How to use this Page

By Simon Usherwood

Tuesday’s Cabinet reshuffle by David Cameron has been trailed for some time now, but until the last moment it was not expected to be of the scale it has assumed. As a result, it sets up the government to present a rather different complexion in the run-up to the general election.

The key factor in the scope of the reshuffle looks to have been William Hague’s decision to step down as Foreign Secretary. For some, this was the result of he’s being broken/bored by the work, but to have seen him last week pushing hard on ending sexual violence in conflict should give the lie to that. The reasons remain rather unclear for now, but the consequence is that the Foreign Office is losing one of its staunchest defenders of recent decades: Philip Hammond might be an operator, but he doesn’t have the same personal attachment to diplomacy that Hague has shown over the past four years.

If Hague walked, then Michael Gove certainly didn’t. His removal from Education to become Chief Whip isn’t a vote of confidence in either the man or his project for school reform: very little is coming through the legislative process in the next nine months that will require much arm-twisting. Cameron’s decision is very odd, given the extent to which he has backed Gove until now, when he could have cut his losses much earlier. Here the judgement might have been that things have moved far enough down the line that they can’t be reversed and that Gove is better moved out now to start building a profile in another area while Nicky Morgan picks up the metaphorical pieces.

Alongside these two big changes, a third individual was also pushed into the limelight: Lord Hill of Oareford. Jonathan Hill’s name is one which has been on the lips of almost no-one until today, when he was nominated as the British member of the European Commission. A Tory party insider, Hill has been Leader of the Lords since last year, providing with the skills of political management and coalition-building that Cameron argues will be essential in Brussels. His nomination also has the propitious consequence that there will be no need for the by-election that use of an MP would have entailed.

Beyond these three big changes, the rest of the reshuffle is mainly one of filling in the gaps created and rewarding allies (see the Institute of Government’s very useful blog for more). Thus several of the 2010 intake get into the Cabinet, such as Liz Truss, Stephen Crabb, and Priti Patel.

But what is the intent behind all of this?

There are two possible readings of this, one more optimistic than the other.

The positive interpretation is that this is part two of Cameron’s strategy, building on the radical phase needed to pull the UK up from the depths of the recession and forming a new team to create a positive shine to that work in anticipation for the general election. This is certainly Cameron’s own spin, trying to create a narrative that the worst is behind us and the strength of the economic recovery means we can afford not to think too hard about the difficulty that has passed.

Part of that strategy is to make a Cabinet that is more resistant to Labour attacks. One of the more-remarked-upon aspects has been the promotion/retention of women, an obvious rejoinder to the recent months of criticism from the Opposition. Likewise, Gove’s removal has at least some aspect of depriving Labour of one of their favourite whipping boys.

However, if we are feeling less generous, then we might look at things rather differently. Hague’s departure might seem less surprising if we consider that he might expect to be out of the Foreign Office next May in any case, on the back of a Tory defeat.

This is really the unspoken sub-text: that we give party loyalists some time in the political sun because it’s unlikely to last very long. Despite the tightening of the opinion polls in recent months (see the excellent Polling Observatory posts), the Conservatives still look like being out of power in May, even as a coalition partner. That puts a big disincentive on laying long-term plans and refocuses attention on making the most of the remainder of this Parliament.

It’s easy to forget in all of this that the Tories are still in a coalition with the Liberal Democrats and that whatever electoral nemesis they face next year, that still lies in the future. Hence Cameron still has to temper the desires and pressures of his party to fit the coalition agreement, not least in his allocation of government posts.

All of this has echoes of 1992, when John Major looked set to lose, only to scrap through for another five years. Back then, there was a distinct sense that the foot had come off the gas and that the long period of Tory government was coming to an end. It was to be the questions over the electability of Labour that finally proved more consequential in the vote.

Cameron might not have had the long period in power that Major did, but he does have an Opposition that has struggled to impress. Even with the more fractured arithmetic of a party political system with UKIP, Tory victory is not impossible. That raises the potential danger that Cameron might pull it all off next year and then have to follow through.

If that did happen, then Europe is going to be the big fight, which will take up almost all his energies until 2017. Whether Hammond in the Foreign Commonwealth Office and Hill in Brussels will still look like good choices then remains to be seen.

Simon Usherwood is Senior Lecturer in the School of Politics at the University of Surrey. He tweets from @Usherwood.

