{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012612612612612612, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.698795180722891, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Judging Presidential Performance on House & Senate Roll Calls

How successful should we expect presidents to be in their relationships with the House and Senate? An answer to this question is central to making informed judgments about their effectiveness. Professors Hammond and Fraser show how quantitative and circumstance-sensitive standards for judging presidential performance can be developed. Applying these standards to presidents from Eisenhower to Carter, they suggest that the reputations of some of these presidents would bear reconsideration.