Protecting Power and Building Legacy: The Development and Use of Presidential Signing Statements

When a president signs a bill into law he often issues a signing statement that praises, criticizes, claims and attributes credit for, and sometimes challenges the constitutionality of, the new law. These challenges are particularly controversial because they promise to implement the law in an altered manner or not at all. Scholars of constitutional law have taken an interest in the normative questions surrounding the use of this tool for many years, but political science has only recently taken an interest in exploring empirical questions related to the issuance of signing statements. This dissertation explores the development and use of presidential signing statements during the modern presidency. I argue that signing statements are a unique and multifaceted tool that the president uses to benefit both his institution and legacy. Chapters two and three reveal that the president issues signing statements to protect his prerogatives. The struggle between Congress and the president to determine the scope of his powers is manifested in the president's challenges to provisions of legislation. Presidents are especially hostile toward congressional involvement in foreign affairs and burdensome reporting requirements (often coming in the form of legislative vetoes). The analysis also reveals that Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon set considerable precedent for heavier usage of the tool by future presidents. In addition to these findings, chapter four shows that the president uses the statements to better his position in the future and build his legacy. He praises, criticizes, claims and attributes credit, and makes legislative requests in signing statements with an eye on his prospective power and shaping perceptions concerning his informal role as Chief Legislator.