American Presidency How Presidents can influence the policymaking process to suit their needs

constitution has created the executive branch and the executive power vested in the hands of the president. In fact, the president cannot act in isolation in running the executive branch. The president depends on the executive office staff and agencies like office of management and council of economic advisors and the policy development offices like the National Security Council. Further, the president selects individual cabinet members who lead the cabinet departments and other non-cabinet-level agencies. All these are mandated to interpret and implement laws passed by congress. All these departments act as advisors, formulating policies, and identifying issues for presidential consideration. In theory, all these divisions of the executive branch function in furthering the goals set by the president.

The presidents

The presidents are the heads of the federal executive branch. As strong as this might sound, the founders of the country created three different government branches and limited the president's powers to ensure he does not influence the policy making process to suit his needs over the nation. However, the president is still powerful in a number of ways and his powers are limited in some ways (Rose, 2007).

Presidents have numerous roles in policymaking. In the context of the unofficial chief of the state, the president is viewed as the symbol of the country. As the official chief executive, he manages the executive and cabinet branches. The president is also the commander in chief of the armed forces, and thus he is at the official top rank of the military in the country. The constitution vests the president with additional powers, like appointing ambassadors and treaties with foreign countries. All these presidential powers are subject to the consent and advice of the Senate.

Agenda setting

A key tool that presidents can use to influence the policymaking is the ability to place issues on the national agenda and provide a recommended course of action. The presidency is all about framing agendas. The president can influence setting the national agenda through their role as the country leaders and the volume of attention given to presidential decisions, actions, and policy recommendations. Unlike interest groups and other politicians, presidents do not have to work hard to receive media coverage. Whether it is the release of the president's policy proposal, annual state address, a photo shoot, press conference, or release of a report, president's message is continually published. Additionally, the party leader, vice president or the cabinet officers can deliver the president's message (Hao, 2010).

The concept of going public involves appealing directly to the citizens to influence the legislative debates and focus on a certain issue. While doing this, presidents can use support from their country's citizens to obtain the attention of the Congress while swaying the votes of policy decisions. Since the Congress members are more concerned about pleasing their constituencies to gain another chance for re-election, the president seeks the support of the third party: the public, to coerce his politicians to accept his preferences.

It is often advantageous for the presidents to plea an item on the policy agenda in a minimal public manner. For instance, in case a policy is controversial with the public or if the president's party members disagree with his proposal, it can be more effective to promote a policy behind the scenes. The president can carefully let Congress members know the favored policies directly or via intermediaries. Using a combination of threats to members' interests and promises of favors, presidents can influence the outcomes of policy debates in Congress even with no need to go public (Mitchell, 2010).

Besides deciding whether to approach, Congress behind the scenes or publicly, presidents must choose whether to present a preferred policy with less or more detail. A president can present a policy more broadly using contemporary guidelines or principles, or through proposed legislation presented to Congress. All the methods that president uses to convey his goals have pros and cons. If the president presents a policy in a broad manner, Congress can interpret the policy in a manner that the president dislikes. However, if the president presents a specified draft or proposal to the Congress, members of the Congress can view the act as infringing their legislative role and resist working with him.

The success of presidents in nationalizing their policy issues and resolving them according to their preferences relies partly on the extent of the president's available political capital. Political capital refers to the strength of the presidential popularity and his party in Congress and various contexts. Congressional members...

Association with the president's party and the generation of money for their campaigns enhances this (Shull, 2012).
Even the most popular presidents are not always able to dictate issues that should be on the national agenda. However, decisions and events outside the president's control regularly influence what topics should concern the country. The anthrax scare, the subsequent September 11 terrorist attack, the U.S., and subway bombing in Madrid and London all served to put terrorism at the top of a political agenda and policy. Numerous food recalls and concern about avian flu epidemic put food safety and public health issues on the national agenda. However, all other issues have recently been dwarfed by concerns about high unemployment, the federal deficit, and a lagging economy. Therefore, even the most popular president must be responsive to international and national events, which might be beyond their control.

Presidential powers

As previously noted, the president has veto powers of rejecting a bill if Congressional members pass legislation that he dislikes. Nevertheless, the president does not have to use the veto to influence policymaking. The president can be able to persuade Congressional members to change a portion of legislation by threatening to veto it, particularly if it is a piece that is only expected to be passed by a slim majority. Vetoes are used indifferently, with presidents vetoing at least three percent of all legislation until now.

In addition, presidents have the power to issue executive orders. These orders that president gives to federal agencies and their staffs in how to implement some laws are legally binding. Executive orders are often controversial because under the current system of government, Congress, not the executive, is mandated to make laws. For instance, President Truman issued an executive order to integrate the armed forces (Rose, 2007). If the Congress deems that an executive order is contrary to congressional intent, then it has two courses of action. It can amend the law at hand by clarifying its intention and effectively stamping out the executive order that is evidently against the law. Alternatively, Congress can challenge the executive order in court, arguing that the actions of the president exceed his constitutional power.

From the description of the presidency and the presidential powers, it is obvious that presidents have various layers of constituents to influence the policy decisions. Certainly, the president represents all citizens and the country as the nationally elected official. The contemporary presidency varies drastically from the one the framers of the Constitution planned in 1787 (Riley & Brophy-Baermann, 2006). They imagined that the official office had more constrained power, fewer obligations, and a great deal of less organizational structure than today's presidency. There is a belief that presidents can survive solely, and they impart official, administrative, and legal power with alternate extensions of government.

The Constitution says exceptionally in regards to presidential force: The executive power has been vested in the U.S. sitting president. Institutional parity was crucial for agents at the Constitutional Convention. Currently, there is a whole other world to presidential power than the Constitution alone recommends, and that power is determined from numerous sources. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, it was popular for political researchers, history specialists, and reporters to support an influential presidency. By the 1970s, many citizens felt that the Vietnam War was disagreeable. Lyndon Johnson and the war made individuals reassess the part of presidential force (Shull, 2012). In his book, "The Imperial Presidency, history specialist" Arthur Schlesinger, an associate of John Kennedy's, contended that the presidency had become excessively compelling for its citizens. The part of the president changed as America expanded in noticeable quality on the global stage, and innovation served to reshape the presidency. Presidents themselves have taken the activity in advancing new parts in the workplace. Different presidents developed the force of the presidency by developing the president's obligations and political assets.

Running the government

One of the president's most vital influences is through directing the organization of government. The Constitution simply advises the president to ensure that the laws be steadfastly executed. Today, the federal bureaucracy incorporates 4.1 million regular people and military representatives and uses more than $2 trillion every year (Schraeder, 2008). One of the assets for regulating the organization is the presidential power to delegate top-level administrators. New presidents have something like 500 abnormal amount positions accessible for errand (bureau and subcabinet occupations, organizational heads, and other non-civil administration posts), in…