Comparitive Notes

Roles of the president and Prime Minister

head of state

this role of head of state is held by the president in the United states where it's held by demonic in United Kingdom. This gives the president of far more important symbolic role in leading and uniting the nation compared to Prime Minister. The presidency combines the largest roles and responsibilities in the position of Prime Minister.

Chief diplomat and war powers

the president and Prime Minister are the main negotiators with other countries, representing their country abroad and negotiating with other nations. As such they have significant control in determining the relationship between their country and the rest of the world. This role is limited in both countries by the power of Congress in parliament. The Senate can reject treaties negotiated by the president. In contrast, the Prime Minister has prerogative powers giving them (and not parliament) absolute control over treaties. In practise, it's become a somewhat accepted convention that parliament holds power to reject treaties with prime ministers usually seeking a vote. In addition, the Prime Minister has prerogative powers to declare war without restriction from parliament. Again, in practise there is a great deal of political pressure on prime ministers to seek a vote in parliament before taking military action. The presence influence over military matters is based on their constitutional role as commander in chief of the Armed Services. This appears to give the president complete control over military matters. the US constitution, however, gives Congress apart to cloud war. As with United Kingdom, there is a degree of constitutional ambiguity here.

Chief legislator

in the United States and United Kingdom political leaders have arguably assumed a leading role in the legislative process. the United Kingdom Prime Minister is the head of the party with a majority of seats in parliament and the ability to use patronage Anna whip system to control that majority. In addition, there is an increased media focus on the Prime Minister, which gives them a personal mandate to govern. In the United states, the modern presidency has been able to use a national mandate and superior resources to come known as the chief legislator. On the other hand, or U.S. President faces considerably greater opposition to their political agenda from the legislature then as UK Prime Minister.

Power of the president and Prime Minister

the exact power level of a Prime Minister or president will also be affected by the political context in which they are operating. Once they are fixed constitutional roles and powers, other factors such as the extent of their majority in parliament or Congress can have a major impact from their level of powerful stop other factors include the level of public support on divisions within their party.

U.S. President	UK Prime Minister
has a direct mandate from the public that is separate from the mandate given to Congress will stop there is a complete separation of personnel between the president and the rest of the executive team, on the one hand, and Congress, on the other.	Elected an MP and chosen by the party to be party leader. Power is Fused as the PM sits in government and parliament.
Has power of patronage over the executive branch. No ongoing system apparent over members of Congress.	Has power partners over members of the executive and backbenchers in parliament.
Has completely authority within the executive branch.	The cabinet contains rivals for the prime minister's position with an expectation of collective cabinet decision making
uses the national mandate and control of the executive branch to develop and propose a policy agenda	uses that position as head of government and had a party developer propose a policy agenda
typically access the driving force for legislation based on their national elected position. They use the state of the Union address and propose of the annual budget to help set up political agenda. They can veto legislation passed by Congress. They are often limited by Congress due to the separation of powers and checks and balances	finds it relatively easy to push the government's legislative agenda through parliament given the government majority in whip system. The House of Lords can offer limited resistance to the government's legislative agenda
commander in chief of the armed service but Congress given the power to declare war. Senate must ratify treaties	house royal prerogative powers given control over treaties and military power but increasingly expected to consult parliament.

The accountability of the president and Prime Minister to legislative bodies

U.S. President	UK Prime Minister
separation of powers, separate mandate in cheques and balances promote high levels of cheques from Congress. Possibility divided government.	Parliamentary system, government majority and passionate make parliament relatively passive in restricting the Prime Minister.
Appointments to senior executive positions in the judiciary must be ratified by the Senate.	Appointments to the executive branch are not ratified by parliament. The PM does not appoint members of the judiciary.
Not subject to questions in Congress.	Directly accountable to the Commons at prime minister's Question Time.
Subject to impeachment and removal by the House and Senate if there is evidence that the president has committed a high crime or misdemeanour	subject to a vote of no confidence alongside the rest of government. This can remove the Prime Minister from office

theoretical approaches to comparing executives

	Similarities	differences
rational	both presidents and Prime Minister can use their considerable power to pursue their policy goals. Both can use their power within the executive to benefit themselves by surrounding themselves with supportive cabinet members or by removing those who resist their political agenda	the rationalapproach highlights a significant difference with presidents being given a role to appoint members of the judiciary. Presence can use to gain greater support for their ideological position within the US Supreme Court. Presidents make appointment on ideological basis to benefit themselves in a way that prime ministers are unable to
cultural	both presidents and prime ministers are sometimes influenced by their party or core voter groups when determining their political agenda. Respecting the cultural values of the group means that they may alter their own ideas in the face of the response from their party or add in policies which they feel will be respected by those within their group.	The cultural theory reveals that prime ministers work more closely with their own party in parliament compared to the extent to which presidents work with party members in Congress. As such it is harder for prime ministers to ignore the dominant values of the party. A president is more distant from their party, working separately in the White House to secure support from any groups in Congress that will secure their legislative goals
structural	both presidents and prime ministers are restricted by the legislature in their own country. Both parliament and Congress can block their legislative proposals and even remove them from office	presidents face much stronger structural limitations and prime ministers. Presidents made like a majority in Congress facing a hostile majority, word prime ministers will typically have an absolute majority of seats in the Commons.