James P. Pfiffner – författare

The book focuses on policy-making at the highest levels of the United States government. Chapter contributors examine political, military, and foreign policy processes from micro and macro perspectives in documenting how President Bush personally dominated U.S. national security policy and was the driving force behind the United Nations-backed coalition of nations against Saddam Hussein. The authors place the president's actions into political and historical perspective and examine the consequences of the Gulf War in both military and diplomatic terms. Among the subjects discussed by experts are the president's political and constitutional roles in war-making; the foreign policy implications and military issues in the war; the domestic implications; and the postwar environment and planning for peace.

This work provides an analysis of presidential transitions from JFK to Bill Clinton. The author argues that, in order to accomplish his policy objectives, a new president must always first gain control of and organise the government.

The framers of the U.S. Constitution divided the federal government's powers among three branches: the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. Their goal was to prevent tyranny by ensuring that none of the branches could govern alone. While numerous presidents have sought to escape these constitutional constraints, the administration of George W. Bush went farther than most. It denied the writ of habeas corpus to individuals deemed to be enemy combatants. It suspended the Geneva Convention and allowed or encouraged the use of harsh interrogation methods amounting to torture. It ordered the surveillance of Americans without obtaining warrants as required by law. And it issued signing statements declaring that the president does not have the duty to faithfully execute hundreds of provisions in the laws he has signed.Power Play analyzes the Bush presidency's efforts to expand executive power in these four domains and puts them into constitutional and historical perspective. Pfiffner explores the evolution of Anglo-American thinking about executive power and individual rights. He highlights the lessons the Constitution's framers drew from such philosophers as Locke and Montesquieu, as well as English constitutional history. He documents the ways in which the Bush administration's policies have undermined the separation of powers, and he shows how these practices have imperiled the rule of law.Following 9/11, the Bush presidency engaged in a two-front offensive. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the administration aggressively prosecuted the ""war on terror."" At home, it targeted constraints on the power of the executive. Power Play lays bare the extent of this second campaign and explains why it will continue to threaten the future of republican government if the other two branches do not assert their own constitutional prerogatives.

The framers of the U.S. Constitution divided the federal government's powers among three branches: the executive, the legislative, and the judiciary. Their goal was to prevent tyranny by ensuring that none of the branches could govern alone. While numerous presidents have sought to escape these constitutional constraints, the administration of George W. Bush went farther than most. It denied the writ of habeas corpus to individuals deemed to be enemy combatants. It suspended the Geneva Convention and allowed or encouraged the use of harsh interrogation methods amounting to torture. It ordered the surveillance of Americans without obtaining warrants as required by law. And it issued signing statements declaring that the president does not have the duty to faithfully execute hundreds of provisions in the laws he has signed.Power Play analyzes the Bush presidency's efforts to expand executive power in these four domains and puts them into constitutional and historical perspective. Pfiffner explores the evolution of Anglo-American thinking about executive power and individual rights. He highlights the lessons the Constitution's framers drew from such philosophers as Locke and Montesquieu, as well as English constitutional history. He documents the ways in which the Bush administration's policies have undermined the separation of powers, and he shows how these practices have imperiled the rule of law.Following 9/11, the Bush presidency engaged in a two-front offensive. In Afghanistan and Iraq, the administration aggressively prosecuted the ""war on terror."" At home, it targeted constraints on the power of the executive. Power Play lays bare the extent of this second campaign and explains why it will continue to threaten the future of republican government if the other two branches do not assert their own constitutional prerogatives.

Examining how the White House works—or doesn't—before and after TrumpDonald Trump has reinvented the presidency, transforming it from a well-oiled if sometimes cumbersome institution into what has often seemed to be a one-man show. But even Trump's unorthodox presidency requires institutional support, from a constantly rotating White House staff and cabinet who have sought to carry out—and sometimes resist—the president's direct orders and comply with his many tweets.Nonetheless, the Trump White House still exhibits many features of its predecessors over the past eight decades. When Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated, the White House staff numbered fewer than fifty people, and most federal department were lightly staffed as well. As the United States became a world power, the staff of the Executive Office increased twentyfold, and the staffing of federal agencies blossomed comparably.In the fourth edition of Organizing the Presidency, a landmark volume examining the presidency as an institution, Stephen Hess and James P. Pfiffner argue that the successes and failures of presidents from Roosevelt through Trump have resulted in large part from how the president deployed and used White House staffers and other top officials responsible for carrying out Oval Office policy. Drawing on a wealth of analysis and insight, Organizing the Presidency addresses best practices for managing a presidency that is itself a bureaucracy.

