| In the Role of the Military, how does the UK and US differ? | -In the UK: Parliament should be Consulted on the Commitment of British Troops. The Queen is the Head of Armed Troops, though it is Delegated to the PM
-In the US: The President is Commander-in-Chief and has Circumvented the Congressional Power to Declare War |
| In the Role of the Judicial, how does the UK and US differ? | -In the UK: The Queen has the Royal Prerogative of Mercy, which isn't fully delegated to the PM. Furthermore, Justices are Appointed Independently to the Supreme Court via the Judicial Appointments Commission
-In the US: The President has the Power of Pardon. The President can also Nominate Supreme Court Justices and Alter the Ideological Balance of the Courts |
| In the Role of the Legislative, how does the UK and US differ? | -In the UK: The Manifesto of the Winning Party with a Majority will essentially Pass Parliament. The PM can also chose its own Cabinet, and is Subject to Collective Responsibility
-In the US: The President can Suggest, but not Initiate Legislation. They can Veto it though. The President chooses a Cabinet, which acts as an Advisory Group |
| In the Role of Ceremonial, how does the UK and US differ? | -In the UK: Many Ceremonial Roles are Carried out by the Queen
-In the US: The President, being the Head of State and Head of Government, carries out the Ceremonial Duties |
| In the Role of Representing the Nation, how do the UK and US differ? | -In the UK: The PM, or the King, will represent and speak to the Nation. It also showcases Britain in Global Organisations
-In the US: The President will Represent and Speak to the Nation. It also showcases the United States in Global Organisations |
| So what are the similarities between the British Prime Minister and the American President? | -Both the President and the PM depend on Charisma and Personality Over and Above the Powers they are Given. The Power to Persuade is Very Powerful
-Both are Responsible for Appointments within their Executive Branch
-Both assume the Role of Commander-in-Chief
-Both represent the Country on a National and International Stage. Both Controls Foreign Policy
-Both can see their Power Fluctuate depending on the Control of the Legislature and other Factors |
| What are the Differences between the British Prime Minister and the American President? | -The PM is the head of Government but not the Head of State. The President is both the Head of Government and State
-The President has a Direct Mandate from the People, whereas the PM holds Power only by Leading the Main Party
-The PM heads the Executive, but the Cabinet is Collective and can Force the PM out of his Job. The President is the Executive and the Cabinet is only the Advisory
-The President is Bound by a Written Constitution limiting their Powers and their Impeachment. The Unwritten Constitution in Britain gives the PM Flexibility in Power
-The UK is a Unitary State, giving the PM Power over the Entire Nation, where as the President shares Sovereignty with the Other Branches of Government and the States |
| What are the Impacts of the President and Prime Minister on Politics and Government? | -Legislative: The PM and President sets up the Legislative Programme for their Nation, and thus Public Policy. However, the PM can control more the Content of Legislation due to Parliament's Unitary Power and Majority Control.
-Government: The PM is the head of a Government of Fused Powers. The Supreme Court has no Constitutional Sovereign Power - Parliament not Binding to the. The President has More Control over the People in Government, Appointing Cabinet Members and SCOTUS Justices, but once they are in, its Limited Influence
-Parties: The President is usually Seen as the Head of their Party, but they're not. The PM does Head their own Party though |
| What are the Extent of their Accountability to the US and UK Legislatures? | -Legislative: The President is Dependent on Congress for Passing their legislative Programme. The PM usually has a Majority in the House, and can whip the Vote!
-Foreign Policy: The President and the PM can Act on Behalf of the Nation in Foreign Policy. The President will be more Challenged when Congress is Lost to the other Party (i.e. Obama with Iran, Syria and Afghanistan) but the PM can usually get their own way (But Really?)
-Second Chambers: The President has the Senate to be concerned about, seeing how the Senate can Block their Appointments to the Supreme Court and the Cabinet. The House of Lords, however, does very Little to the UK PM |
| Why is Rational Theory the best way to view the Presidents and PM Actions? | -Actions taken by the PM and President may be done to Protect their Positions of Power or to Enact Policy they Personally Favoured. Cameron with Same Sex Marriage, Biden with Funding for Ukraine, Sunak for Rwanda.. |
| Why can Cultural theory also help with viewing the President and PM actions? | -The PM must act in a way with their own Party Lines rather than Personal Belief. This is because they depend on the Party's Support in Parliament. Presidential Policies also must make sense with the Party as well obviously? Most Politicians join the Party which, Personally, they have a Shared Belief with |
| Why can Structural theory help with Viewing the President and PM actions? | -Structural Theory helps to examine the Extent of Power. A President threatening to Veto Legislation, if it knew Congress would Override it would be Priceless. Many of the President's Decisions must be Weighed against the Likelihood of the C+B System being Effective. In the UK, the PM has Powerful Whips allowing the PM to Dominate Parliament. With Fused Powers, the PM can do whatever it needs with little Compromise |
