Any thoughts on how professors — and again I recognize that Obama was not a career academic in the sense that many professors are — have generally done as elected politicians in America?
I understand that Woodrow Wilson, who I think is the only President to have been an academic, is pretty well-regarded by historians, though I’ve also heard some pretty serious criticisms of him. Bill Clinton was obviously very smart, and worked as a professor briefly; I think he was a very successful politician, though I disagree with many of his views and though he was obviously crippled by his own personal failings. Newt Gingrich was a professor who had quite a noteworthy political career for a considerable time, though he is now in the political wilderness. Phil Gramm was a professor, and apparently a fairly successful Senator, though he got nowhere in the Presidential race. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was a professor and, to my knowledge, widely respected as an intellectual; I’m not sure how to evaluate his political skills. Dixy Lee Ray, the second woman Governor (Washington, 1977-81) who wasn’t the wife or widow of the Governor who preceded her, was a professor, though my sense is that she was not a great success as a politician. There must be others, but they’re hard for me to think of.
What’s your general sense of how well academics do as politicians? Are they on balance more successful than other politicians? Less so? About the same? Do they deploy their intelligence and learning effectively, or do they find them to be stumbling blocks?
B.D. says:
Woodrow Wilson is the only president who actually was a productive career academic. His presidency should make anyone think twice about professor-politicians: he was a proto-fascist who openly disdained the Constitution. Fail.
As far as his effectiveness as a politician, Wilson seems to have been a success. He accomplished a great many things throughout his career. His success must have been a product of the times, since I can’t imagine a career academic being able to survive his paper trail of articles and books. (Though I suppose a professor in some field like mathematics might have an easier time if he were inclined to become a politician.)
February 10, 2010, 8:14 pmruuffles says:
I did not know before this post that Gingrich, Gramm, and Moynihan were professors. I suspect most of the people that voted for them did not know either.
February 10, 2010, 8:16 pmDom says:
Representative Vern Ehlers had a successful career in Michigan, serving 17 years in Congress after 10 years in the Michigan state legislature. He was a Physics professor before going into politics.
February 10, 2010, 8:17 pmJoe Horton says:
Paul Douglas and Dick Armey were both economics professors before having successful careers as politicians.
February 10, 2010, 8:20 pmRPT says:
Gingrich is certainly not out in the wilderness judging by his many and regular television appearances. Many believe Gramm had a very profound effect on the economy (for the worse) before moving to represent UBS more directly.
February 10, 2010, 8:20 pmDave N. says:
Dwight D. Eisenhower was President of Columbia University, though few would consider him an academic.
February 10, 2010, 8:28 pmDr. Weevil says:
I’ve always thought that Woodrow Wilson is the only president commonly listed in Top 10 lists who belongs in the Bottom 10. He resegregated Washington, locked up pacifists and Socialists by the thousands, botched the aftermath of World War I, and clung to his job after he had been incapacitated by a stroke, letting his wife run the country. What did he actually achieve that was good?
His 1919 Pierce-Arrow convertible is very nice, though. (I’m sitting about 50 yards from it right now.)
So why is Wilson so highly regarded by professors? The same reason lawyers never have to worry about being eaten by sharks: professional (or should we call it professorial?) courtesy.
February 10, 2010, 8:31 pmBrett says:
More’s the pity. He was a tyrant and liar who promised not to get the US involved in war in his re-election, then did everything but openly support the British (he sold them arms and ran them) with troops. He was also a major racist, who really set-back any progress that blacks had made in government positions by decades. Let’s not get into his litany of abuses of power.
It’s a real pity he didn’t get knocked into incapacity in one of his earlier strokes before he came to the Presidency. The only real satisfaction I can get is that his successor got heavily defeated by a fat guy who sat on his porch the whole campaign.
February 10, 2010, 8:33 pmStrict says:
I think almost everyone considers Jefferson to have been an “academic.”
