• Daniel P. Franklin
Part of the The Evolving American Presidency Series book series (EAP)


No one would accuse Teddy Roosevelt of a lack of ambition. Part of the charm and part of the hubris of his storied career were his unmitigated aspirations. So it came as somewhat of a surprise that in 1904, immediately upon his election to president in his own right, Roosevelt announced his intention to make his first full term, his last. While it is not entirely clear why TR made this decision, on this as in so many crucial decisions he kept his own counsel, it is probably the case that inasmuch as Roosevelt had served most of McKinley’s second term and because his critics had taken note of and criticized his aggressive ambition, TR decided to confound the opposition and unilaterally disarm. It was a decision Roosevelt would come to regret. Roosevelt expended much energy in the next four years choosing a worthy successor—an effort that apparently went to no avail. TR was so angry with President William Howard Taft that by the end of Taft’s first term, the two men hardly spoke. So frustrated was he with Taft’s performance and with his own absence from the limelight, Roosevelt took the extraordinary step in 1912 of running again for the presidency without even his party’s nomination. He lost, but he succeeded in beating Taft (by drawing off Republican votes) and electing Woodrow Wilson in the bargain.


Foreign Policy Chief Executive Executive Order Final Term Presidential Transition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See Wallace Earl Walker, “Presidential Transitions and the Entrepreneurial Presidency: Of Lions, Foxes, and Puppy Dogs,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 23 (1) (1993): 57–75.Google Scholar
  2. A. Lane Crothers, “Asserting Dominance: Presidential Transitions from Out-Party to In-Party, 1932–1992,” Polity 26 (4) (1994): 793–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Martha Kumar, “Getting Ready for Day One: Taking Advantage of the Opportunities and Minimizing the Hazards of a Presidential Transition,” Public Administration Review 68 (4) (2008): 603–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    For just a sampling of the business transition literature, see: Jeffrey A. Sonnenfeld, The Hero’s Farewell: What Happens When CEOs Retire (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. William Ocasio, “Political Dynamics and the Circulation of Power: CEO Succession in U.S. Industrial Corporations, 1960–1990,” Administrative Science Quarterly 39(2) (June 1, 1994): 285–312; “Institutionalized Action and Corporate Governance: The Reliance on Rules of CEO Succession,” Administrative Science Quarterly 44(2) (June 1, 1999): 384–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Patricia Pitcher, Samia Chreim, and Veronika Kisfalvi, “CEO Succession Research: Methodological Bridges over Troubled Waters,” Strategic Management Journal 21(6) (June 1, 2000): 625–648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Wei Shen and Albert A. Cannella Jr., “Revisiting the Performance Consequences of CEO Succession: The Impacts of Successor Type, Postsuccession Senior Executive Turnover, and Departing CEO Tenure,” The Academy of Management Journal 45(4) (August 1, 2002): 717–733.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. and Gary A. Ballinger and F. David Schoorman, “Individual Reactions to Leadership Succession in Workgroups,” The Academy of Management Review 32(1) (January 1, 2007): 118–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 5.
    For a selection of comparative studies, see Laurin L. Henry, Presidential transitions (Brookings Institution, 1961).Google Scholar
  10. Thad L. Beyle, “Gubernatorial Transitions: Lessons from the 1982–1983 Experience,” Publius 14 (3) (1984): 13–29.Google Scholar
  11. James S. Bowman, “State and Federal Executive Transitions: Sources and Resources,” Public Productivity Review 12 (1) (1988): 107–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harold F. Bass, “Comparing Presidential Party Leadership Transfers: Two Cases,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 23 (1) (1993): 115–128.Google Scholar
  13. Anthony J. Eksterowicz and Glenn Hastedt, “Modern Presidential Transitions: Problems, Pitfalls, and Lessons for Success,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 28 (2) (1998): 299–319.Google Scholar
  14. Stephen Hess, “First Impressions: A Look Back at Five Presidential Transitions,” The Brookings Review 19 (2) (2001): 28–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. John P. Burke, “Lessons from Past Presidential Transitions: Organization, Management, and Decision Making,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 31 (1) (2001): 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clay Johnson, “Recommendations for an Effective 2008 Transition,” Public Administration Review 68 (4) (2008): 624–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 6.
    For a good review of the legislative term limits literature, see Edward J. López, “Term Limits: Causes and Consequences,” Public Choice 114 (1/2) (2003): 1–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. or Christopher Z. Mooney, “Term Limits as a Boon to Legislative Scholarship: A Review,” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 9(2) (July 1, 2009): 204–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 7.
    For the electoral effects of term limits at the state legislative level, see Jonathan S. Krasno and Donald Philip Green, “Preempting Quality Challengers in House Elections,” The Journal of Politics 50 (4) (1988): 920–936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. and Seth E. Masket and Jeffrey B. Lewis, “A Return to Normalcy? Revisiting the Effects of Term Limits on Competitiveness and Spending in California Assembly Elections,” State Politics & Policy Quarterly 7 (1) (2007): 20–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 8.
    These data for life expectancies from 1789 to 1900 were collected by the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and are published in Tables 62 and 66 in Warren S. Thompson and P. K. Whelpton, Population Trends in the United States (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1933), p. 240.Google Scholar
  22. 9.
    See Kenneth R. Mayer, “Executive Orders and Presidential Power,” The Journal of Politics 61 (2) (1999): 445–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. William G. Howell and Kenneth R. Mayer, “The Last One Hundred Days,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 35 (3) (2005): 533–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 10.
    Frederick C. Mosher, “Presidential Transitions and Foreign Policy: The American Experience.” Public Administration Review 45 (4) (1985): 468–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vikki Gordon, “‘The Law’: Unilaterally Shaping U.S. National Security Policy: The Role of National Security Directives,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 37 (2) (2007): 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kurt M. Campbell and James B. Steinberg, Difficult Transitions: Foreign Policy Troubles at the Outset of Presidential Power (Brookings Institution Press, 2008).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Daniel P. Franklin 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel P. Franklin

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations