A president's personal character, his approach to the position and circumstances during his term all contribute to presidential behavior. Presidents have approached the office from two vague positions. They have believed, to varying degrees, that either the president has a strong leadership position and broad powers to direct the nation in one direction, or that the president has very limited powers dictated by the Constitution and should act like a chief administrator for the Federal Government. These beliefs were reflected in their behavior while in the White House. Franklin Roosevelt believed that the Federal Government had an obligation and interest in bringing the nation out of the depression.
You only have to examine the ritual patterns of the British media to realise that the Prime Minister is taken as the representative and primary force of the executive and of government in general. If you look at Tony Blair 's control over cabinet meetings, the hiring and firing of ministers, his interference in departmental affairs, his use of civil service appointments and patronage, it 's pretty clear that the Prime Minister is no longer the mere leader of the cabinet, but the executive superior to the cabinet. However, one could argue that because the power of the cabinet is dependent on the power of the prime minister, the Prime Ministerial Model of British politics could potentially
Cabinet government model tells us that it’s a reminder that despite the growth of the PM power no PM can survive if he or she loses the support of the cabinet. Cabinet government is kept alive by the fact that PM’s authority is linked to... ... middle of paper ... ...he party. Only that the electorate increasingly demand ‘visible leadership’ rather than old-fashioned party politics as the focal point of government. The Prime Minister is dependent on support from parliament and cannot exist without it. Other sources of authority within the cabinet might pose a threat/challenge or moderate the Prime Minister’s authority (as seen with powerful ministers such Gordon Brown and Mo Mowlam).
Controlling the Parliament and the House of Commons 'The government controls parliament but it cannot always rely on getting its own way.' A tendency to ignore the protestations and activities of parliament in issuing central, top-down directives and 'memos' is a criticism often levied at Tony Blair's Labour administration. It is seen to signify a consolidation of executive power, often represented in the media as control-freakery on the part of the Prime Minister. Although any apparent increase in the power of the executive would be accentuated by the immense size of the 179 seat Labour majority, the present government is widely seen to have taken up a continuing trend towards centralised government, often revolving around Downing Street. It is perhaps largely the power of Blair's mandate in conjunction with the vice-like control of the party whips over MPs that has led to comments such as that of Lord Hailsham that we live under an "elective dictatorship."
The powers of government, and its cohesion under the convention of collective responsibility, ensured that the government could maintain a united front in the face of parliamentary opposition. Within such a system, the PM could be described as "primus inter pares" - first among equals - because, although he was the leading member of the government and its chief spokesman, it was the cabinet rather than the PM that dominated the decision making process. Almost 100 years later, when Richard Crossman edited "the English Constitution he was able to state that the doctrine of cabinet government had itself been replaced by one of prime ministerial government.. Later in his diaries Crossman was able to develop his original theory that the PM dominated the decision making process. The PMs powers have grown over the last 100 years for a variety of reasons: the growth of the franchise has placed the elected government in a position of greater authority; the development of national party organisations after 1870 has tended to exalt the position of party leaders a... ... middle of paper ... ...tion to his colleagues. A PM like Home may have been similar to the 19th century "primus inter pares", but mrs Thatcher has displayed a strength of personality that represents a growth in PM power.
Commanding is only effective in certain situations. Neustadt believes that a persuasive president is a powerful president but in William Howell book Power Without Persuasion, he attacks Neustadt’s point about persuasion in a president. Howell argues that a president does not need to be persuasive in order to be powerful. He believes that a president can become a powerful leader without using persuasion. Howell states that “... effect policy change outside of a bargaining framework" (Howell, pg.
He thinks that regardless of the existence of other influential performers from other branches of the government, the president can act based on many other rights he possesses, such as executive orders and national security directives. These tools will allow him to bypass the traditional legislative process. Despite that both authors define power as president’s prime influence, Howell however argues that president has more capacity in which he can partially decide the outcome of a given situation if not whole. Howell steps further and insists more on the president’s capability despite the fact that Neustadt defines power as individual power. Howell envisions that the President must influence the “content of public policy”, in contrast, Neustadt’s argument is based on the exercise of the “Effective” impact by President.
The Extent of the Prime Minister's Power and Authority In society today people think that the most powerful person in the British government system is the Prime Minister, Tony Blair. However, to what extent does he have power and authority? The Prime Minister doesn’t govern the country alone; the Cabinet as a whole discuss most matters. You could then say that we have Cabinet government as they do supposedly collectively make decisions on matters. The position however of power in one government may differ from that of another, Margaret Thatcher for example rarely used Cabinet at all, John Major on the other hand used it regularly and considered there opinions vital in the decision making process.
Madison ends his writing with the idea that self government succeeds in a large nation with multiple different factions. Certain countries are too large in population to even entertain the idea of self-government, but the suggested plan changes the federal principle as much as necessary so that self-government can become a reality in America. How do federalists relate to today’s society? Democrat’s take a more liberal position, and seem to have the belief that government should be heavily involved in the lives of the American people. This political party often thinks that nearly everything should be under government regulation, their main principle being the belief of big government.
In this system of government there is an overlap on who is part of the executive and who is part of the legislative branch. The prime minister and the members of the legislative branch hold office in both (Phillips, 2012, p.198). Contrary to the “separation of powers” that the presidential system holds, the parliamentary system holds the “fusion on powers”. This makes both branches responsible for administering the daily operations of government departments and also exercising executive powers (Phillips, 2012, p.198). This can be seen as an advantage and a disadvantage at the exact same time.