February 10, 2010, 8:39 pmPorJ says:
How could you forget the legendary James A. Garfield – easily the most intelligent man to occupy the White House? Not only was he ambidextrous (? – !) but it was said he could write in Latin and Greek simultaneously. He discovered a novel Pythagorean theorem proof as well – something Wilson and Obama could only dream of accomplishing.
February 10, 2010, 8:43 pmAfter he decided against being a preacher, he taught at Hiram College in Ohio for a few years, but….
Dr. Weevil says:
How soon we forget. S. I. Hayakawa went from Professor of English (and distinguished writer of books on Semantics) to president of San Francisco State to the U.S. Senate. Wikipedia doesn’t mention any particular accomplishments in the Senate, and he declined to run for a second term, so perhaps he found politics unfulfilling.
February 10, 2010, 8:44 pmohwilleke says:
Clinton was at least as much of a professor as Obama was, both in law schools.
February 10, 2010, 8:46 pmDr. Weevil says:
I do not consider Jefferson an “academic”. A scholar yes, and a writer, and an intellectual, and founder of a great university, but did he ever teach anywhere?
February 10, 2010, 8:47 pmnewrouter says:
the good old days before statists reduced competition with regulation.
February 10, 2010, 8:47 pmRelic says:
Dr. Weevil, I don’t know if it counts, but he founded the University of Virginia.
February 10, 2010, 9:02 pmStamper says:
Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain was elected governor of Maine four times and was a Professor at Bowdoin College. No idea if he was considered a successful politicain.
February 10, 2010, 9:02 pmDr. Weevil says:
Relic:
February 10, 2010, 9:08 pmI mentioned that he founded the University of Virginia, and called it “a great university” (I’m an alumnus, so I’m prejudiced), but I don’t believe Jefferson ever taught there. Most scholars are academics, and most academics worthy of the name are scholars, but Jefferson was a scholar and intellectual without (in my opinion) being an academic.
Adam Maas says:
And for all that, Chamberlain will still be remembered primarily for his non-academic and non-political accomplishments, as one of the better Colonels the Union produced and the commander of one of the most heroic actions of the war.
February 10, 2010, 9:10 pmAutist says:
Eugene,
Are you thinking about running? You’ve got my vote!
February 10, 2010, 9:21 pmTTC says:
You forgot Herbert Hoover. He lectured extensively in Columbia and Standford on mining, wrote a mining engineering textbook, and his translation of De Re Metallica a German book on mining from the 16th cen remains the definitive scholarly work on the text.
February 10, 2010, 9:28 pmRelic says:
Dr. Weevil:
February 10, 2010, 9:38 pmSorry, my mistake.
KingTaco says:
“Most scholars are academics, and most academics worthy of the name are scholars, but Jefferson was a scholar and intellectual without (in my opinion) being an academic.”
It’s true that Jefferson wasn’t an academic in the modern sense, but I think he fits to the ‘spirit’ of the question. I take it EV is more or less comparing the ‘real world/political’ performance of men and woman chiefly noted for their intellectual/ideological/academic chops. In the case of Jefferson he was generally considered, nationally and internationally, one of America’s foremost scientific and philosophic minds. The shape/teaching make-up of American universities circa 1800 was also a far, far cry from the modern example.
Jefferson makes a great case of ‘academic-to-politician’ study, for he so readily displays the classic (and this is true back to Greek and Roman political wonkery)words-deeds disparity in behavior. Before and after his presidency, Jefferson was a fierce critic of centralized government, but *during* his presidency he expounded executive privilege arguably greater than any president until Theodore Roosevelt or Wilson. He initiated the purchase of Louisiana while acknowledging he had no constitutional right to do so, engaged in all types of internal intrigue to gain West Florida from Spain, ordered up the impeachment of Justice Samuel Chase when he offended Jefferson, etc. Jefferson was a master of rather savage personal attacks on politicians he disagreed with, then was very, very thin-skinned when president. He touted a united Congress, but bitterly, almost tinged with paranoia, hated Federalists. This is a thumb-sketch blog comment, and I don’t want to give the impression Thomas Jefferson is, in a revisionist way, a bad guy. He was a towering figure, and a giant of American history. But his political character cut the exact figure his famous ideological/academic character professed to be eternally vigilant of. This is the story, especially considering the proclivities towards heavy personal attack mixed with extreme sensitivity to personal criticism, that illustrates a pattern of much history in the annuals of academics-to-politicians.
