State of the Union preview…
Among the various genres of presidential speech, the State of the Union Address is the only presidential message delivered by law. The Constitution says: “He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union…”
This information does not have to come in the form of an address. Thomas Jefferson considered the practice of delivering an address directly to Congress demagogic, and so he dropped it. Woodrow Wilson, determined to use the full rhetorical power of the presidency, restored the practice–especially as a way to assert his political agenda.
The State of the Union has evolved into an important moment of political theater–especially in the age of television.
In terms of the five canons of rhetoric, I have been impressed with George W. Bush’s style and delivery. His SOTUs have been among the very best of his public performances. I fully expect him to sustain this effort despite his atrocious second inaugural address.
As a presidency matures (i.e. moves into its second term) certain pitfalls arise in the genre of the SOTU. The public and Congress often reward a president for boldness during the first term SOTUs. But in the second term the SOTU increasingly becomes an elegiac form. One reason: A president’s party may begin distancing itself from the executive in order to ensure re-election at the midterm and presidential cycles. Bush faces an interesting challenge: His approval rating is low but his confidence is high (and his party is in control). I think this is his last shot at a SOTU full of “bold” plans. But he could be too bold.
What’s the right mix? If I were on the inside working on this address I might be able to offer a credible answer. I cannot. But I will offer an analysis following the address. I won’t be quick about it. So don’t expect to see much before Thursday afternoon.
The expectations game is in full swing:
(Additional tags: politics)
