Constitutional Theory Vs Presidential Theory

The constitutional theory and the modern theory are two prominent frameworks of presidency seen in American history. The constitutional theory is a framework of presidency that the president confines his powers to ones strictly given in the constitution. The modern theory of presidency is a framework that the president explores the options and gains of power; use of more external factors and less restraint of the constitution. Throughout American history, from first president, George Washington to later presidents, these frameworks covered most of the actual practices implemented by American presidents. The two frameworks, however, at times differ greatly from each other, in terms of practice and focus. Despite their contrasting differences
The passage of time marked the importance of media, the remedy that enabled presidents to directly promote and present themselves to America (Kernell et al. 2014, p. 331). Theodore Roosevelt was the pioneer of the using the press and mass media, he leaked information, made proclamation to headline newspapers (Patterson 1976, p. 50). The modern theory explains the presidential power rose because Roosevelt use the press to pressure Congress and used the reporters to increase his popularity. Fast-forward into mid-late 20th century and media became more influential with the new technological invention of the television. Media then became more important for presidents to gain power, where they came relied on their popularity to gain support of the nation that overshadows Congress. Minor presidential addresses exponentially increased as Reagan, Carter and Nixon quadrupled the amount of minor addresses that Truman, Roosevelt and Hoover, not to mention triple of that in the past two decades (Kernell et al. 2014, p. 333). Modern presidency provided that presidential power rose significantly as presidents capitalized on the media advancement in past century to gain more public influence over
The constitutional theory provides that conservatively presidents aren’t full accustomed or adept to use their constitutional power to veto and not using the arguably most formidable remedy against Congress may prove costly (Kernell et al. 2014, p. 325). The consequence is of not maximizing the power to veto is allowing Congress to be less considerate of the president while making decisions (Kernell et al. 2014, p. 326). As it shows that number of average vetoes per year has fluctuated in the past century but on definite decline in past three decades (Kernell et al. 2014, p. 326). The general negative linear correlation in the number of vetoes help explain that the inadequate use of constitutional power, is a limiter the Congress has on the