Kansas Books

This book is best seen within the context of Donald Lutz's career. His early career was highlighted by a prolonged investigation into the colonial documents and tradition that culminated in the U.S. Constitution.
This investigation culminated in the publication of two important books. The first was a collection co-edited by Lutz along w/ Charles Hyneman, American Political Writing During the Founding Era: 1760-1805. This is an essential collection of pamphlets, articles, speeches, essays, sermons, etc. from the period in question. The second book was Lutz' summary of his learning from this period of work, The Origins of American Constitutionalism (I promise a review within a week or two). This latter book is one of the most important books published on its subject matter within the last 30 years or so.
The work under discussion is a summation of his methodological reflections from that period of investigation. He is suggesting how someone who is approaching the investigation of the American political theory (which I will call Apt) should conduct their work. He wants to outline what he thinks is distinctive about the field, what are appropriate methodologies, what the source material is and how to avoid certain common fallacies.
One of his main goals is to distinguish Apt from the European tradition of political theory. The first difference he notes is that Apt "has always worked implicitly from an operational definition of politics based on constitutionalism" (p.23). Lutz believes that that was the case from the earliest colonial times. From the earliest settlements, colonists wrote compacts based on charters that were the first steps toward our current understanding of a constitution. Those documents came to consistently meet the following requirements: to define a way of life, to create and define a people, define the political institutions that form the government, define the regime, the public and citizenship, establish authority, distribute political power, manage conflict and limit governmental power (24). One of Lutz' later books, The Colonial Origins of the American Constitution (published by Liberty Fund) contains many of the documents that Lutz sees as being part of this development.
Apt (in Lutz' view) is thus a discipline that is based on foundational documents that "speak institutionally rather than philosophically" (27). This is another of the differences that distinguishes Apt from the European tradition. This difference implies others. The European tradition is based on the theoretical works of an intellectual elite. They often contain meanings that must be teased out of the work through great effort. Apt is based on the work of what Lutz calls "the political class" (102). This is that 10 to 15% or the population that is politically engaged throughout our history. These were people who wrote in order to be clearly understood so that the institutional ideas they were suggesting would receive the consent of the people. Their work often does not put forth a theoretical innovation so much as put forth a rhetorically powerful statement that the public will understand and embrace as exemplary of their own beliefs.
Lutz points out that a major problem for Apt is what constitutes a "complete" document. In the central third chapter, he presents what he sees as the necessary documentary evidence that must be amassed and compared in order to have a complete text of The Bill Of Rights. He offers his list on pp. 79-81. It includes everything from the Magna Carta through The Pilgrim Code of Law through the Virginia Declaration of Rights through the various amendments proposed by the ratifying conventions of the various states through all the working versions that led up to the final adapted version of The Bill of Rights. In this chapter, Lutz demonstrates the sort of learning that can be teased out of a collection of documents like this. He presents a fascinating table (Table 3.2 on pp.56-60) entitled Amendments Porposed by State Ratifying Conventions Compared with Madison's Original Porposed Amendments. Lutz' analysis and conclusions from this presentation seem unanswerable. Madison simply ignored all requests from the State Ratifying Conventions to alter the proposed national institutions or to curtail their powers and focused entirely on protecting individual rights from the national government (pp.61-63). This chapter is altogether brilliant.
All in all, Lutz is pioneering a discipline that is at once analytical, theoretical, and philosophical. He believes (influenced by Eric Voegelin) that we have to start off with how a people define themselves. But we can go beyond that to evaluate how well their institutions serve to create the sort of people and nation that they want to create. We can then tease out what institutions work and how. This knowledge is then used to study and perhaps advise developing democracies. This is the work that Lutz seems to be engaged in now to judge from the reviews I have read of his latest book, Principles of Constitutional Design.
This book is not just a suggestive primer on methodology. It offers superb examples of that methodology at work and serves as an entry point to the work of an important constitutional scholar. Good stuff, people.