Examining how the White House works—or doesn''t—before and after TrumpDonald Trump has reinvented the presidency, transforming it from a well-oiled if sometimes cumbersome institution into what has often seemed to be a one-man show. But even Trump''s unorthodox presidency requires institutional support, from a constantly rotating White House staff and cabinet who have sought to carry out—and sometimes resist—the president''s direct orders and comply with his many tweets.Nonetheless, the Trump White House still exhibits many features of its predecessors over the past eight decades. When Franklin D. Roosevelt was inaugurated, the White House staff numbered fewer than fifty people, and most federal department were lightly staffed as well. As the United States became a world power, the staff of the Executive Office increased twentyfold, and the staffing of federal agencies blossomed comparably.In the fourth edition of Organizing the Presidency, a landmark volume examining the presidency as an institution, Stephen Hess and James P. Pfiffner argue that the successes and failures of presidents from Roosevelt through Trump have resulted in large part from how the president deployed and used White House staffers and other top officials responsible for carrying out Oval Office policy. Drawing on a wealth of analysis and insight, Organizing the Presidency addresses best practices for managing a presidency that is itself a bureaucracy.

After September 11, 2001 the Bush Administration decided that the most important intelligence about terrorism would come from the interrogation of captives suspected of terrorism. As a result, many detainees were subject to harsh interrogation techniques that at times amounted to torture. Here, James P. Pfiffner authoritatively examines the policy directives, operational decisions, and leadership actions of the Bush Administration that reversed centuries of US policy on the treatment of enemy prisoners. He shows how the serious reservations of career military lawyers about these policies were overcome by the political appointees of the Bush Administration. Pfiffner then analyses the philosophical and legal underpinnings of the policies and practices that have led to the denunciation of the United States'' policies by its allies and adversaries throughout the world. Looking ahead, Pfiffner anticipates Obama administration policy changes to restore U.S. credibility and accountability. In all, Torture as Public Policy is a model of detailed policy analysis that demonstrates how greatly public policy matters beyond the back corridors of bureaucracy.

After September 11, 2001 the Bush Administration decided that the most important intelligence about terrorism would come from the interrogation of captives suspected of terrorism. As a result, many detainees were subject to harsh interrogation techniques that at times amounted to torture. Here, James P. Pfiffner authoritatively examines the policy directives, operational decisions, and leadership actions of the Bush Administration that reversed centuries of US policy on the treatment of enemy prisoners. He shows how the serious reservations of career military lawyers about these policies were overcome by the political appointees of the Bush Administration. Pfiffner then analyses the philosophical and legal underpinnings of the policies and practices that have led to the denunciation of the United States'' policies by its allies and adversaries throughout the world. Looking ahead, Pfiffner anticipates Obama administration policy changes to restore U.S. credibility and accountability. In all, Torture as Public Policy is a model of detailed policy analysis that demonstrates how greatly public policy matters beyond the back corridors of bureaucracy.

After September 11, 2001 the Bush Administration decided that the most important intelligence about terrorism would come from the interrogation of captives suspected of terrorism. As a result, many detainees were subject to harsh interrogation techniques that at times amounted to torture. Here, James P. Pfiffner authoritatively examines the policy directives, operational decisions, and leadership actions of the Bush Administration that reversed centuries of US policy on the treatment of enemy prisoners. He shows how the serious reservations of career military lawyers about these policies were overcome by the political appointees of the Bush Administration. Pfiffner then analyses the philosophical and legal underpinnings of the policies and practices that have led to the denunciation of the United States' policies by its allies and adversaries throughout the world. Looking ahead, Pfiffner anticipates Obama administration policy changes to restore U.S. credibility and accountability. In all, Torture as Public Policy is a model of detailed policy analysis that demonstrates how greatly public policy matters beyond the back corridors of bureaucracy.

After September 11, 2001 the Bush Administration decided that the most important intelligence about terrorism would come from the interrogation of captives suspected of terrorism. As a result, many detainees were subject to harsh interrogation techniques that at times amounted to torture. Here, James P. Pfiffner authoritatively examines the policy directives, operational decisions, and leadership actions of the Bush Administration that reversed centuries of US policy on the treatment of enemy prisoners. He shows how the serious reservations of career military lawyers about these policies were overcome by the political appointees of the Bush Administration. Pfiffner then analyses the philosophical and legal underpinnings of the policies and practices that have led to the denunciation of the United States' policies by its allies and adversaries throughout the world. Looking ahead, Pfiffner anticipates Obama administration policy changes to restore U.S. credibility and accountability. In all, Torture as Public Policy is a model of detailed policy analysis that demonstrates how greatly public policy matters beyond the back corridors of bureaucracy.