Scholars Discuss Evolving Scope of Presidential Power with PEPCON Conference at Hoover

Hoover Institution (Stanford, CA) - Scholars gathered at Hoover Institution for the Presidency and Executive Politics Conference (PEPCON 2026) on April 16-17, 2026, to examine the evolving balance of power between the presidency and other branches of government, spotlighting new research on executive authority, bureaucracy, and media dynamics.

The goal was to highlight innovative research in executive politics and promote dialogue within political science. The conference also offered opportunities for mentorship and scholarly collaboration at all career stages. Visiting fellows Andrew Reeves and Sharece Thrower took the lead in organizing the conference, with supporting roles by the other PEPCON organizers.

"It's so heartening to think about where the field was in the 1990s when I was in graduate school and then to think of where it is now, and see the growth in the interest in [studying] the US presidency," said Brandice Canes-Wrone, director of Hoover's Center for Revitalizing American Institutions (RAI).

The gathering featured research presentations on executive authority, bureaucratic interactions, and the relationship between the presidency and other government branches.

It was made possible by support from RAI as well as the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress and the Weidenbaum Center on the Economy, Government, and Public Policy at Washington University in St. Louis.

Across two days, the scholars presented a range of research that used analysis and datasets to gain insight into how presidents, judges, members of Congress, bureaucrats, and even the news media perform and interact over time.

Some of the research was based on materials in the Hoover Archives. For instance, John Dearborn, assistant professor at Vanderbilt University, presented his findings on how the civil rights revolution altered relationships between the presidents and the executive branch. Using archival sources from the Hoover Archives on President Nixon, he showed how Nixon began to assert presidential authority over the bureaucracy, which was resisting his policy goals.

Hoover Institution Director Condoleezza Rice welcomed the political scientists at the conference and spoke of how their work highlights the evolutionary nature of America's Constitution, which in turn influences how the branches of government interact with one another.

"You never actually have it completely right," she said of those branches' interaction. "It's something you work towards every day."

"Who would have thought, though, that the Constitution would be evergreen enough to start out with my ancestors being [considered] three-fifths of a man, and go on to see me take the oath of office to become the 66^th secretary of state?"

"It takes constant evaluation, thought, tussling with difficult issues," she continued.

Keynote remarks were given by Senior Fellow Michael McConnell during dinner and Senior Fellow emeritus Terry Moe at lunch. McConnell discussed the ways in which recent Supreme Court decisions are reshaping executive power. He highlighted how there are two key aspects of executive power in recent and upcoming cases: the balance of power between the executive and legislative branches and, separately, the influence of the president over the executive branch.

The case on tariffs earlier this termhighlighted the first type-the US Supreme Court's willingness to restrain executive power when it conflicts with legislative prerogatives. In particular, in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, the court ruled that the president had exceeded the authority granted by 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). By comparison, in Trump v. Slaughter, heard in October 2025, the court is deciding whether the president has the authority to fire commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission, an independent agency, without cause.

As McConnell pointed out, even if the court rules in favor of the Trump administration on this case, thereby expanding presidential power over the administrative state, it has curbed it in other ways when the balance of power with the legislative branch is considered.

Moe focused on his recent book with co-author William Howell about the rise of executive power, especially with respect to presidential control of the administrative state. Moe discussed how the liberal orientation of many administrative agencies can make Republican presidents less trusting of the administrative state than Democratic presidents and therefore seek stronger presidential control of agencies.

Many of the papers and projects presented by invited guests involved novel datasets to explain trends in executive power and presidential interactions with other branches of government.

For instance, Benjamin Noble of the University of California, San Diego, explained how the structure and content of a White House daily press briefing can shape or detract from the president's agenda.

He found that when the briefing included a special guest such as a cabinet member, senior law enforcement official, or top general, it is 10 percent more likely to set the media coverage, meaning the questions asked by reporters and the coverage after the briefing would match the topics advanced by White House communications staff.

Other presentations focused on how the executive branch can act to marshal immense resources toward a particular policy area via executive order-but when a successor pares them back, there is little change or public gain.

One such program is the 1033 Program, which allows the Department of Defense to give local law enforcement agencies weapons and surplus vehicles. Kenneth Lowande of the University of Michigan looked into how a series of presidential administrations managed, increased, and curtailed the program's scope and size over a number of years.

He found that participating in the 1033 program made a jurisdiction's police much more likely to support a Republican for president. But he also found that whether 1033 grants of equipment grew or shrank, the program did little or nothing to reduce crime, improve officer safety, or encourage the proper use of force.

Other presentations at PEPCON focused on the impact personnel changes within the federal bureaucracy can have on external parties, such as private businesses bidding on federal contracts.

Kyuwon Lee of the University of Southern California examined the career paths of 34,000 government contracting officers between 2001 and 2024, and 2,666 businesses between 2004 and 2024. She found that businesses that hired former government contracting officials typically saw gains in the volume of government contracts earned after the hiring.

Her research indicated that hiring a former contracting officer leads to an average increase of about 250 percent in the government contracts earned by a private firm.

Looking at cabinet members and presidentially nominated, Senate-confirmed leadership positions in government, Yale University's Christina Kinane looked at the differences in rate of appearance before Congress between those "acting" in their roles and those formally confirmed.

She found that the personnel acting in presidential-level, Senate-appointed positions had increased from about 11 percent of roles under President Reagan to about 24-25 percent today. These "acting" appointees appear to testify before committees only 25 percent as often as Senate-approved officials, she found.