Read this for graduate American history course. The Presidency of Dwight D. Eisenhower by Chester J. Pach, Jf. and Elmo Richardson seeks to provide a lucid, cogent, and relatively brief (263 pages) analysis of the Eisenhower presidency. Many early historical writings about Eisenhower's presidency came to the conclusion that he was beyond his depth in the presidency because he lacked any previous elective political experience. The image of the Eisenhower grin and his generally genial demeanor could not conceal his obvious bafflement when the subject was tax policy, civil rights, or farm subsidies. When he spoke extemporaneously, his statements were frequently so baffling that an assistant frequently had to offer clarification to listeners so they could understand the president's point, assuming there was one. Issues that puzzled or bored him he assigned to subordinates-John Foster Dulles for the daily management of foreign relations, George M. Humphrey shaped economic policy, while Sherman Adams handled a host of domestic matters-and reserved his energies for golf, bridge, and fishing. Eisenhower did not so much run the country, as preside over it; at a time of national complacency, he was able to provide some welcome inertia. This image of Eisenhower was challenged by revisionist and post revisionist historians beginning in the 1970s. According to revisionist scholars, Eisenhower only appeared to be a complacent chief executive: although he willingly let his subordinates take responsibility for decisions, within the Oval Office and the Cabinet Room, he was a dynamic and forceful leader who used the powers of his office vigorously and deftly to shape the policies being implemented (e.g., his successful extrication of the United States from the quagmire of the Korean War and his restraint in avoiding intervention in other conflicts such as the Hungarian uprising and the Suez crisis).

The work is divided into a Preface and ten subsequent chapters: "Duty and Ambition" traces the slow but steady evolution of Eisenhower from military man to presidential candidate, to elected office holder and his apprenticeship at learning how to play political hardball; "Organizing the Presidency" examines the transition difficulties that occurred between the outgoing Truman administration and Ike's incoming administration, and his efforts at organizing a post-New Deal Fair Deal cabinet; "President, Party, and Congress" analyzes Eisenhower's contentious relationship with the congressional leadership of both political parties over the economy and other domestic issues; "Waging Cold War" looks at Eisenhower's efforts to create a foreign policy that would effectively keep the free world secure and neutralize communist aggression through the use of military strength that would not overburden the American economy; "Personal Victories" focuses on Eisenhower surviving his heart attack and being reelected, as well as foreign policy resolutions especially in Hungary and the Suez; "The Hazards of Deliberate Speed" examines Eisenhower's decisive actions to enforce federal authority and public order over state resistance in Little Rock; "The Erosion of Consensus" analyzes the beginning of the loss of popular support for the Eisenhower administration, the Adams-Goldfine Scandal, and the subsequent return to majority power of the Democrats in
Congress during the midterm elections of 1958; "Intervention and Diplomacy" examines ~ Eisenhower administration foreign policy after the death of Secretary of State Dulles; "Beyond his Grasp" looks at Eisenhower's efforts to holds the line on defense spending, even as the U-2 crisis sabotaged any possibility for Soviet-American detente during his administration; "Epilogue" briefly examines the manner that Eisenhower spent his post-presidential years.

According to Pach and Richardson, Eisenhower hoped to contain the reckless spending of the Truman administration, yet he was able to balance the budget only three times and ran up what was then the largest peacetime deficit in American history-$12 billion in fiscal 1959. The
authors also believe that Eisenhower deserves equal credit for holding the line on defense spending, resisting the perils of the garrison state, and keeping much of the New Deal and its programs weakened and amended, but intact.

As a graduate student in philosophy and history, I recommended this book for anyone interested in American history, foreign policy, Cold War history.

