The Gatekeepers

Introduction

In the complex world of American politics, one role stands out as both crucial and often overlooked: the White House Chief of Staff. Chris Whipple's book "The Gatekeepers" sheds light on this pivotal position, exploring how it has shaped presidencies from Nixon to Obama. This behind-the-scenes look at the inner workings of the White House reveals the immense power and responsibility that comes with being the president's right-hand person.

The role of Chief of Staff is often described as the second most powerful job in Washington, and for good reason. These individuals are tasked with managing the president's schedule, controlling access to the Oval Office, and often acting as the primary advisor on critical decisions. They are the gatekeepers of the White House, filtering information and people to ensure the president can focus on the most important matters of state.

Whipple's book takes us on a journey through modern American history, showing how different Chiefs of Staff have influenced their presidents and, by extension, the course of the nation. From the pioneering work of H.R. Haldeman under Nixon to the challenges faced by Obama's team, "The Gatekeepers" offers a fascinating glimpse into the corridors of power.

The Birth of the Modern Chief of Staff

Nixon and Haldeman: Setting the Template

The role of White House Chief of Staff as we know it today took shape during Richard Nixon's presidency. Nixon, determined to avoid the organizational pitfalls of his predecessor Lyndon B. Johnson, turned to H.R. Haldeman to create a more structured White House operation.

Haldeman revolutionized the role by:

1. Controlling access to the president
2. Organizing White House procedures
3. Acting as the first and last person the president spoke to each day

This new system aimed to keep the president focused on his main policy goals by shielding him from unnecessary distractions. Haldeman's iron grip on the White House earned him the nickname "The Berlin Wall," a testament to his effectiveness in controlling information flow.

However, Haldeman's tenure also highlighted the potential dangers of concentrating too much power in one person's hands. As Nixon's paranoia grew, Haldeman struggled to keep the president in check. The Watergate scandal, which ultimately led to Nixon's resignation, showed the limits of even the most powerful Chief of Staff's influence.

Despite its inglorious end, the Nixon-Haldeman partnership set the template for future White House operations. The lessons learned during this period would shape how subsequent administrations approached the role of Chief of Staff.

The Ford Years: Rumsfeld and Cheney

Steadying the Ship

When Gerald Ford assumed the presidency following Nixon's resignation, he inherited a White House in crisis. To restore order and public confidence, Ford turned to Donald Rumsfeld as his Chief of Staff.

Rumsfeld, known for his no-nonsense approach and organizational skills, agreed to take on the role under three conditions:

1. Complete authority over the president's schedule
2. Top advisor status in all decision-making
3. A promise of a future cabinet position

With these powers, Rumsfeld set about reorganizing the White House. He brought in his young deputy, Dick Cheney, to help implement a tight schedule and streamlined information flow, much like the Haldeman model.

Despite their efforts, Ford's presidency was marred by public gaffes and the lingering effects of the Nixon pardon. When Ford found himself trailing badly in the polls against Jimmy Carter, Rumsfeld and Cheney orchestrated a major staff shakeup known as the "Halloween Massacre." This reorganization saw Rumsfeld move to Secretary of Defense and Cheney step up as the new Chief of Staff.

Although Cheney managed to improve Ford's standing somewhat, it wasn't enough to overcome the narrow margin that gave Carter the presidency in 1976. The Ford years demonstrated the importance of a strong Chief of Staff in navigating political crises, but also showed that even the most competent staff couldn't always overcome larger political forces.

Carter's Mistake: The Absence of a Chief

The Perils of DIY Management

Jimmy Carter's presidency serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of trying to manage the White House without a strong Chief of Staff. Carter, believing he could handle the job's demands himself, initially resisted appointing a formal Chief of Staff.

This decision led to several problems:

1. Overwhelming workload for the president
2. Lack of clear priorities
3. Difficulty in managing crises effectively

Carter soon found himself bogged down in details, unable to focus on the big picture. The absence of a strong gatekeeper meant that Carter was constantly bombarded with information and requests, leaving him little time for strategic thinking.

The consequences of this management style became apparent as Carter faced multiple crises, including:

• The Iranian Revolution and subsequent oil price spike
• The Iran hostage crisis
• Economic troubles at home

It wasn't until his approval ratings hit rock bottom that Carter finally appointed Jack Watson as his formal Chief of Staff, just four months before the 1980 election. While Watson managed to bring some order to the White House, it was too late to save Carter's presidency.

The Carter years clearly demonstrated the need for a strong Chief of Staff to manage the complex operations of the White House and allow the president to focus on high-level decision-making.

Reagan's Revolving Door: Four Chiefs in Eight Years

The Baker Era: Co-Presidency and Economic Challenges

Ronald Reagan's presidency began with the appointment of James Baker as Chief of Staff. Baker, a pragmatic Washington insider, effectively acted as a co-president, particularly when it came to domestic policy.

Baker's main achievements included:

1. Successfully pushing through Reagan's economic agenda (Reaganomics)
2. Navigating the challenges of a recession
3. Convincing Reagan to raise taxes when necessary

Baker's political acumen and ability to work with Congress were crucial in implementing Reagan's vision. However, by the end of Reagan's first term, Baker was exhausted and orchestrated a job swap with Treasury Secretary Don Regan.

The Regan Disaster: Iran-Contra and Resignation

Don Regan's tenure as Chief of Staff was marked by controversy and ultimately led to one of the biggest scandals of the Reagan presidency. Regan lacked Baker's political tact and struggled to manage the White House effectively.

The Iran-Contra affair, in which the administration secretly sold weapons to Iran to fund Nicaraguan rebels, erupted during Regan's watch. This scandal severely damaged Reagan's credibility and led to Regan's resignation.

Baker's Return and Duberstein's Legacy

Howard Baker, a former Senate Majority Leader, stepped in to replace Regan. His main achievement was convincing Reagan to apologize to the nation for the Iran-Contra scandal, helping to restore some of the president's credibility.

When Baker left to support his wife through cancer treatment, his deputy Kenneth Duberstein took over. Duberstein played a crucial role in shaping Reagan's foreign policy legacy, particularly by encouraging the president to deliver his famous "tear down this wall" speech in Berlin.

The Reagan years demonstrated the impact that different Chiefs of Staff can have on a presidency. From Baker's co-presidency to Regan's missteps and Duberstein's influence on foreign policy, each Chief left their mark on the administration.

Bush Sr.'s Struggle: The Wrong Chiefs at the Wrong Time

Sununu's Arrogance and Downfall

George H.W. Bush's presidency got off to a promising start with John Sununu as Chief of Staff. Sununu's confidence and connections on Capitol Hill initially helped Bush achieve some policy victories, particularly in environmental regulation.

However, Sununu's arrogance soon became a liability:

1. He alienated White House staff
2. His use of military aircraft for personal trips became a scandal
3. He lacked support when controversy struck

The media's revelation of Sununu's expensive personal trips on military aircraft forced Bush to replace him, damaging the administration's image in the process.

Skinner's Ineffectiveness and the Return of Baker

Bush's next choice, Samuel Skinner, proved to be equally problematic but for different reasons. Where Sununu was too aggressive, Skinner was too reserved. He struggled to rally the staff and became overwhelmed as Bush's re-election campaign faltered.

In a last-ditch effort to save his presidency, Bush turned once again to James Baker. However, with less than three months before the election and facing a struggling economy and Bill Clinton's charismatic campaign, even Baker couldn't turn things around.

Bush's experience highlights the critical importance of choosing the right Chief of Staff. The wrong choice can hamper a president's ability to govern effectively and respond to crises, ultimately contributing to electoral defeat.

Clinton's Chaotic Start and Eventual Recovery

The Dorm Room Oval Office

Bill Clinton's presidency began with a mistake similar to Carter's: trying to be his own Chief of Staff. While he technically appointed his childhood friend Mack McLarty to the position, McLarty was unable to say no to the president or impose the necessary discipline.

The result was chaos in the White House:

1. The Oval Office resembled a college dorm room
2. There was little structure to meetings or schedules
3. Policy initiatives stalled due to lack of organization

This disorder prevented Clinton from achieving his early policy goals and contributed to the Democrats' massive losses in the 1994 midterm elections.

Panetta Brings Order

Recognizing the need for change, Clinton appointed Leon Panetta as his new Chief of Staff. Panetta, who had previously served as Director of the Office of Management and Budget, demanded and received full authority to reorganize the White House.

Panetta's impact was immediate and significant:

1. He imposed strict discipline on the White House staff
2. He helped rebrand Clinton as an organized and unifying leader
3. He navigated the administration through challenges like the government shutdown and the Oklahoma City bombing response

Under Panetta's leadership, Clinton's approval ratings rose, and the economy improved, leading to his re-election in 1996.

Weathering Scandal and Finishing Strong

Clinton's second term saw two more Chiefs of Staff: Erskine Bowles and John Podesta. They faced the challenge of guiding the administration through the Lewinsky scandal and subsequent impeachment proceedings.

Podesta, in particular, helped Clinton use executive powers effectively in his final years, creating new national parks and issuing numerous presidential pardons despite Republican control of Congress.

The Clinton years demonstrate how a strong Chief of Staff can turn around a floundering administration and help a president overcome even major scandals to achieve policy goals.

Bush Jr.'s Presidency: The Shadow Chief of Staff

The Cheney Factor

George W. Bush's presidency was unique in that while Andy Card held the title of Chief of Staff, much of the power traditionally associated with the role was wielded by Vice President Dick Cheney.

