, N. (2004). Models of Vetoes and Veto Bargaining. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 409–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. B., & Krause, G. A. (2000). Presidents, Chiefs of Staff, and White House Organizational Behavior: Survey Evidence from the Reagan and Bush Administrations. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 30(3), 421–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. E. (1982). The Impact of the Modern Presidency on Presidential Success in the U. S. Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 7(4), 515–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Raadt, J. (2009). Contested Constitutions: Legitimacy of Constitution-making and Constitutional Conflict in Central Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 23(3), 315–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deen, R. E., & Arnold, L. W. (2002). Veto Threats as a Policy Tool: When to Threaten?. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 32(1), 30–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deering, C. J., & Maltzman, F. (1999). The Politics of Executive Orders: Legislative Constraints on Presidential Power. Political Research Quarterly, 52(4), 767–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degenhardt, C. (2008). Staatsrecht 1. Staatsorganisationsrecht. 24th Updated and Revised Edition. Heidelberg: C.F. Müller Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dieringer, J. (2005). Staatspräsident Árpád Göncz Wegbereiter der ungarischen ‘Kanzlerdemokratie’ wider Willen. Südosteuropa. Zeitschrift für Politik und Gesellschaft, 2/2005, 272–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, D., & Elgie, R. (2016). Maximizing the Reliability of Cross-National Measures of Presidential Power. British Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 731–741.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duverger, M. (1978). Échec au Roi. Paris: Albin Michel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duverger, M. (1980). A New Political System Model: Semi-Presidential Government. European Journal of Political Research, 8(2), 165–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, G. C. III. (2009). The Strategic Presidency. Persuasion and Opportunity in Presidential Leadership. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgie, R. (1998). The Classification of Democratic Regime Types: Conceptual Ambiguity and Contestable Assumptions. European Journal of Political Research, 33(2), 219–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgie, R. (Ed.). (1999a). Semi-Presidentialism in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elgie, R. (1999b). The Politics of Semi-Presidentialism. In Elgie, R. (Ed.). Semi-Presidentialism in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1–21.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Elgie, R. (2004). Semi-Presidentialism: Concepts, Consequences and Contesting Explanations. Political Studies Review, 2(3), 314–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elgie, R., & Moestrup, S. (Eds). (2008). Semi-presidentialism in Central and Eastern Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortin, J. (2012). Measuring Presidential Powers: Some Pitfalls of Aggregate Measurement. International Political Science Review, 34(1), 91–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frye, T. (1997). A Politics of Institutional Choice: Post-Communist Presidencies. Comparative Political Studies, 30(5), 523–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganev, V. I. (1999). Bulgaria. In Elgie, R. (Ed.). Semi-Presidentialism in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 124–149.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Geddes, B. (1990). How the Cases you Choose Affect the Answers you Get: Selection Bias in Comparative Politics. Political Analysis, 2(1), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilmour, J. B. (2002). Institutional and Individual Influences on the President’s Veto. The Journal of Politics, 64(1), 198–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenstein, F. I. (1979). Eisenhower as an Activist President: A Look at New Evidence. Political Science Quarterly, 94(4), 575–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hager, G. L., & Sullivan, T. (1994). President-centered and Presidency-centered Explanations of Presidential Public Activity. American Journal of Political Science, 38(4), 1080–1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, T. H., & Miller, G. J. (1987). The Core of the Constitution. American Political Science Review, 81(04), 1155–1174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haspel, M., Remington, T. F., & Smith, S. S. (2006). Lawmaking and Decree making in the Russian Federation: Time, Space, and Rules in Russian National Policymaking. Post-Soviet Affairs, 22(3), 249–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellman, J. S. (1996). Constitutions and Economic Reform in the Postcommunist Transitions. East European Constitutional Review, 5(1), 46–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hloušek, V. (Ed). (2013a). Presidents above Parties? Presidents in Central and Eastern Europe, Their Formal Competencies and Informal Power. Brno: Masaryk University Press/International Institute of Political Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hloušek, V. (2013b). Heads of State in Parliamentary Democracies: The Temptation to accrue Personal Power. In Hloušek, V. (Ed.). Presidents above Parties? Presidents in Central and Eastern Europe, Their Formal Competencies and Informal Power. Brno: Masaryk University Press/International Institute of Political Science. 19–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoff, S. B. (1991). Saying No: Presidential Support and Veto Use, 1889–1989. American Politics Research, 19(3), 310–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishiyama, J. T., & Velten, M. (1998). Presidential Power and Democratic Development in Post-communist Politics. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, 31(3), 217–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ismayr, W. (2010). Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas im Vergleich. In Ismayr, W. (Ed.). Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas. 3rd Updated and Expanded Edition. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 9–78.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S. G. (2009). The Influence of Presidential Heads of State on Government Formation in European Democracies: Empirical Evidence. European Journal of Political Research, 48(4), 543–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, D. S. (2013). The Transition to Democracy in Hungary. Árpád Göncz and the Post-Communist Hungarian Presidency. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, G., Keohane, R. O., & Verba, S. (1994). Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kipke, R. (2010). Das Politische System der Slowakei. In Ismayr, W. (Ed.). Die Politischen Systeme Osteuropas. 3rd Updated and Expanded Edition. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 317–356.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Köker, P. (2014). Semi-structured Elite Interviews in a Nested Analysis Framework: Studying Presidential Activism in Central and Eastern Europe. SAGE Research Methods Cases, doi: 10.4135/978144627305014534927.

