Browsing by Subject "Clinton"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access Presidential Preparation: The Influence of Military Service on the Management Styles and Policy Decisions of U.S. Presidents(2012-08-20) Schulte, TimothyPeople are shaped by their backgrounds, and military service is arguably one of the most impactful experiences in which one can partake. Thirty-one of America's forty-three different presidents have served in the armed forces (twenty-one having seen combat). Like all other veterans, the service of these men impacted the rest of their lives — the decisions they made; the ways they interacted with others; and their views of America, its allies, and its enemies. Through critical analysis of the Public Papers of the Presidents, memos, letters, and personal reflections, along with the support of secondary sources, the impact of military service on the management styles and policy decisions of United States presidents becomes evident. The following American presidents are used to frame the analysis: - Dwight D. Eisenhower, a career soldier who rose to the top of the Army's hierarchy - John F. Kennedy, a Naval lieutenant who served valiantly for less than four years - William J. Clinton, an academic and career politician who actively avoided military service By exploring how the styles and decisions of these men are the product of their pre-presidential training, the unique effects of military service on those who served in the Oval Office is made clear. At a deeper level, distinguishing characteristics of military service — such as rank achieved, length of service, and combat experience — are addressed when relevant. The study identifies connections between the priorities, politics, and decision-making techniques of the presidents who were members of the nation's armed forces, and it compares these trends to the presidency of one who did not serve in the military.Item Open Access Why won’t it sell? Universal Health Care in America, 1945 - 2009(2009-12-04) Aberger, MarieThis project examines the language used to frame universal health care reform from 1945 to 2009, focusing on four frames: morality, efficacy, personal vulnerability, and fear of government. It analyzes whether the frames used by the opponents and proponents of reform evolved by researching three health care debates: President Truman from 1945-1950, President Clinton from 1993-1994, and President Obama in 2009.The analysis focuses on speeches given by the presidents, advertisements produced by interest groups, and newspaper coverage of the debates. For all three presidencies, fear of government was the frame most commonly used by opponents of reform in advertisements while morality was the frame most commonly used by proponents. This suggests that the language has not evolved significantly over the past sixty years and provides insight into why universal health care reform continues to fail. Notably, however, there is a trend in the Obama administration toward utilizing the personal vulnerability frame. Ultimately, this project found that self-interested arguments are the most effective, and therefore opponents should continue to address people’s fear of government while proponents should follow President Obama’s lead in utilizing the personal vulnerability frame.