Cheney's influence was particularly strong in national security matters:

1. He was a driving force behind the War on Terror
2. He advocated for expanded surveillance operations
3. He pushed for controversial interrogation techniques

This arrangement created a divided White House, with Card managing day-to-day operations while Cheney set much of the administration's agenda, especially in foreign policy.

The Iraq War and Its Aftermath

The decision to invade Iraq in 2003 was largely driven by Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, often overriding dissenting voices within and outside the administration. As the war became increasingly unpopular and mistakes mounted, tensions within the White House grew.

Bolton's Tenure and the Financial Crisis

Joshua Bolton replaced Card as Chief of Staff in 2006 and managed to bring more order to the White House. His key achievements included:

1. Convincing Bush to replace Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense
2. Guiding the administration's response to the 2008 financial crisis

Bolton's calm leadership during the financial crisis, particularly in advocating for the purchase of toxic assets to stabilize the economy, helped prevent an even worse economic disaster.

The Bush Jr. years highlight the potential complications when the traditional role of the Chief of Staff is undermined by other powerful figures in the administration.

Obama's Learning Curve: From Insider to Outsider

Emanuel's Controversial Tenure

Barack Obama came into office promising change, but his choice of Washington insider Rahm Emanuel as his first Chief of Staff raised eyebrows. Emanuel's approach often clashed with Obama's campaign promises:

1. He pushed for more centrist positions on issues like healthcare reform
2. His aggressive style alienated some Democratic allies
3. He advocated for bipartisan compromises that diluted Obama's original vision

After heavy losses in the 2010 midterm elections, Emanuel left to pursue his ambition of becoming Chicago's mayor.

The Daley Experiment

Obama's next choice, William Daley, was intended to improve relations with the business community. However, Daley's CEO-style management clashed with Obama's more liberal advisors, leading to a short and ineffective tenure.

Finding Stability with McDonough

Denis McDonough, who took over as Chief of Staff for Obama's second term, provided more stability. Faced with a Republican-controlled Congress, McDonough helped Obama focus on using executive orders to secure his legacy, particularly in areas like:

1. Restoring relations with Cuba
2. Negotiating the Iran nuclear deal
3. Signing the Paris climate accord

Obama's experience with different Chiefs of Staff shows the importance of finding someone who can balance Washington experience with loyalty to the president's vision.

Lessons from the Gatekeepers

The Power of Organization

Throughout the book, one theme becomes clear: the most effective Chiefs of Staff are those who can bring order to the chaos of the White House. From Haldeman's strict control under Nixon to Panetta's turnaround of the Clinton administration, organization is key to a successful presidency.

Balancing Act: Advisor and Gatekeeper

The best Chiefs of Staff manage to balance their roles as both advisor to the president and gatekeeper of the Oval Office. They must be willing to give honest, sometimes unwelcome advice while also protecting the president from unnecessary distractions.

Adapting to the President's Style

Each president has their own management style, and the most successful Chiefs of Staff are those who can adapt to these differences. Whether it's working with a hands-on president like Carter or a more delegating leader like Reagan, flexibility is crucial.

Crisis Management

Many of the most memorable moments in recent presidential history have been defined by how Chiefs of Staff helped their presidents navigate crises. From Watergate to 9/11 to the 2008 financial crisis, the ability to manage high-pressure situations is a key skill for any Chief of Staff.

The Dangers of Overreach

The book also highlights the potential dangers when Chiefs of Staff accumulate too much power. Haldeman's role in the Watergate scandal and Cheney's influence over foreign policy under Bush Jr. serve as cautionary tales about the need for checks and balances even within the White House.

Conclusion: The Indispensable Role

"The Gatekeepers" makes a compelling case for the critical importance of the White House Chief of Staff in shaping the success or failure of a presidency. Through detailed accounts of different administrations, Whipple shows how this often-overlooked role can make or break a president's ability to govern effectively.

The book offers several key takeaways:

1. A strong Chief of Staff is essential for a well-functioning White House
2. The role requires a unique combination of political savvy, organizational skills, and personal loyalty
3. Different presidencies call for different types of Chiefs of Staff
4. The position has evolved over time but remains crucial to presidential success

As American politics continues to evolve, the role of the White House Chief of Staff is likely to remain as important as ever. Future presidents would do well to heed the lessons of their predecessors in choosing and empowering these crucial gatekeepers.

In the end, "The Gatekeepers" not only provides a fascinating look behind the scenes of the highest office in the land but also offers valuable insights into the nature of power, leadership, and governance in the modern era. It's a must-read for anyone interested in understanding how the American presidency really works and the often-unsung heroes who help shape the course of history from just outside the Oval Office.