The office of president today is very different from that envisaged by the framers of the constitution in 1787- the circumstances that have given rise to modern presidential power could not have been foreseen. However some argue that the office of president is one of inherent weakness rather than strength, and that the powers of the president were no guarantee that power could actually be exercised. In his view, presidential leadership was possible only when there were extraordinary crisis conditions such as depression or war. F.D. Roosevelt is often given as an example of such a president.…
One argument for is that the cabinet includes more than one political party, this means that the Prime Minister has to confer, with other MP’s and with the other party in the coalition, on all matters. This limits the patronage and decision-making power of the Prime Minister, and that he/ she has to share their power with another party, in order to come to a decision that both parties are happy with. An example of this was when the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats had to discuss the annual Spending Review and decide which taxes they should raise and cut. This led to both parties wanting to cut different taxes, which the other party wanted to raise, such as housing. If only one party was in government and the one Prime Minister had all the power, then they would have been able to cut and raise the taxes they wanted to, but being in a coalition meant that they had to come to a group agreement, where both parties weren’t entirely happy. This argument is quite strong because if the Prime Minister has to share his/ her powers it means it is harder for the cabinet to come to a decision, however it does lead to the decision being fairer and appealing to a wider range of the population.…
Richard Neustadt’s Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents discusses the powers of the president and the way in which these functions have changed in the most recent centuries. He first notes the importance of persuasion, which, when successful, creates more beneficial and lasting outcomes than if the leader had simply used his or her ability to give commands. Furthermore, the author goes on to state that national chief executive officers should be more “skeptical than trustful, more curious than committed.” () Likewise, he or she should be surrounded with a variety of opinions from trusted advisors in order to promote decisions that result in the best outcome for the most amount of people. Moving on, the writer speaks of the great shift…
Identify & Explain factors which influence the degree of power a Prime Minister has. Include examples of Blair, Brown and Cameron.…
Next, the presidents are expected to set out their own political agendas. Failure to do so would now be seen as a major deficiency and a weakness in political leadership. Then, the new presidential rhetorical strategy encourages the president to speak directly to the people instead of congress. Finally, the president rely less on reason, argument and evidence to support their persuasion. Instead, they tend to inspire and move the passion of the public to achieve their presidential agenda.…
Americans admire a powerful president but fear a strong centralized leader. We want a president to be both common, like an American, and uncommon, greater than every American. In dealing with problems, he has to be both decent and manipulative, to above politics in some and highly political in others.…
The two perspectives on Presidential power are power as persuasion and unilateral power. Since Presidents’ power is to persuade, they have far less formal power than the necessary to meet the large expectations over them. Presidents take to office their goals and expectations for public policy, but to accomplish these, they must work with the Congress. Congress and the presidency were created to avoid one single institution from having control over policymaking. Presidents’ power involves the bargaining that derives from their position, reputation, prestige and reputation (Howell). They make their personal impact on the choices of what should be said or done, how and when.…
The executive is made up of the Prime Minister (PM) acting in place on the monarch and a group of ministers known as the PMs Cabinet. All cabinet members (including the PM) are members’ of the Privy Council and must also be members of the Commons or the Lord’s, by convention most being from the Commons. Therefore the executive is borne out of the legislature and directly accountable to it. The executive has many functions, such as the power of patronage which is vested in the PM, the setting of the agenda for government and the prioritising of legislation. The close union between the executive and the legislature is prima facie, a potential for abuse as liberal democratic theory calls for a separation between powers.…
Over two hundred years ago people were asking how powerful should the president be? Is he too powerful now? Today, in the twenty-first century, political scientist, constituent, and even politicians are asking the same questions. One of the most notable debates over this subject stems from a disagree between Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Hamilton preferred a larger executive while Jefferson preferred a smaller one. When George Washington declared neutrality during a war between Britain and France, Jefferson did not believe that Washington had the constitutional power to do this. Hamilton decided to respond; he did so by publishing articles under the pseudonym, Pacificus.…
Text’s concern: power as it is used to affect who will hold government office and how government will behave…
He/She chairs cabinet meetings and has the powers to call consensus in such meetings. The lack of security of tenure among cabinet ministers means that any cabinet minister deemed hostile to the Prime Minister can be fired (Savoie, 2009). Therefore the cabinet ministers have no incentive to revolt or stand their ground against the Prime Minister especially when it is only a small number of cabinet ministers holding an opinion contrary to that of the Prime Minister. Therefore, Savoie, (2000) argues that ministerial powers do not flow from the ministers but from the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister also appoints many office bearers who are responsible for providing checks and balances to his government. This includes officers such as the Auditor General, and governor of the Bank of Canada.…
Cabinet : Chosen by the PM from the governing caucu, these Ministers run major departments of the government such as Defence, Foreign Affairs, Justice etc…They determine government policy. In the Crown`s eyes, they are the government.…
Coupled with this power are constraints “without which the U.S. Presidency would be more of an imperial presidency rather than democratic” (Harris, 2012, p. 37). The aforementioned categories show the respective classes of the powers and roles of an American president. The presidency is a revered institution in the United States of America. This is because of the relevance and sanity that it injects in the whole country. The powers ensure that the president that not overstep his mandate. Additionally, the same powers ensure that the president acts within the constitutionally mandated confines. The president ought to act within the parameters of the requisite…
What is the extent of presidential power?” This is a question that has been debated in the United States since the days of founding the nation. It could be because throughout history, the president has a deep understanding of the government and what it entails. Stepping back to when Americans were just colonists, they dealt with specific situations that made them question their lives as they knew it. Awake from a revolution, the founders of America were concerned with an executive official, one that would run the entire nation in which they wrote down limits to their power. It was because of the former ruling of the British King, one that left the former colonists in distress over how they were being treated and governed. They wanted for future…
In this essay, I will demonstrate that the Prime Minister is powerful and can cause many potential dangers by analyzing different elements inside and outside of our government over the period of different Prime Ministers throughout the Canadian political history.…