February 10, 2010, 9:49 pm3L says:
how about ol’ Joey Biden?
February 10, 2010, 9:52 pmChristopher Cooke says:
Dr. Weevil: S.I. “Sam” Hayakawa is largely remembered for falling asleep in the Senate. Coincidentally, Reagan, who was President during a portion of Hayakawa’s service, also feel asleep during meetings (Cabinet meetings). I attribute this common trait to their age and/or the boring nature of the topics being discussed. Both were big picture guys who didn’t have much patience for details. Hayakawa did write a nice book called “Language in Thought and Action” (I believe) which I read in high school.
February 10, 2010, 9:54 pmMM says:
Paul Wellstone was, I believe, a professor of political science at Carleton College before being elected senator. I’m not sure if he would be deemed successful or not. His original victory (1990?) was impressive, in that he was a poorly-funded and relatively unknown candidate. He had some missteps as senator, but was quite popular on the left, both in and out of Minnesota. Before he died he was in a very tight race for reelection.
As for Professor Volokh’s larger point (made in the previous post): many of the traits he attributes to academics are ones that I associate with politicians–expecting subordinates to do their bidding, believing that their title carries some weight with others, etc.
February 10, 2010, 9:58 pmBama 1L says:
I think you need to fix your description of Dixy Lee Ray. She was the second female governor who wasn’t the wife or widow of the governor who preceded her. [Fixed, thanks! -EV]
February 10, 2010, 9:59 pmKazinski says:
Phil Gram was an economics professor at Texas A&M before running for Congress.
I could vote for a professor of a hard science, math, or economics, but I’d never vote for a professor of anything else.
February 10, 2010, 10:09 pmRicardo says:
As Aristotle once argued, academic life is superior because one does not owe anything to anyone else and never labors under any obligation. You always have enough to live a comfortable life and are free to pursue your interests and fancies whether it makes anyone else happy or not.
To the extent that many if not most academics agree with Aristotle, they make lousy politicians. Larry Summers is a good prototypical academic: he’s done plenty to piss off ideologues of various sorts (leftists more than conservatives, actually) exactly because he sees it as his main obligation to call it as he sees it rather than build a coalition or consensus. If he thinks you are wrong, he will flat out tell you to your face “you’re wrong.” As an administration official, he will probably continue to serve for a couple more years unless he stirs up controversy of some kind and then return again to academic life. The Harvard faculty lounge is his natural habitat. A guy like him could never get elected.
Personality-wise, most professors tend to be introverts, as well, while politics tends to select for backslapping extroverts. Professors enjoy being alone and having internal conversations in their heads about various issues while politicians seek out a crowd and prefer decisive action to nuance.
Especially in American politics, there is a bias against people perceived as being just a bit too intellectual. Eisenhower exploited this when running against Adlai Stevenson and the GWB campaign tried to paint John Kerry as an aloof intellectual. If the economy was not so bad, McCain could well have won against Obama using the same strategy.
February 10, 2010, 10:34 pmtired of blogs says:
Dave Loebsack was a professor of political science at Cornell College in Iowa for twenty years before he defeated Jim Leach to join the Congress in 2006. He was re-elected in 2008. Other than that, I have no sense of how effective he has been.
February 10, 2010, 10:35 pmCecil Moon says:
His promotion of the League of Nations and its subsequent successor, the UN, disqualifies him of any other honors one might dredge up to justify him as either an academic or a politician. Support of either organization would demonstrate an ignorance of the United Staste Constitution.
February 10, 2010, 10:44 pmgeokstr says:
Fixed that for you.
February 10, 2010, 11:20 pmReader says:
John Quincy Adams was the Boylston Professor of Rhetoric and Oratory at Harvard, an office that still exists today.