    Google Scholar 

  • Körösényi, A., Fodor, G. G., & Dieringer, J. (2010). Das Politische System Ungarns. In Ismayr, W. (Ed.). Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas. 3rd Updated and Expanded Edition. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 357–417.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Krent, H. J. (2005). Presidential Powers. New York/London: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kristinsson, G. H. (2009). More Safe than Sound? Cabinet Ministers in Iceland. In Dowding, K. & Dumont, P. (Eds.). The Selection of Ministers in Europe. Hiring and Firing. London/New York: Routledge. 194–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krupavičius, A. (2008). Semi-presidentialism in Lithuania: Origins, Development and Challenges. In Elgie, R. & Moestrup, S. (Eds.). Semi-presidentialism in Central and Eastern Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kvale, S. (1996). An Introduction to Qualitative Interviewing. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagerspetz, M., & Maier, K. (2010). Das Politische System Estlands. In Ismayr, W. (Ed.). Die politischen Systeme Osteuropas. 3rd Updated and Expanded Edition. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. 79–121.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. R. (1975). Presidential Vetoes from Washington to Nixon. The Journal of Politics, 37(2), 522–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, E. S. (2005). Nested Analysis as a Mixed-method Strategy for Comparative Research. American Political Science Review, 99(3), 435–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilleker, D. G. (2003). Interviewing the Political Elite: Navigating a Potential Minefield. Politics, 23(3), 207–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linz, J. J. (1994). Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does it make a Difference?. In Linz, J. J. & Valenzuela, A. (Eds.). The Failure of Presidential Democracy, vol. 1: Comparative Perspectives. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. 3–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucky, C. (1994). Tables of Presidential Powers in Eastern Europe. East European Constitutional Review, 3(1), 81–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarty, N., & Poole, K. T. (1995). Veto Power and Legislation: An Empirical Analysis of Executive and Legislative Bargaining from 1961 to 1986. Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 11(2), 282–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGregor, J. (1994). The Presidency in East Central Europe. RFE/RL Research Report, 3(2), 23–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalf, L. K. (2000). Measuring Presidential Power. Comparative Political Studies, 33(5), 660–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mikecz, R. (2012). Interviewing Elites: Addressing Methodological Issues. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(6), 482–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millard, F. (2000). Presidents and Democratization in Poland: The Roles of Lech Wałesa and Aleksander Kwaśniewski in Building a New Polity. Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, 16(3), 39–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, Z. S. (2009). The Truth about Interviewing Elites. Politics, 29(3), 209–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, A. B. (1984). Evaluating the Presidents of the United States. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 14(1), 117–126.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neto, O. A., & Costa Lobo, M. (2009). Portugal’s Semi-presidentialism (Re)considered: An Assessment of the President’s Role in the Policy Process, 1976–2006. European Journal of Political Research, 48(2), 234–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neto, O. A., & Strøm, K. (2006). Breaking the Parliamentary Chain of Delegation: Presidents and Non-partisan Cabinet Members in European Democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 36(4), 619–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nousiainen, J. (2001). From Semi-presidentialism to Parliamentary Government: Political and Constitutional Developments in Finland Semi-presidentialism as a System Form. Scandinavian Political Studies, 24(2), 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill, P. H. (1993). Presidential Power in Post-Communist Europe: The Hungarian Case in Comparative Perspective. Journal of Communist Studies, 9(3), 177–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Protsyk, O. (2004). Ruling with Decrees: Presidential Decree Making in Russia and Ukraine. Europe-Asia Studies, 56(5), 637–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Protsyk, O. (2005a). Politics of Intraexecutive Conflict in Semipresidential Regimes in Eastern Europe. East European Politics and Societies, 19(2), 135–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Protsyk, O. (2005b). Prime Minister’s Identity in Semi-Presidential Regimes: Constitutional Norms and Cabinet Formation Outcomes. European Journal of Political Research, 44(5), 721–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Protsyk, O. (2006). Intra-Executive Competition between President and Prime Minister: Patterns of Institutional Conflict and Cooperation under Semi-Presidentialism. Political Studies, 54(2), 219–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Przeworski, A., & Teune, H. (1979). The Logic of Comparative Social Inquiry. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, D. (1996). Elite Interviewing: Approaches and Pitfalls. Politics, 16(3), 199–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rivera, S. W., Kozyreva, P. M., & Sarovskii, E. G. (2002). Interviewing Political Elites: Lessons from Russia. PS: Political Science and Politics, 35(4), 683–688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde, D. W., & Simon, D. M. (1985). Presidential Vetoes and Congressional Response: A Study of Institutional Conflict. American Journal of Political Science, 29(3), 397–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rohlfing, I. (2008). What You See and What You Get Pitfalls and Principles of Nested Analysis in Comparative Research. Comparative Political Studies, 41(11), 1492–1514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roper, S. D. (2002). Are all Semipresidential Regimes the Same? A Comparison of Premier-presidential Regimes. Comparative Politics, 34(3), 253–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sartori, G. (1997). Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An Inquiry into Structures, Incentives, and Outcomes. New York: NYU Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schleiter, P., & Morgan-Jones, E. (2009). Party Government in Europe? Parliamentary and Semi-presidential Democracies Compared. European Journal of Political Research, 48(5), 665–693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schleiter, P., & Morgan-Jones, E. (2010). Who’s in Charge? Presidents, Assemblies, and the Political Control of Semipresidential Cabinets. Comparative Political Studies, 43(11), 1415–1441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger, A. M. (1997). Rating the Presidents: Washington to Clinton. Political Science Quarterly, 112(2), 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sedelius, T. (2006). The Tug-of-War between Presidents and Prime Ministers. Semi-Presidentialism in Central and Eastern Europe. Örebro: Örebro Studies in Political Science. 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, R. Y., Kumar, M. J., & Jacobs, L. R. (2000). Presidential Power: Forging the Presidency for the Twenty-first Century. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shields, T. G., & Huang, C. (1995). Presidential Vetoes: An Event Count Model. Political Research Quarterly, 48(3), 559–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shields, T. G., & Huang, C. (1997). Executive Vetoes: Testing Presidency- Versus President- Centered Perspectives of Presidential Behavior. American Politics Research, 25(4), 431–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shugart, M. S., & Carey, J. M. (1992). Presidents and Assemblies. Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shugart, M. S., & Haggard, S. (2001). Institutions and Public Policy in Presidential Systems. In Haggard, S. & McCubins, M. D. (Eds.). Presidents, Parliaments, and Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 64–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siaroff, A. (2003). Comparative Presidencies: The Inadequacy of the Presidential, Semi-presidential and Parliamentary Distinction. European Journal of Political Research, 42(3), 287–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, P. (1996). The Troubled Reign of Lech Wałęsa. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 26 (2), 317–336.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spitzer, R. J. (1988). The Presidential Veto. Touchstone of The American Presidency. New York: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strohmeier, G. (2012). More Legitimation = more Competence? Heads of State in Parliamentary Systems in Comparative Perspective. Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Politikwissenschaft, 6(2), 177–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taras, R. (Ed). (1997). Postcommunist Presidents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavits, M. (2008). Presidents with Prime Ministers: Do Direct Elections Matter?. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tichenor, D. J. (1999). The Presidency, Social Movements, and Contentious Change: Lessons from the Woman’s Suffrage and Labor Movements. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 29(1), 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsebelis, G., & Rizova, T. P. (2007). Presidential Conditional Agenda Setting in the Former Communist Countries. Comparative Political Studies, 40(10), 1155–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zielonka, J. (Ed). (2001). Democratic Consolidation in Eastern Europe Volume 1: Institutional Engineering. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zubek, V. (1997). The Eclipse of Walesa’s Political Career. Europe-Asia Studies, 49(1), 107–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, Politics and Sociology, Canterbury Christ Church University, Canterbury, United Kingdom

    Philipp Köker

Authors
  1. Philipp Köker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Köker, P. (2017). Introduction. In: Presidential Activism and Veto Power in Central and Eastern Europe. Palgrave Studies in Presidential Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51914-2_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation