Could the United States Presidency develop similar to the British Monarchy in terms of the exercise of Powers and Prerogatives?

[godefrois]

It has been said in the past that the US president is a king with telephones. Indeed, the office of President of the United States was modeled after the theoretical powers of the Stuart and Hanover monarchs. Perhaps, instead of gradually growing larger and gigantic; the office of President remains reserved, exercising its power as necessary, exercising not to little and not to much power. Congress could theoretically pick up the modern day slack of the President, taking more control over the civil service, perhaps even setting up the policy of the civil service for said fiscal year in its apportionment bills. Another development which possibly could aid in this, in my opinion, is the Vice President being allowed to exercise his powers as Senate President, perhaps another other than Adams becomes VP, and oversees establishing the precedent of a stronger VP.

Other than my ideas, is this overall possible? Or is it inevitable that the President becomes all encompassing and important in terms of US politics?

 

[Wendell]

No Burr resignation potentially gives you a stronger vice presidency. A favorite idea of mine is a POD in the Washington administration in which the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Secretary of State become separate positions, and the latter accrues a sort of government chairmanship role over successive administrations.

 

[octaviuz]

The Austrians never really changed their constitution after post WWII restoration, the current president has a broad range of powers that are never used.
Norms can be as effective as laws.

 

[godefrois]

No Burr resignation potentially gives you a stronger vice presidency. A favorite idea of mine is a POD in the Washington administration in which the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Secretary of State become separate positions, and the latter accrues a sort of government chairmanship role over successive administrations.

Interesting. The SecState becoming a de facto Prime Minister is definitely something that I've seen before on the thread. Alternatively, the SecState's Home Bureau could be given Civil Service management in the beginning. Just throwing out ideas.

 

[Brady Kj]

The easiest way to make the president weak is to make one of the houses of congress stronger than the other, and give that house the authority to choose supreme court justices. In our world, the members of both houses of congress have a lot of power to stop each other from getting anything done, and very little power to stop the president from getting things done, which has led to most presidents being able to expand their powers. If the senate didn't have any power to stop the house from passing laws, that would stop things.

Another way is to expand congress' power to impeach the president, or even cast a vote of no confidence in scenarios where the president goes too far.

Another way is to have the entire cabinet be elected officials, who the president can't simply fire when he wants. That's how many states in the US have their constitutions set up.

 

[jseidorf]

I've often thought that if the Constitution had made the House much more unambiguously powerful vis-a-vis the Senate, or even the sole chamber of Congress, then the Speaker of the House could have evolved into a Westminster style Prime Minister role.

 

[Wendell]

Interesting. The SecState becoming a de facto Prime Minister is definitely something that I've seen before on the thread. Alternatively, the SecState's Home Bureau could be given Civil Service management in the beginning. Just throwing out ideas.

A prime minister in the Russian sense, serving at the pleasure of the head of state rather than the legislature, but sure.