February 10, 2010, 11:39 pmGerbilsbite says:
Paul Wellstone was a political science professor when he won his seat in the Senate. Gene McCarthy had been a professor in the 40s, I think. I’m sure plenty of commenters will be delighted that those were the first two names that popped to my non-Minnesotan mind.
February 10, 2010, 11:46 pmJim Miller says:
This is going back a bit, but I have to like Mississippi governor (and former college president) Henry Whitfield, if only because he defeated Theodore Bilbo.
According to V. O. Key (in “Southern Politics”), Whitfield had been president of the Mississippi State College for Women for many years. When a Bilbo ally threw him out, he
February 10, 2010, 11:55 pmran for governor against Bilbo and won with the help of the the graduates of his college.
Eric Rasmusen says:
John Adams was more of a scholar than Thomas Jefferson, writing a long work of political philosophy (and being a lawyer, a member of a scholarly profession. But like Jefferson, he was not an academic.
Paul Douglas and SI Hayakawa were not just professors, but very successful and important ones (the Cobb-Douglas production function).
Schumpeter was finance minister of Austria, I think, but that is more like Larry Summers being Secy. of the Treasury— in parliamentary systems, experts can get appointed to office, in effect or actuality.
Law prof. Tom Campbell was a Congressman, I think, and is running for something now. I wrote a law review article refuting one of his antitrust articles.
Was President Taft a law prof ever? He was a scholarly man.
I find it hard to count Clinton and Obama as academics. Did they ever write anything? It seems more as if they taught on the side while figuring out what political office to run for. Eisenhower’s case is similar, tho he didn’t even teach.
February 10, 2010, 11:56 pmRich says:
Umm, no. The question was about professors and the peculiar problems they have because of their place in the hierarchy of the academy. As for the rest, tl;dr.
February 11, 2010, 12:43 amDave N. says:
Taft was the Chancellor Kent Professor of Law and Legal History at Yale Law School after he left the Presidency and before he became Chief Justice.
On a totally unrelated note, former California Congressman Ed Zschau was an Assistant Professor at the Stanford University Graduate School of Business before entering Congress.
February 11, 2010, 12:57 amKingTaco says:
Directly from OP:
‘What’s your general sense of how well academics do as politicians? Are they on balance more successful than other politicians? Less so? About the same? Do they deploy their intelligence and learning effectively, or do they find them to be stumbling blocks?’
‘Hierarchy’ was in the post prior to this one, and even then it was one of many reasons looking in to…how do people noted/trained as academics stumble/succeed when entering the realm of politics. Which is exactly what I discussed vis-a-vie Thomas Jefferson.
February 11, 2010, 1:39 amDesiderius says:
Petraeus/Volokh in ’16!
February 11, 2010, 7:38 amdearieme says:
“…I don’t want to give the impression Thomas Jefferson is, in a revisionist way, a bad guy. He was a towering figure, and a giant of American history.” But most Great Men are bad men.
February 11, 2010, 8:00 amBill Harshaw says:
Rep. David Price from North Carolina was a professor at Duke for about 20 years. Has a nice book on the crossover between political science and politics–I think he’s revised it periodically to cover the new issues which arise.. Viewing from afar he seems to have been an effective representative, at least in terms of moving some good legislation. He did get beat in 1994 after serving a few years, but bounced back the next election, so he’s a reasonably good pol.
Rep. Rush Holt from New Jersey was a physics prof for a while and then at Princeton’s Plasma Physics lab before he scored a big upset victory the first time.
Because we only identify those who succeeded in winning one or more elections I think the sample is not representative. It does seem that most of the ex-professors were/are Democrats.
February 11, 2010, 8:19 amDavid says:
Actually, it was pretty common knowledge at the time. In Moynihan’s case, it became a very public issue as part of a “carpetbagger” issue in the 1976 Democratic primary: can a Harvard professor whose only tie to New York is a farm he uses as a vacation home adequately represent New York?
February 11, 2010, 8:24 amDavid says:
Clearly in electoral terms, he was successful! :-)
But I imagine his political popularity stemmed more from his command of the 20th Maine than from his academic pursuits.