The Very Short Introductions (VSI) series combines a small format with authoritative analysis and big ideas for hundreds of topic areas. Written by our expert authors, these books can change the way you think about the things that interest you and are the perfect introduction to subjects you previously knew nothing about. Grow your knowledge with OUPblog and the VSI series every Friday, subscribe to Very Short Introductions articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS, and like Very Short Introductions on Facebook.

Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS
Subscribe to only politics articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Image credit: Prime Minister visits Russia, by Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Flickr). Open Government License v1.0 via Wikimedia Commons

The post Cameron’s reshuffle appeared first on OUPblog.

Add a Comment

By Michael Gerhardt

John Tyler remains one of the most interesting, active, and constitutionally significant presidents we have ever had.

To begin with, he is the first vice president to be elevated to the presidency because of the death of the incumbent, William Henry Harrison. Harrison died 31 days after his inauguration in 1841. Many congressional leaders and the cabinet believed that the vice president, Tyler, did not automatically become the president upon Harrison’s death. They argued that he merely became the acting president or remained the vice president but was eligible to use some of the powers of the presidency with the full power and authority of the office. Tyler contested the claim. In his first meeting with Harrison’s cabinet, he convinced them to accept the legitimacy of his claim to take the presidential oath. He persuaded skeptical congressional leaders as well. In doing so, he established a practice and understanding that was later enshrined within the Constitution in the Twenty-fifth Amendment and is still followed to this day.

Second, John Tyler is the only American president whose party expelled him while he was the president. Tyler had been a life-long Democrat who left his party to become the running mate of William Henry Harrison, a Whig, in 1840. After Tyler became the president, Whigs did not trust him. After he exercised power in ways that Whigs did not approve, they formally expelled him from the party. For the remainder of his presidency, Tyler was, as he himself said, a man “without a party.”

Third, throughout his presidency, Tyler battled successfully against congressional efforts to thwart a number of unique presidential powers. As a result, he successfully consolidated the nominating, removal, and veto powers of future presidents.

Fourth, Tyler was also the only president to have had virtually all of his cabinet resign in protest over his actions. When Tyler vetoed a tariff bill, which his entire cabinet thought he should sign, all but Secretary of State Daniel Webster resigned in protest. Tyler happily accepted their resignations and replaced all but Webster with people who actually supported him politically.

Fifth, Tyler set a record for the numbers of cabinet and Supreme Court nominations that were rejected or forced to be withdrawn. In fact, he made eight nominations to fill two Supreme Court vacancies, only one of which the Senate confirmed.

As a bonus, Tyler also took unilateral action to clear the path for Texas to become a state. Though the Senate refused to ratify a treaty which would have made Texas statehood possible, Tyler got a majority in the House and a majority in the Senate to approve an annexation bill. Tyler signed the annexation bill three days before leaving office.

Through all of these and other actions, Tyler made the presidency stronger, but at the cost of his own political fortunes.  He left office widely politically unpopular and ended his days as a member of the Confederate Congress.

Michael Gerhardt is Samuel Ashe Distinguished Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. A nationally recognized authority on constitutional conflicts, he has testified in several Supreme Court confirmation hearings, and has published five books, including The Forgotten Presidents and The Power of Precedent. Read his previous blog posts on the American presidents.

Subscribe to the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Subscribe to only American history articles on the OUPblog via email or RSS.
Image credit: “Official White House Portrait of John Tyler” by George Peter Alexander Healy, February 1859. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons.

The post Five interesting facts about John Tyler appeared first on OUPblog.

Add a Comment

I was asked by an Apartment Therapy editor if she could post one of the pictures from my blog. Of course I said yes since I'm a huge fan. I checked out the post several hours later to discover I am not a hit.

In my defense, I can only say that it was a pretty old post. I did update the fabric to one I like better too, a Marimekko print. I did resew the panel so that it's more snug. And the cabinet does have glass doors which didn't show up too clearly in the photo. (as for how I get the cds out - a bit mystified by that comment - I open the door and take them off their shelf.)

But as for ripping all my cds - there are 100s and I'm just too lazy so I have to take the shame. I do dream of a future with a neat little Tivoli system. In the meantime, my nephew also had a big laugh at my old-fashioned cds so I knew I was behind the times. Although he had an even bigger laugh at the old cassette tapes I gave to my sister to play in her car... (and an even bigger laugh at the black and white TV at my parent's house)

But most importantly of all, I have to say that I'm grateful that I have friendlier commenters - at least you guys just ignore me when you don't like what you see! And I love you for it.

Display Comments Add a Comment

The election seems like old news at this point and yet we are still over a month away from inauguration day.  Donald Ritchie, author of Reporting from Washington: The History of the Washington Press Corps, Our Constitution, and The Congress of the United States: A Student Companion, looks at this lag in historical perspective. Ritchie, who has been Associate Historian of the United States Senate for more than three decades, explains why a President-elect may need this time prepare to take over.

Many Americans, and the rest of the world, wonder why so much time elapses between the U.S. presidential election in November and the inauguration on January 20. Why not reform the system and reduce the interval? The answer is we did reform it–the interregnum used to last twice as long.

Under the original Constitutional scheme, the new president took office on March 4, four months after the November elections. The new Congress would not convene until the first Monday in December, thirteen months after the election. This made sense to the framers in the eighteenth century, when transportation was slow and treacherous. The incoming president would call the Senate into special session for a week in March to confirm his cabinet, and then have the rest of the year to get his administration underway free from congressional interference.

By the twentieth century, the old system had grown obsolete. The second session of every Congress did not meet until after the next election had taken place, meaning that senators and representatives who had been defeated or retired came back as lame ducks. They proved especially susceptible to lobbyists, and since the short session had to end at midnight on March 3, they could easily filibuster to block needed legislation. George Norris, a progressive Republican from Nebraska who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, led the effort to amend the Constitution and move the presidential inauguration from March 4 to January 20, and the opening of Congress from December up to January 3. By staggering the closing dates of the terms of the president and Congress, the amendment also eliminated the need for outgoing presidents to spend their last night on Capitol Hill signing and vetoing last-minute legislation.

Beyond getting rid of most lame duck sessions, Norris’ amendment halved the transition between presidential administrations, from four months down to two. Transitions had grown increasingly awkward. During peaceful and prosperous times, the incoming president had to keep out of the way of his predecessor. Herbert Hoover, for instance, sailed off to South America after the 1928 election to avoid upstaging Calvin Coolidge’s final months in office. During periods of conflict and crisis, however, the interregnum cost the nation needed leadership. Outgoing presidents tried to coerce their successors into continuing their policies, as James Buchanan attempted with Abraham Lincoln in 1861, and Herbert Hoover did with Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1933. Lincoln and Roosevelt wisely avoided committing themselves to failed ideas, but these impasses did nothing to resolve the crises they faced, which grew worse by the time they took office.

The transition between Hoover and Roosevelt took place against a dramatic collapse of the American financial system, with the nation’s banking system shutting down, credit drying up, and unemployment soaring. Congress had passed the Twentieth Amendment in March 1932 and sent it to the states, but the necessary three quarters of the states did not ratify it until January 23, 1933, three days after the new date for inaugurations, making it too late for that year. The first inauguration on January 20 took place in 1937.

That last long interregnum convinced everyone that a shorter transition was preferable, but is the current system still too long? In a parliamentary system such as Great Britain’s, the new prime minister can move into 10 Downing Street the day after the election and the new cabinet can show up ready for work. The American system of separation of powers, however, makes no provision for a shadow cabinet in waiting. The president-elect needs time to select cabinet members and a host of other executive branch nominees who will be confirmed by the Senate. It may not do the new president any favor to shorten the interregnum further, although when times are tough the inauguration still looks awfully far away.

Display Comments Add a Comment

As I said in my last post, things are changing around here. I've been unusually stressed out this weekend. I wanted a dog, but actually getting one threw me for a loop. He's been a dream. Except for one little accident, that is. Amazing for such a young guy. Here he is. He is my boys' lifelong dream. My little guy has been in love with dogs since he was 9 months old. They can't believe we actually have a dog.

Display Comments Add a Comment

Today I finished the last step of refinishing the sewing cabinet. It felt slightly rough after the first coat of polyurethane dried, so I sanded it all over with 220 sandpaper and brushed on another coat. This is what it had suggested on the can.

And it worked really well. Sanding created a bit of a whitish dusty look (which I wiped clean with barely damp paper towel) but it felt much smoother and after the 2nd coat of polyurethane dried the surfaces felt very smooth and nicely finished. I've varnished things before and never bothered to do the "sand between coats" step but I admit now that it really does make all the difference.

So now the cabinet is done and I can show it off. It really doesn't seem like that much work when you look back, it was just sort of frustrating at the time doing the stripping but I think I have the hang of it now. But it's a reminder that I wouldn't really want to try anything more ornate, or too big to rinse in the sink!

As I mentioned luckily it was really only the top that was damaged so the rest is still the original finish and in nice shape. This is the back view:It's funny because in the craiglist picture it really looked worse than it was. Also, the sides were up in the photo and one panel seemed to be sagging. I thought the hinges might need replacing and even had a quick look on ebay and found some listed. But when we picked up the table and moved it, a metal rod swung out and it turns out there's a support for the larger side panel that tucks into the table when it's not in use. And the hinges are in great shape and look practically new.

I used a cream-with-tan-stripes upholstery cotton (a sample square from the Textile Museum sale) to re-upholster the bench. I chose the light colours because it just lightens up the whole set which is a bit dark. Also it matches my new/vintage Bernina sewing machine - but that's a topic for another post. Here's a glimpse of the inside of the bench:
This is the table with the sides out and the drawer open. I didn't refinish the inside of the two side panels so they're not perfect but the polish with mineral oil spruced them up quite well. I did refinish the little panel in front of the sewing machine, so you can see what a nice match the stain was to the original finish.
I'm so glad that the cabinet turn out so well. As I mentioned it would have been less trouble to wait for one in great condition to turn up, but then again it's very satisfying to take something that's been a bit neglected and bring it back to life. Also it was a bargain at $55.

And don't forget that includes the sewing machine inside. That's been brought back to life too, I'll show that next post. Thank you for the comments!

Display Comments Add a Comment

I was tagged by Jan for five random things, so here goes!

1. I'm really short. Barely 5 foot 2, to be exact. My younger brother (16) is almost 6 foot 5. Who looks like the baby sister? Yeah, me. Everywhere we go. Argh.

2. I love pens. Seriously. I have zillions of them, some I use and some I save. My favorite colors to write with are dark green, dark purple and pink.

3. I'm addicted to tea. Green, white, herbal and red are my favs. Not a huge drinker of black tea, but I love iced black tea in the summer. I also keep a log off all of the teas I've tried and rate them based on whether I liked the taste, brand, etc.

4. I want a squirrel. Yep, in my house. Think Veruca Salt in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory when she says, "Daddy, buy me a squirrel." :)

5. I don't like monkeys. At all. Never have for some reason. Sorry Diana and Jen!

If you want to play, consider yourself tagged!

Display Comments Add a Comment

The kitchen is going well, mainly because we had to get things in place for the countertop measurer on Wednesday. It went well, they make cardboard templates of your countertop and glue them in place to make sure they're accurate. Now we just have to wait a few weeks until the countertop is ready to install. Since the kitchen is now more organized I could put away some of the dishes that were in the living room china cabinet I bought specifically for sewing supplies. I've finally organized all my fabric!

The fabric is folded in large squares so that you can see the edge of each one which will make them easier to find. They're sorted by colours of course, with patterns and solids mixed in. I tried to fold them neatly (in thirds if they're big enough) so you can pull one out without messing up the whole pile.

My thread boxes are on top, and the drawers hold smaller items. The lower shelves hold messier remnants of fabric that don't fold as nicely. I want to paint this cabinet white but can't decide. The wood patina is nice on some places but not so much in others. This is the outside of the cabinet: And the inside:
I might just put light wallpaper in the inside to lighten it up without painting. The vintage tins hold things like zippers and bias tape:
I also had some inspiration for my ribbon. I'd already organized it into these metal baskets that came from the dollar store. They are wound onto pieces of paper towel cardboard rolls.
My inspiration was to use some of my vintage thread spools. Finally I have a purpose for them, and it's much nicer than the cardboard. These old wooden spools are just too nice to throw away, but I do actually use the thread so they were empty.
You can wind the lace or ribbon the way you would thread, spiral up and down the spool then secure in place with a pin. I need some shorter pins for this, so if anyone knows where you can find them please let me know!
p.s. the cable stitch from my recent knitting post was adapted from this lovely scarf pattern. For mine, I made the longer cable part shorter and was trying out a double rib for the sides.

