Newspaper and Journal Articles-Written

Newspaper and Journal Articles-Quoted

Main

Mr. and Mrs.President

See How They Ran

The Hillary Clinton of 1999 is a far cry from the woman who burst on the scene in 1992 promising to revolutionize the role of First Lady - and the rest of the country as well. In her first national incarnation, Hillary Rodham Clinton emphasized her impressive legal resume, her own extensive network of political contacts, her ambitions -- and qualifications -- to be a policy maker in the White House. In those days of "two-for-the-price-one, buy-one-get-one-free," Hillary and Bill Clinton promised the American people a veritable co-presidency

Even as they voted her husband into office -- just barely -- the American people resoundingly rejected the Clinton’s co-presidency and Hillary Rodham Clinton herself. Throughout the Clintons’ first two years in office, public opinion polls consistently gave Mrs. Clinton the lowest approval ratings any First Lady has received since polling began. The result was the national health care debacle – and Hillary Clinton’s retirement from high profile policymaking.

Mrs. Clinton’s public approval ratings only began to rise when she began to conform to the unspoken but clear protocols defining the First Ladyship. Increasingly, she came to resemble Barbara Bush not Eleanor Roosevelt.Only by trading in her power-suit for an apron, by writing a best-selling book about child-rearing not policy-making, by standing by her man rather than working with him, did she become the popular political figure she is today. 

The gossamer shackles of the First Lady certainly are frustrating for a modern, intelligent, accomplished woman. Even the most traditional of her predecessors like Mrs. Bush have bristled at the archaic and contradictory demands on this odd, extra-constitutional, monarchical yet terribly important throwback of a position. Fears of unelected and unaccountable presidential courtiers mix with yearnings for a traditional ballast in the White House to keep First Ladies rooted in the 1950s.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Clinton and her New York fans, although no previous First Lady has run for office, the past is studded with cautionary tales to consider. Even her heroine Eleanor Roosevelt stumbled badly when she took a job – at a dollar a year – as assistant director of the Office of Civilian Defense during the early days of World War II. After sustaining five months of criticism directed at both the President and the First Lady, Mrs. Roosevelt quit.

More recently, when First Ladies as diverse as Nancy Reagan, Rosalynn Carter, and Hillary Rodham Clinton seemed to strike out on their own, reporters cheered but their poll ratings nosedived. When Mrs. Reagan helped depose Donald Regan as chief of staff, she was vilified as a castrating, power-hungry Lady Macbeth – she was called virtually every name Hillary Clinton was called during the health care debate except “feminazi.” The harsh and unimaginative criticisms each of these women endured reflect the depth of the consensus about the proper dos and don’ts for a First Lady.

Even in this modern age, the overwhelming majority of American people expect the First Lady to stay within relatively traditional bounds. They are handed what Nancy Reagan called a “white glove pulpit” that gives them tremendous potential to do a lot of good in very limited areas. Independent projects, especially on traditionally “soft” womanly topics such as child-rearing, literacy, and historic preservation are encouraged; bold policy initiatives are not. Books co-written with Millie the Bushes’ dog or Socks the Clintons’ cat will play well; policy memoes and position papers will not. In this era of the presidential couple, the many demands that the First Lady help with the joint image-making do not translate into an invitation to share power with the president.

After six tumultuous years at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, despite unimaginable tensions and humiliations, Hillary Rodham Clinton finally is basking in the glow of spectacular public approval ratings. She should enjoy the Hillary-for-Senator boom, but not take it too seriously. She should not forget what price she had to pay to secure such popularity, how delicate her position as First Lady is, and how fickle the public can be.30

Gil Troy is Professor of History at McGill University in Montreal. His latest book, “Affairs of State: the Rise and Rejection of the Presidential Couple Since World War II” chronicled the history of the presidential couples from the Trumans through the Clintons.