February 11, 2010, 8:27 amDavid says:
Well, if we’re not limiting this to the US…Salazar was a professor at Coimbra University before being invited to “fix” Portugal’s political and economic system, and I am sure there are dozens of other examples as well.
February 11, 2010, 8:36 amWidmerpool says:
Someone mentioned Phil Gramm from Texas–and, lest we forget, there’s also Dick Armey from Texas. Both were university economics professors.
February 11, 2010, 8:41 amneurodoc says:
Dr. Weevil, do you teach at Mary Baldwin?
February 11, 2010, 9:25 amneurodoc says:
Our younger daughter graduated from Bowdoin, so we know who Chamberlain was, but won’t have otherwise. A friend surprised me once when upon learning that she went to Bowdoin, he started to rhapsodize about Chamberlain as a great general. I seems that so exemplary was Chamberlain as a military leader that the Army points to him as a role model for its rising officers.
February 11, 2010, 9:36 amDr. Weevil says:
neurodoc:
February 11, 2010, 9:37 amNo, I just live a block away. I teach high school in the area.
neurodoc says:
Holt has not been willing to accept as the final answer that Bruce Ivins of Ft. Detrich in Frederick, Maryland was the person responsible for the anthrax attacks. I don’t know whether to see that as reasonable skepticism on Holt’s part or a mild version of a conspiracy/coverup theory.
February 11, 2010, 9:40 amDave N. says:
Since we are doing Rush Holt trivia, he was also a Five Time Champion on Jeopardy! before being elected to Congress and is the son of the youngest person ever elected to the U.S. Senate, Rush Dew Holt of West Virginia (who was 29 when he was elected and had to wait 5 months until he reached his 30th birthday before he could be seated).
February 11, 2010, 10:52 ammikeyes says:
Lamar Alexander was the president of the University of Tennessee after he was governor and before he was senator, but I suppose that doesn’t count.
February 11, 2010, 11:28 amJestak says:
Paul Douglas, mentioned upthread very briefly, had both a distinguished career as an academic economist, and a successful and effective one in politics.
February 11, 2010, 12:34 pmSarcastro says:
I think we need a Wilson hate thread. There just hasn’t been enough revisionist history about the tyrant.
And what a crappy tyrant he was, keeping a functioning democracy while he was going around tyranting it up.
February 11, 2010, 2:32 pmjcm says:
Cardozo was a promarket president of Brasil who made an academics career in Venezuela and Brasil as founder of dependency theory .
Roman Herzog , Chief Justice of Karlruse and President of Germany is also a scholar.
Woodrow Wilson established an apartheid in the federal government. Seeded the wwii with the failed Nations Society. And bullied Germany until he forced them to adopt a democracy.An wanted a parliamentary government for the USA
Turgot was a Sorbone´s professor and Finance Minister of Louis xvi. He wrote the basis of the Wealth of Nations
February 11, 2010, 5:33 pmjosil says:
Paul Douglas was the only academic I can think of who made a significant contribution in research (cobb-douglas function), in politics, and in war. Read the Wikipedia bio and weep for today’s politicians.
February 11, 2010, 7:34 pmDAvid says:
Re jcm’s comment above:
I have the impression that professors becoming politicians is much more common in Latin America than in the US (professors who have made a career as professors, rather than just educated people who may have briefly taught at a college or held a professorship). Maybe this is because in Latin America, students are a much stronger political force now than they are in the US (more like US students during the 60s?).
With regard to Turgot being the finance minister of Louis XVI, it may also be more common for people in specialized fields, such as economics/central banking (or for that matter, scientific fields or the law/judicial system, etc.) to later hold “political” positions rather than actual elected positions. For instance, Ben Bernanke was a full time professor of economics, and he can be characterized now as a “politician,” at least in some ways – but he was not elected.
February 12, 2010, 4:15 pmMichael Kochin says:
John Quincy Adams was Professor of Rhetoric at Harvard. He was a success as a Senator, as Secretary of State, and as a Congressman. He was, not however, a successful President.
February 13, 2010, 2:23 pm