Describe the process by which United States foreign policy is made.

Foreign policy making is both similar to and different from domestic policy making in several important ways. To understand the foreign policy making process, we will first review the general features of the domestic policy making process.

In general, domestic policy making begins when a problem is recognized and articulated. A problem may go unnoticed for years before it appears on anybody’s radar screen. Policy makers cannot do anything about it, however, until they are aware of it. Once a problem is recognized, political parties, interest groups, and individual citizens almost immediately begin proposing and lining up behind particular solutions to the problem. The dynamics of this process are often complicated and unpredictable as groups and individuals calculate the relative plusses and minuses of various alternatives.

After making their calculations, individual political leaders and the heads of political parties and interest groups work to build public and political support for their favored alternatives. They hold press conferences, issue press releases, run advertisements in print and on television and in dozens of other ways try to build momentum for their preferred approaches. Over time, two or three of the most viable options emerge. The successful political coalitions that have been built are generally based on contingencies in Congress that support one of the competing proposals. Hearings are held, alternatives are debated, and ultimately the Congress votes. If a majority supports one of the proposed solutions (or some compromise version of one or more of them), the Congress passes legislation authorizing the executive branch to implement the solution. If the president supports the Congress’ proposed solution, he signs the legislation into law and begins work on implementation.

While foreign policy making generally follows this same pattern, it is different in several important ways. First, foreign policy problems are often of such magnitude that they drown out all other issues. As noted above, the president’s natural advantages in foreign policy are amplified by this heightened attention. As various policy solutions are debated, the president’s proposals are always at the center of the deliberations. On policies that are potentially contentious, presidents will often call key congressional leaders to the White House to build consensus. Still, the president is clearly the agenda setter and the leader to which everyone looks.

Perhaps the most important difference between domestic and foreign policy making, however, is the ability of the president to take forceful action without the consent of Congress. Presidents and the Congress have long been at odds with each other over where independent presidential power ends and congressional authority demands that he work in concert with them. The simple fact remains, however, that Congress rarely has the unanimity and will to oppose the actions of a determined president in foreign affairs.

What many consider to be the president’s most significant upper hand in both domestic and foreign policy making is not based on constitutional authority. Teddy Roosevelt once remarked that the greatest power of the presidency was unparalleled access to the “bully pulpit.” In other words, presidents are at the center of the political universe. When they speak, reporters show up and people listen. The same is not true for the average member of Congress. This is especially true in foreign policy making where presidents not only command the attention of the nation, but of other nations — and their leaders — as well. American presidents often rely on public speeches and other public pronouncements, conveyed to the world by the media, to get their message out to the community of nations, thereby building support for their foreign policy agendas even beyond the nation’s borders.