On the Limits of Presidential Power: Nixon Vs. White House Tennis

When we met with Mao Tse-tung in Beijing in 1972, Henry Kissinger remarked that he had assigned Mao’s writings to his classes at Harvard. With typical self-deprecation, Mao said, “These writings of mine aren’t anything. There is nothing instructive in what I wrote.”

I said, “The chairman’s writings moved a nation and changed the world.”

He replied, “I haven’t been able to change it. I’ve only been able to change a few places in the vicinity of Peking.”

I could have responded that this was far more than I had been able to do in the vicinity of the White House.

Not even White House aides are immune from letting self-interests get in the way of following orders. I do not play tennis, and besides, I felt that the tennis court on the White House grounds marred the original simplicity and elegance of the south lawn. I ordered it removed, thus sparking a crisis among my aides, many of whom did play tennis and enjoyed using the White House court.

Each time I would mention tearing it up, they would resolve to study the matter for a few months and then see whether I mentioned it again. When I did, there would be yet another study. Eventually, I realized that the only way to get rid of the White House tennis court would be if I rented a bulldozer one night and did it myself. President Bush, who enjoys playing tennis, can thank my staff for not carrying out my order!

These examples may seem picayune compared to the big issues a President deals with. But they illustrate a point many self-proclaimed experts on the presidency overlook. The President of the United States is said to be the most powerful man in the world. This is true only in the sense that he leads the most powerful nation in the world. In fact, the President’s power is far more circumscribed than that of most world leaders.

The point is often made that because the National Security Council is much more efficient than the cumbersome Soviet bureaucracy, President Bush can respond more quickly to a crisis than can President Gorbachev. This analysis misses the point. Because of his dictatorial power, Gorbachev can always get his way in the end if he insists. Bush can do so only if he can persuade others that his decision is the right one.

Those who oppose Gorbachev will no longer lose their heads, but they risk losing their jobs. Those who oppose Bush can usually live to fight another day. If they leak their views, they might even become media heroes.

-- From “In the Arena: A Memoir of Victory, Defeat and Renewal . “