A wonderful book in which Franklin D. Roosevelt emerges as a pragmatic and astute politician who manages the government with coordinating regional interests. The book conveys Roosevelt's adaptability to use federalism-a division of power between the federal government and local autonomy or grass roots movements-while implementing a massive restructuring of government to alleviate the Depression. Although Roosevelt had much help from advisers, he enforced the New Deal to reform banking, the Agricultural Adjustment Act to aid farmers, the unconstitutional National Recovery Administration, the Public Works Administration, the National Labor Relations Board and many others. Additionally, the author uses the term pluralism to describe Roosevelt's networking of various interest groups in an attempt to coalesce a coherent fiscal policy. Moreover, this book recognizes that competing interests sometimes precluded a successful outcome for New Deal legislation. Nonetheless, the author gives F.D.R. praise for his cautious approach in conducting foreign affairs and, especially, the United States' entry in World War II. The chapter about Eleanor Roosevelt gives the reader a glimpse into her humanitarian concerns for women and African Americans. The excellent bibliography adds a detailed essay about finding out more on this complex historical figure. This book made me feel as if I actually experienced the years during F.D.R.'s presidency and the outstanding writing added to my reading enjoyment.

Several years ago, a young co-worker asked me about Jimmy Carter and my response was that he was a much better ex-president than he was a president. His subsequent work in areas such as Habitat for Humanity as well as international relations has been excellent. He has served as a goodwill ambassador, election monitor and has negotiated several international agreements that favored the United States. He has also continued to be a champion of human rights causes throughout the world.
Contrasting his success after his presidency with his performance while in office demonstrates the reasons why his presidency is generally assigned a mediocre grade. His idealism in championing human rights was the most obvious example of the truism that idealism may help get you elected, but it gets in the way of governing effectively. In the age of the cold war and international tensions, a cold, heartless pragmatism seems to be the only thing that works.
I found Kaufman's explanations of the Carter presidency to be the most even-handed and honest that I have read. Carter made many mistakes, had some made for him and in other cases was just the victim of circumstances. Nevertheless, he did have some striking successes, the two most notable being the Camp David accords between Israel and Egypt and the treaty relinquishing the Panama canal. In these events, Carter showed how much potential he really had as a president. I remember when the networks pre-empted their regular programming as Carter, Sadat and Begin came back from Camp David with the agreement in hand. It was a stunning achievement and it amazed the world. The magic of that moment is captured in the book, as well as the subsequent problems that continue to plague the region. Despite all the violence in the area of Palestine and Lebanon in the years since the accords were signed, the fact that Israel and Egypt still continue to have formal relations and are at peace show how sturdy those agreements are.
As someone who lived through those years and followed the Carter presidency in great detail, reading this book brought back a great deal of memories. Without attempting to boast, I do have an excellent memory, and the recounting of the events are all exactly as I remember them.
The author closes with a very important and often overlooked point. Carter's presidency is considered a failure, and yet he refused to negotiate away anything in order to release the hostages in Iran. Reagan's presidency is considered a success and yet he attempted a bribe for the release of the hostages in Lebanon by selling armaments to Iran. There is no doubt that on that point, Carter bests Reagan.
I would like to close this review with a personal point. Yes, Carter's pushing of human rights did create problems. But, when you consider that some of those whose rights were being violated, Walesa in Poland and Havel in the Czech Republic, rose to the leadership of their nations, perhaps he was just ahead of his time.

Writing after the fact, historians often conclude that a war was preventable. This is generally false, as the dispassionate writer is removed from the context of the times. The war in 1812 between the United States and Great Britain has often been viewed as a pointless, forgettable war, yet in fact it had enormous consequences. The war was the defining moment of the Madison presidency and a significant break from the policy of the previous Jefferson and early Madison administrations. In describing the war, Rutland is masterful in describing the context and emotions of the times, the combination of which caused a war that was inevitable.
At the time, the Napoleonic wars were raging on the European continent and both Britain and France sought to wring every advantage they could out of what they considered an upstart nation. For years, Jefferson and Madison tried every tactic they could short of war in an attempt to delay a call to arms. Finally, national pride won out over all other factors and the war began. Madisonýs conduct of the war was not nearly as effective as it could have been, and yet the tie was all that was needed. James Monroe, the successor to Madison, enunciated what is now known as the Monroe doctrine, which warned all nations to avoid colonization efforts in the Western Hemisphere. With little American sea power to back it up, it was the first example of cooperation between Britain and the United States, as the enforcement was due to the power of the British navy. It is doubtful that this could have happened without the war.
The ways in which Rutland places the war in the context of power struggles in Europe and in the United States is masterful, as he describes how fragmented the United States was in those years. It is also possible to see the seeds of an eventual split and internal war, not over the issue of slavery, but over commercial and social differences.
In so many ways, Madisonýs best years were behind him when he became president. And yet, his handling of the war of 1812 was most likely the best that could have been done, as he sought to defend a fractious nation against an old foe who afterward became a staunch ally. For that reason alone, his administration should be considered a success and this book is the most realistic appraisal of his years in the White House that I have ever seen.

All U.S. presidents must confront and solve problems, some more unique than others. There are a few whose difficulties are unprecedented and will never recur again. John Adams was such a president and his effectiveness as a chief executive is often underestimated. When he took the oath of office, the nation was still young and in many ways not yet a nation. Regional differences, which sixty years later would explode into civil war, were powerful and could have led to a similar event during his administration. The governmental structure was idealistic, novel and untested. There were many who felt that it was unworkable, and with minimal communication infrastructure, it was difficult for the central government to project its' power quickly and effectively.
The framers of this government were highly talented, ambitious men, who were now faced with the task of governing. As history has shown us so many times, the talented revolutionary is often mediocre at governing. Political parties began to form and like all births, involved a great deal of fits and starts. George Washington commanded such respect that no one could reasonably hope to challenge his authority, and yet he was wore down by the political battles. Succeeding such a towering figure would have been difficult for anyone. Europe was also currently engaged in a general war as a consequence of the revolution in France, and there were strong forces driving the United States towards involvement.
Into this horrendous mix of conflicting forces, John Adams became president. There is no question that the crises he faced rank in the top five of all presidents. Forced to face and solve these problems, he performed admirably. There is no more telling measures of his success in that he angered many in both parties and one of his strongest enemies, Thomas Jefferson, continued his policies when he succeeded Adams.
Brown does an outstanding job of describing these circumstances, for without this knowledge it is impossible to understand how successful Adams was. He also describes many of the details of John Adams' relationship with his wife Abigail. Although the times dictated that women play secondary roles in society, it is clear that many women wielded substantial power behind the scenes, if only to provide the strength for her husband to do what was right. After reading this book, you cannot help but be impressed with the power and intelligence of Abigail Adams, one of the most talented first spouses that this country has ever had.
This book serves a necessary and overdue purpose. It shows John Adams as more than just an adequate successor to Washington, but as a president who stood firm and always placed the interests of the nation first. He was a great man, showing that many of the men who made the American revolution were also, and perhaps even more skilled, at making and executing a government. I will forever be in awe of their political genius.

Remember those true presidential giants? FDR, Harry Truman, and LBJ--and larger-than-life Bill Clinton. Did you know that FDR was his own architect for his presidential library at Hyde Park? Jefferson wasn't the only architect-president. But most fun of all is to get another look in the imperial-yet-downhome machinations of Lyndon Johnson as he strove create a library that rivaled the Egyptian tombs. OK, so it looks like a scholarly book--and it is, but there is a lot of good reading here. Hufbauer is too polite to employ his scholarship to point out what intellectual pygmies some of our leaders are, and now more than ever, it is important to understand the significance of memory in national life.

I found this book very informative and very intelligently written. The problem of gossip in today's world is a constant and pressing need, making this book more and more relevant.

Overall, I think it was a great read. Short and to the point which how I like it.

The text was as described with no issues. The delivery was prompt and handled in a professional manner. I recommend this seller.

I thought I knew all about man's inhumanity, but master writer Cleveland Amory's description of the lifelong crusade that was spurred by his own first experience with the shocking realities changed the way I viewed the theme forever. Thank you, Mr. Amory. We miss your incisive and untiring contributions to this almost hopeless cause.