In David Sipress’s March 5th cartoon in The New Yorker magazine, one of the Founding Fathers reminded his colleagues drafting the U.S. Constitution. “Don’t forget—we decided to add penis size to the lists of qualifications for President.” This was a humorous reference to candidate Donald Trump’s ribald reference to his anatomical superiority over the Republican field that I just couldn’t resist starting this piece with. Begging your indulgence here.
Of course, the arbitrary qualifications for office have never been a guarantee of solid effective leadership in any country as we have learned from history. These are just the bare minimum to prevent any nutcase from assuming the reins of power. But seriously, once a candidate has won, there are tremendous expectations generated between V-Day and Inauguration Day.
It’s now accepted as the time when a President-Elect is given a honeymoon with the usual critics—the political opposition, the media, and key sectors like business and the Church—right after proclamation. For the opposition, it’s a period when they are willing to give the new boy, or girl, the benefit of the doubt. For the media, it’s the season of curiosity and amusement as with a new baby in the house. Simply put, this is the crawling stage for any new administration.
We can also think of the period as the “Look how far we’ve come” phase of the administration and of its spokesman, if he or she has survived ‘til then. The goal of the 100-day retrospective is to evaluate the new leaders given enough time to get their feet wet in statecraft and before they’ve solidified their legacy for good or ill. Let’s not discount the possibility that presidents can get a surprising amount done in their first three months at the palace.
While it isn’t a perfect gauge for the potential of a new President’s “Executive Effectiveness,” it’s the only one we have so far. Presidents are normally most effective when new in office, when the mystique and majesty of triumph is still awesome, and when Congress is still malleable to his agenda. The number has nothing mystical about it, as many presidential aides have complained that it’s an arbitrary yardstick of success that puts pressure on them. Nevertheless, it has been the measure of presidential activism and effectiveness by scholars, the public, and media since Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) introduced the concept during the dark days of 1933.
In reality, the phrase “The One Hundred Days” goes back to Napoleon Bonaparte. That’s the length of time it took him to escape from Elba, re-establish himself as ruler of France in the Tuilleries, and battle the English and Prussian armies before his final defeat at the Battle of Waterloo. The American tradition only started with FDR more than a century later. Entering into office in the face of the Great Depression, the Homeric scale and magnitude of FDR’s New Deal legislative agenda—15 major bills passed by the U.S. Congress in FDR’s first 100 days—was widely seen then as an unprecedented achievement.
Roosevelt was a presidential phenomenon. His responsive, take-charge style of governing was exactly what a dispirited and Depression-weary republic wanted in 1933. With FDR’s inaugural phrase, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” he swiftly set a bright, infectious tone of optimism. “Where there were hesitation and vacillation, weighing always the personal political consequences, feebleness, timidity, and duplicity, there are now courage and boldness and real action,” admitted California Republican Senator Hiram Johnson.
John F. Kennedy’s (JFK) masterly handling of the Cuban missile crisis compensated for a number of disasters like the Bay of Pigs and teething pains like Russia’s first-man-in-space achievement during his first 100 days. While Richard Nixon’s presidency started off swimmingly, he did away with the 100-days assessment. In 1969, told the New York Times that he wanted to be weighed over the long term. In hindsight, that didn’t turn out too well for him.
Ronald Reagan beat Roosevelt’s 24-hour effectiveness record when the 52 U.S. diplomats held hostage by Iranian militants for 444 days were released on Jan. 20, 1981—the day of his Inauguration. Because of errors in presidential management staff structuring, President Bill Clinton spent his first 100 days bouncing from blunder to blunder such as an unsuccessful Attorney General nomination and Hillary Clinton’s failed healthcare reform.
One hundred days is really a small period in Presidential Time because most administrations don’t achieve or suffer their milestones, achievements and scandals until later. Harry S. Truman’s decision to use the atomic bombs, Watergate, and 9/11 terrorist attacks all happened beyond the 100-day marker.
In the Philippines, Presidents plotted policies in the Inaugural Address and charted legislative agendas in the State of the Nation Address. Until the Third Philippine Republic (July 4, 1946 to September 21, 1972), Presidents were sworn in on Rizal Day and delivered the State of Nation Address in January when Congress assembled. These two speeches within a period of a few weeks set the tone for the new Chief Executive’s manner of governing.
President Corazon C. Aquino introduced the First 100 Days tradition in the country. On February 3, 1986 Candidate Aquino delivered a campaign speech before the Joint Philippine Chambers of Commerce that described what her government will attempt to achieve in its first 100 days. And on June 4, 1986, President Aquino delivered a report to the nation on television. President Fidel V. Ramos, restored the Third Republic tradition when he listed his policies in the June 1992 Inaugural Address and elaborated on his legislative agenda in the January 1993 State of the Nation Address. President Joseph Ejercito Estrada, at the very least, heard of the First 100 Days tradition in the Pa-morningan sessions.
All in all, 100 days are really too short to evaluate a new President. At best, it gives stakeholders a sensing of what his or her governing style will be and how it animates the nation or not. There are two factors that matters in giving the electorate a thumbnail indication of what the First 100 Days will be like:
• First, a decisive mandate will definitely give the new leader a strong hand in fulfilling his campaign promises on policies and agenda; and,
• Second, it’s critical for the voters to be aware of a candidate’s cabinet choices and their caliber as early as the campaign period. This is the ideal, but we know that horse-trading with supporters get in the way during the period between proclamation and inauguration.
Finally, to avoid the Keystone Kops-like blundering of President Noynoy Aquino’s administration in its first month, the President-Elect must swiftly cast for talent and appoint a solid, competent presidential management team right after Proclamation. In this way, the new President can employ the First One Hundred Days as a period to stabilize a fledgling government and to unite a recently-divided nation behind him.
As we end this discussion on rulers, I suspect that the Founding Fathers really knew in the middle of their legs that not all rulers have 12 inches.
