Presidential Legitimacy Rhetoric: Content, Context, and Causes

• In Event: The Presidency and Political Communication

Abstract

What is legitimacy rhetoric, and when and why do presidents use it? Previous studies have identified the importance of legitimacy for maintaining democratic institutions, yet have stopped short of explaining why or when political elites attempt to enhance or degrade institutional legitimacy. Other research examines particular categories of rhetoric in presidential speech, including racial, sexist, and partisan presidential rhetoric. I advance both areas of research by conceptualizing legitimacy rhetoric as speech designed to bolster or undermine the legitimacy of governmental institutions and examining the determinants of its use by presidents. I combine several threads of prior theoretical and empirical research to classify legitimacy rhetoric into six categories of speech on 1) regime attributes, 2) justice and fairness, 3) government efficiency, 4) government accountability, 5) regime design, and 6) direct references to regime legitimacy. With Miller Center texts of 409 famous presidential speeches from 1961-2022, I identify the frequency and types of presidential legitimacy rhetoric and explore potential determinants of legitimacy rhetoric theorized by prior research, including contexts of legitimacy crises, partisanship, divided government, electoral margin of victory, public approval, and honeymoon effects. The results indicate substantial variation in the types of legitimacy rhetoric used over time, between presidents, and during administrations. Democratic presidents are more likely than Republican presidents to refer to democratic quality, justice, and fairness. Presidents are also less likely to discuss government efficiency later in their tenures. Neither the context of divided government nor higher electoral margins appear to significantly impact the use of legitimacy rhetoric. Yet approval ratings have a consistent effect on the use of legitimacy rhetoric, with more popular presidents using less legitimacy rhetoric of most types. Finally, the use of legitimacy rhetoric appears to increase during contexts of legitimacy crises. I conclude by discussing the implications of these findings and the relationship between presidential legitimacy rhetoric and the health of democratic institutions.

Author

• Stephanie Wise, Central College