Rating the presidents of the United States, 1789-2000: a survey of scholars in political science, history, and law.

• Author: Lindgren, James

The reputations of presidents rise and fall. As experts on the presidency gain more perspective, their rankings of some presidents, such as John Kennedy, have fallen, while their impressions of others, such as Harry Truman, have risen. Even some presidents long dead have taken reputational stumbles. For example, the presidencies of James Madison, John Adams, and John Quincy Adams are no longer as highly regarded as they used to be.

This study reports results from the latest survey of seventy-eight scholars on the presidency. Unlike most prior studies, this study surveyed experts on presidential history and politics from the fields of political science and law, as well as from history. Moreover, we explicitly balanced the group to be surveyed with approximately equal numbers of experts on the left and the right. Because political leanings can influence professional judgments, we think that these are the most politically unbiased estimates of reputation yet obtained for U.S. presidents.

To choose the scholars to be surveyed, we had three expert panels of two scholars in each field come up with a list of experts in their fields. The six scholars who consulted on the makeup of the sample were Akhil Reed Amar (Yale University), Alan Brinkley (Columbia University), Steven G. Calabresi (Northwestern University), James W. Ceaser (University of Virginia), Forrest McDonald (University of Alabama), and Stephen Skrowronek (Yale University).

We tried to choose approximately equal numbers of scholars who lean to the left and to the right. Our goal was to present the opinions of experts, controlling for political orientation. Another way to express this is that we sought to mirror what scholarly opinion might be on the counterfactual assumption that the academy was politically representative of the society in which we live and work. This study attempts to resolve the conflict between prior rankings of Presidents done mostly by liberal scholars or mostly by conservative scholars, (1) but not by both together.

As in prior studies, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt continue to be the most esteemed presidents. Also like other studies, Democratic presidents tend to be rated higher than Republican presidents (though insignificantly so), both overall and since 1857.

The scholarly experts we surveyed ranged from the merely distinguished to the great (and the near great). Our response rate was 59%--78 of 132 scholars responded after one follow-up. No demographic data were collected on the seventy-eight respondents--thirty historians, twenty-five political scientists, and twenty-three law professors. Where possible, we have quoted from the comments of scholars who responded to the survey.

Each scholar was asked to rate each president (2) on a standard social science five-point scale from well below average to highly superior (3) and to name the most overrated and underrated presidents. (4) Historian Paula Baker was one of many scholars who explained her criteria: "Highly superior and above average presidents made the most of what circumstances provided, and in a few cases, re-oriented their parties and public life."

The scholars we surveyed were supposed to rate them as presidents, but undoubtedly their other accomplishments sometimes affected the ratings. One respondent explicitly rejected this tendency, "Some of the low-ranking presidents [as he ranked them], such as John Quincy Adams, Martin Van Buren, and William Howard Taft, were able men who contributed a great deal to the nation, but not as president."

This strange modern genre of presidential rankings was initiated in 1948 by Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., who repeated his study in 1962. (5) In 1996 his son, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., replicated the study once again. (6) Our study, conducted in October 2000, found remarkably similar results to the last Schlesinger study. The correlation between the ranks in the two studies is a staggeringly high .94. (7) The main difference between the two studies is that Ronald Reagan ranks 8th in our study, while he ranked 25th (out of thirty-nine presidents) in Schlesinger's 1996 study.

Compared to the Schlesinger study, there are some methodological differences. Like Schlesinger, we surveyed thirty historians, but in place of his two politicians (Mario Cuomo and former Senator Paul Simon), we surveyed twenty-five political scientists and twenty-three law professors. While Schlesinger surveyed one woman and no non-white minorities, about 15% of our respondents were women and minorities, a substantial proportion only by comparison. We believe that we also surveyed more young professors than Schlesinger did.

1. RANKING THE PRESIDENTS

   Rating presidents is an odd practice. No one can be an expert on all periods. Many presidents (e.g., Ulysses Grant, Calvin Coolidge, and Warren Harding) are probably rated more on received wisdom than on assessments of their records. The historian Robert Ferrell argues that, once one goes beyond one's narrow area of expertise, there is "a rapid diminution of real authoritative judgment." Even someone who has written more than a dozen books on the presidency, Ferrell asserts, would "almost have to guess" for some of the presidents.

   Some respondents reflected this cautiousness. Historian Mark Left argues, "Global measures can be an empty exercise." Political scientist Karen Hult notes that rankings of U.S. presidents are problematic: "First, as summaries, they by necessity mask what may be important differences within administrations." Some presidents may be better at some tasks than others or better at different times within their administrations. "Second," she argues, "rankings of presidents appear to me to reinforce the too-frequent tendency in the United States to attribute more power to the individuals who occupy the Oval Office than they typically have (or had)."

   Respondents used different criteria in ranking presidents. Many favored their own evaluations of the presidents' goals and accomplishments. Others, such as legal scholar Annette Gordon-Reed, emphasized the presidents' own goals: "I tried to make decisions based upon the extent to which each man was able to accomplish what he set out to do rather than relying only on my opinion of the worth of their efforts."

   1. THE BEST PRESIDENTS

      "The plain fact is that over half of our presidents have been mediocrities," writes the historian Robert Rutland. Political scientist Thomas Cronin was more sanguine, "[A]t least two dozen individuals have served with distinction; only a few have been grossly inadequate." Some presidents were ranked highly by almost everyone in our study.

      The eleven presidents ranked highest in this survey are presented in Chart 1. As in many previous rankings (including Schlesinger's), George Washington (ranked 1st), Abraham Lincoln (2nd), and Franklin Roosevelt (3rd) lead the pack. As historian Steven Gillon remarks simply in his comments on the survey, "Washington, Lincoln, and FDR remain--and should remain--in a class by themselves."

      Just a step below are Thomas Jefferson (4th) and Theodore Roosevelt (5th). All five of these presidents averaged well above 4.0 on a five point scale. In the next group are Andrew Jackson (6th) and Harry Truman (7th). Rounding out the top eleven are Ronald Reagan (8th), Dwight Eisenhower (9th), James Polk (10th), and Woodrow Wilson (11th).

      Some scholars may have thought that Jefferson's reputation was slipping, partly because of an increase in discussions of his slaveholding in general and his probable fathering of children with Sally Hemings. Political scientist David Mayhew's comment expressed this concern: "Jefferson is getting downgraded these days, but after reading Henry Adams' volumes recently, I see him as first-rate."

      All of the presidents in our group of the eleven best were among Schlesinger's top ten, except for Ronald Reagan who moved up from twenty-fifth in the Schlesinger study to eighth in our study.

   2. THE WORST PRESIDENTS

      According to the seventy-eight experts on our panel, the worst president was James Buchanan (ranked 39th), followed by Warren Harding (tied for 37th) and Franklin Pierce (tied for 37th). Buchanan and Pierce are usually...