Add a Comment

I'm fairly certain I posted 8 random factoids about me some months ago, but since Janie tagged us all, I'm happy to share 8 more. Here goes:

1. I'm the eldest of three girls. My youngest sister (who returns from a fabulous semester abroad in Scotland tonight!) is 10 years my junior.
2. When my Mom was pregnant with my youngest sister, I wanted my parents to name her Scheherezade. I couldn't pronounce it, but it sure did look pretty.
3. Eventually, we all (yes, this was a group effort) settled quite happily upon a different name: Charlotte.
4. I just attended my 10-year college reunion, where one of the activities was singing songs of praise to the Goddess Athena in Ancient Greek. I'm not kidding: traditions are very big at Bryn Mawr. Photos forthcoming on Flickr.
5. My favorite Coen Brothers movie is The Big Lebowski. My favorite movie of all time is Rushmore.
   
6. I can mimic a variety of English accents: Home Counties/posh, Manchester, and general (not posh) Londonish. My husband is sort of freaked out by my ability to speak in these accents.
   
7. I have zero skills on the mic, and in the unrelated but no less important department of present-wrapping, I am also a total disgrace.
8. I am (possibly unhealthily) obsessed with Hello Kitty. Don't judge me.
9. 8:49 PM: Rock! My parents and sister just called from the airport to say they've picked up Charlotte and are on their way home! T-minus 10 minutes till I see my baby sister!
   

Display Comments Add a Comment

Since it's been far too long since a post from PGTL (and we've all been tagged several times for the 8 Things meme) here's my 8 Things Meme entry.

(This is supposed to be 8 random things about me? Sheesh. Random UNKNOWN things? Or just 8 random things? We'll go with unknown or obscure.)

1. While at Wiscon this last weekend, I had lunch with New York Times Bestselling author Karen Joy Fowler (The Jane Austen Book Club). See, that was a totally random fact about me. (And I like to name drop, so nyah!)

2. I never worked in a library until late in 2005.

3. I once worked for a waste management landfill weighing trucks.

4. I like to flatten things while I cook. For example, when cooking spaghetti meat sauce, I will eventually make the whole surface of the sauce flat and smooth. I do the same thing when making vegetable dips. Any type of thing I'm cooking that is not liquid enough to flatten itself (soup, sauces, caramels, etc.) but not too solid to resist flattening (turkey, ribs, chicken, etc.) I will flatten into a smooth surface. Same thing for peanut butter, butter & cheese (I straighten the edges from where the last person cut), and so on. Weird, huh?

5. I absolutely love brussel sprouts. Love them. LOVE. THEM. (great, now I'm thinking food at 10 in the morning and now I'm starving)

6. The biggest rat I have personally seen I thought was a cat (and a fairly big one at that) until I got closer to it. This was downtown Milwaukee near the river.

7. Speaking of Milwaukee (where I grew up), while home from college in 1991, I was driving around with some friends. There was an apartment that had more police and resuce vehicles in front of it than I'd ever seen in my life in one place. It took us forever to get past them and back onto our random driving (ah to be young again!). When we got home, the lead story on the news was "Police are removing another victim from Jeffrey Dahmer's apartment. We don't know how many victims will be found in total." Wha? I just drove past that place! Kinda creeps you out. As I relate the story to my dad, he then tells me a story of when he went hunting as a kid near where Ed Gein used to live. My dad is certain that the man he saw walking through the woods with some dogs was Ed Gein. (OK, no longer hungry, and no longer looking forward to sleeping tonight...)

8. My favorite (in no particular order) songs (the songs I would want as a theme song when I enter a room) are: Sex Machine by James Brown, Sex Bomb by Tom Jones, Greasy Granny by the Charlie Hunter Trio, Virtual Insanity by Jamiroquai, Rock Your Body by Justin Timberlake (I know!), and Something Beautiful by Robbie Williams (Robbie wrote this for Tom Jones and decided to keep it for himself). There are more, I'm sure, but this is a good list. These are all songs that when they come on, I literally stop whatever I'm doing (it could be anything...I mean that: ANYTHING) and get up a groove. What's bugging me now is that just the other day I looked at my wife when a song was playing and I said "I think this might be my favorite song ever" but I don't know what it was anymore.

I am not tagging anyone. This madness must stop! :)

Add a Comment