Donald J. Trump ran on a platform that, among other things, promised to "drain the swamp" that is Washington, DC. Part of that draining would entail what his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, would call "the deconstruction of the administrative state." Set in the political environment of 2020, with a raging pandemic and nationwide protests, this work examines the philosophy that guides the Trump Administration's approach and the mechanisms by which it seeks to accomplish the deconstruction. By combining journalistic accounts with presidential and public administration scholarship, the book raises questions about the impact of Trump's approach on the future of public administration. As such, this work makes a strong contribution to public administration and presidential studies and casts a scholarly light on treatments of Trump's contribution to governance and politics. This new edition brings the narrative up to date and speculates about the future of the administrative state and our democracy in the aftermath of January 6th under the new Biden Administration and future presidents. "A powerful defense of the administrative state and equally powerful indictment of the attempts of Donald Trump and his ilk to deconstruct it. The growing threats to our democracy go beyond the malignant acts of courts, state legislatures, and Congress. To overlook the administrative branch is to miss a large piece of the danger we face as a nation."-Thomas E. Patterson, Bradlee Professor of Government & the Press, Harvard University "President Donald Trump launched an unprecedented assault on American federal government. This book provides a thorough assessment of how that assault proceeded and the dangers it posed. This is an essential guide for scholars in public administration and political science, as well as students of American history."-Alasdair Roberts, Professor of Public Policy, University of Massachusetts Amherst

Donald J. Trump ran on a platform that, among other things, promised to "drain the swamp" that is Washington, DC. Part of that draining would entail what his chief strategist, Steve Bannon, would call "the deconstruction of the administrative state." Set in the political environment of 2020, with a raging pandemic and nationwide protests, this work examines the philosophy that guides the Trump Administration's approach and the mechanisms by which it seeks to accomplish the deconstruction. By combining journalistic accounts with presidential and public administration scholarship, the book raises questions about the impact of Trump's approach on the future of public administration. As such, this work makes a strong contribution to public administration and presidential studies and casts a scholarly light on treatments of Trump's contribution to governance and politics.

The 2020 presidential selection process is already underway. As the political parties finalize their nominating rules and the states jostle for an advantageous contest date, potential challengers are being identified and sized up by party insiders. Once again, media and popular attention will be disproportionately focused on the candidates' performance in the first and earliest of the state nominating contests-and on how quickly the sequence of primaries and caucuses winnows the field and identifies the presumptive nominees. But what are the implications of a sequential and front-loaded nominating calendar that gives some voters outsized influence while leaving many others with a constrained choice-or no choice-in the selection of their party's presidential nominee? Reforming the Presidential Nominating Process: Front-Loading's Consequences and the National Primary Solution critiques the contemporary nominating process from the perspective of voters and their right to effectively participate in their parties' selection of a presidential nominee. Employing both a common-sense and legal, rights-based framework to invite a constitutionally grounded conversation on the legitimacy of the current presidential nominating process, Lisa K. Parshall argues that timing of participation in the nomination goes hand-in-hand with the right to choose a candidate and the fairest way to restore the promise of meaningful and timely participation for all voters is by adopting a same-day national primary. Viewed from the party membership perspective, this work illuminates the fundamental interests at stake that should be considered in any potential reform of the presidential nominating system.

The 2020 presidential selection process is already underway. As the political parties finalize their nominating rules and the states jostle for an advantageous contest date, potential challengers are being identified and sized up by party insiders. Once again, media and popular attention will be disproportionately focused on the candidates' performance in the first and earliest of the state nominating contests-and on how quickly the sequence of primaries and caucuses winnows the field and identifies the presumptive nominees. But what are the implications of a sequential and front-loaded nominating calendar that gives some voters outsized influence while leaving many others with a constrained choice-or no choice-in the selection of their party's presidential nominee? Reforming the Presidential Nominating Process: Front-Loading's Consequences and the National Primary Solution critiques the contemporary nominating process from the perspective of voters and their right to effectively participate in their parties' selection of a presidential nominee. Employing both a common-sense and legal, rights-based framework to invite a constitutionally grounded conversation on the legitimacy of the current presidential nominating process, Lisa K. Parshall argues that timing of participation in the nomination goes hand-in-hand with the right to choose a candidate and the fairest way to restore the promise of meaningful and timely participation for all voters is by adopting a same-day national primary. Viewed from the party membership perspective, this work illuminates the fundamental interests at stake that should be considered in any potential reform of the presidential nominating system.