Relative Power

The Roosevelts are a most American dynasty, as Theodore Roosevelt (progressive Republican, man of action) and Franklin Delano Roosevelt (progressive Democrat, suffered from polio, steeled the nation in depression and war) were at once so different yet so similar. Theodore served in the state legislature, was governor of New York, assistant secretary of the Navy and president -- and Franklin pursued the exact same path to the White House. He even married Theodore's favorite niece, Eleanor, whom Theodore gave away at the marriage ceremony.

"TR encouraged him to enter politics, though he lamented that he was a Democrat instead of a Republican," says Jean Edward Smith, a historian at Marshall University and author of "FDR." Was there any contemporaneous grumbling among the pundits, digs from his enemies at the time, about the prospect of another Roosevelt? On the contrary. "Much of the press coverage, early on, would focus on him being a Democratic Roosevelt," Smith says. "Franklin traded on it his entire career. It was plus all the way for FDR. No downside to it. None at all."

As a dynasty, the Roosevelts are instructive in another way. After FDR, the political lineage does not end, but diminishes, then withers. Two sons go into Congress, as Democrats representing New York and California. One son marries into the du Pont family, which opposed and despised FDR. Another seconds the nomination of Dwight Eisenhower at the Republican National Convention in 1952.

As Hess says, American political dynasties have been mercurial and fluid. Many of the founding families played their roles and then departed the stage. George Washington had no children of his own. His stepson Jackie, who joined him at the siege of Yorktown, died of camp fever. Similarly, there was no long line of Jeffersons or Madisons or Lincolns clamoring for public office. ("Looked at another way," says Rakove, "the story of America's political dynasties may be that there are conspicuously few.")

"It's not as if the families stay too long," Hess says. "Oh, maybe there's a Kennedy who stayed too long, but by and large, they left the scene gracefully. If you look at history through a long enough lens, what happens is that they either lose interest in us, or we lose interest in them, and they fade away."

Has it been good for us? "Taking the long view," says Hess, "they've done well by us and we've done well by these people." Mostly. Among any top 10 lists tabulated by historians, there are presidents from the established dynasties. Who would wish to exclude Theodore or Franklin Delano Roosevelt or John Adams? John F. Kennedy galvanized a generation of young activists and William Howard Taft's administration was known for trust-busting and an improved postal service.

But it is also true there have been a lot of backbenchers the nation could have done without. President William Henry Harrison and his grandson President Benjamin Harrison? Mediocre? The Taft in the national spotlight now is Bob Taft, governor of Ohio, who left office just last year -- with a 7 percent approval rating and four criminal misdemeanor convictions.

In a nation of 300 million citizens, the small pool theory no longer applies, so something keeps these families in office. Access to networks of fundraisers? That's one explanation. Political skills learned at a parent's knee? A sense of stewardship -- or an appetite for power? Does a distracted electorate prefer the ease of a brand name? Lexis, Chevy, Target, Macy's, Bush, Clinton.

A truly historical assessment about current and contending members of the Bush and Clinton political dynasties will be made in the future, when we all will be judged. In the meantime, Chelsea Clinton and the Bush twins will be eligible to run for the White House in 2017.