To more fully understand the work of the presidency and the nature of presidential leadership in the United States, you must also understand the president's relationship to Congress. This can be done by examining the challenges presidents face and the actions they take to address them. There are five challenges this paper will focus on: the “vanishing center” and polarization, the president's use of unilateral executive powers and signing declarations, shared constitutional powers, who is a better representative of the people and the different “branch inter-control models” between the two branches. Within these five challenges we will explain why they are important and recommendations that presidents can use to overcome them. The first challenge the president faces concerns “the vanishing center” and the polarization between the two political parties that so often determines the success of their relationship with Congress. For the political process to work, agreement and cooperation between parties is needed to make changes at the federal government level. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The American public wants cross-party public policymaking in general, which is why the center is considered extremely important. Without a political center there will surely be greater partisanship and ideological polarization among those elected to Congress and the Office of the President. The result of this can lead to greater public distrust and aversion towards the political process and politicians. Sarah Binder states, “The shift away from the center has been accompanied by a vulgarization of politics and bitter partisanship, leaving voters increasingly disenchanted with Washington politics” (p. 281). It becomes more difficult for presidents to pass desired legislation through Congress as the two parties move further apart. Presidents can successfully address the polarization that is occurring between the two parties. To do this, presidents should choose to engage members of Congress in political compromise in order to gain approval for parts of their agenda. Brandon Rottinghaus suggests, “Presidents are able to use their executive political experience to influence committee stages for technical or relatively noncontroversial issues” (p. 85). They can also adapt their policies to accommodate concerns from the opposing party in order to pass legislation. Of course, this is easier when the president's party holds a majority in both houses of Congress. Presidents can gain the loyalty and support of leaders in both chambers to help legislation pass Congress. If this were to happen, presidents will need to meet regularly with these leaders. The result of this form of contact can provide them with knowledge of the mood of Congress, as well as information on where to look when trying to vote. A second challenge the president faces are situations involving the use of unilateral executive powers and signing declarations when working with Congress. The president's unilateral powers derive from the unitary executive theory. This theory suggests that the president is solely responsible for maintaining and controlling what happens within the executive branch of government. Presidents use this theory to justify signing statements made when they sign a bill. Richard W. Waterman suggests: “It raises serious legal questionson the boundaries of presidential power and the ability of Congress to limit presidential discretion” (p. 249). This is done to demonstrate to Congress that it does not possess the right to pass laws that limit the president's powers as commander in chief or chief executive. Unilateral executive powers should be used carefully by presidents to maintain a functioning relationship with Congress. Signing declarations is one way presidents can bypass vetoes on legislation passed by Congress. Presidents should use these types of power only when there is prior agreement between the executive and legislative branches of government. Rottinghaus comments that, “Presidents often use these actions only when the action does not need to be overturned by Congress,” and “Congress provides the president with statutory power to operate within a specific boundary” (p. 94). Keeping lines of communication open between members of Congress and presidents is important to getting legislation passed and signed into law. Signing statements are one way to do this and can be revised or eliminated when a new administration is elected to the executive branch. Another challenge that presidents face when it comes to their relationship with Congress is the obstacles they face when it comes to managing their shared constitutional powers. “Perhaps nowhere is the interconnectedness of the Constitution on display more than in matters involving joint executive-legislative decision-making” (Rottinghaus, p. 81). Articles I and II of the United States Constitution contain the shared powers that are at the heart of presidential relationships with Congress. This shared power allows them to formulate and implement policies. Although legislative powers are shared between the two branches of government, one branch may wield more power than the other during certain periods of government. Rottinghaus compares this relationship to a “rubber band.” He states: “In reality, the executive-legislative relationship is more like a rubber band, where it maintains a basic shape but can be stretched to change as legislative and executive instruments change and political events occur” (Rottinghaus, p. 96). . This type of relationship is important if presidents and Congress are to get anything done. This challenge can be overcome as long as presidents maintain an open line of communication between themselves and Congress. Presidents can achieve this goal through regular meetings with the leaders of both houses of Congress. It would also be helpful if the priorities of the executive branch were the same as those of the legislative branch. If not, presidents should find ways to compromise with Congress. When seeking to build relationships with members of Congress, presidents should remember to consider what drives these leaders and their personality types. If their personalities clash, they may want their staff to interact and bring information back to them. Other factors that influence presidents' relationship with Congress are whether or not their party holds a majority in one or both houses and the size of that majority. To improve the executive-legislative relationship, presidents must carefully develop their policy agendas and be willing to compromise to get some of what they want. A fourth challenge that presidents may face in their relationship with Congress is which of the two best represents the people. Some scholars believe that the president better represents the American public since he is elected by the nation as a whole. Marc J. Hetherington says, “Presidents face a different setof political imperatives that make them significantly more representative of the public as a whole than members of Congress” (p. 91). While other scholars argue that Congress represents the people as it is composed of individuals elected by the voting public from each of the 1950s states they represent. Congress is made up of 535 people who must return to their home states to face their constituents. What matters is who, presidents or Congress, guides policies through the legislative process who best represents the people's views. In order for presidents to overcome who best represents the population, they must realize that the American public is not one voice, but 300 million voices. Just like Congress, the president can listen to all Americans and address them through news and television media or by holding town hall-type meetings. When holding these types of meetings, presidents must let the public express their concerns. At the same time, presidents must actually listen to what is being said and shape policies using this new knowledge. When running for office or reelection, presidential candidates must modify their policies and messages to appeal to all voters in all states, not just those in their own party. Hetherington states that “most Americans, when looking at the nation as a whole, are moderate and non-ideological. A president who does not take this factor into account runs the risk of alienating a large portion of the public” (p. 93). The final challenge that presidents face in their relationship with Congress is the different “internal control models” between the two. Party control is the strongest factor influencing internal relations. This can be seen in three types of situations. Party government, divided government and truncated government. Party rule occurs when one party has a majority in both houses of Congress. This type of government is seen more in parliamentary type governments. Having a majority in Congress does not necessarily mean there will be legislative success in passing policies. “Divided government occurs when the White House and Congress are in the hands of opposing parties,” states Roger H. Davidson (p. 270). Divided government requires leadership that uses intelligent negotiation between domestic branches to overcome political stalemates. While truncated government is one in which one but not both houses of Congress are controlled by the president's party. When faced with these types of situations, presidents must try to overcome them so they can work with Congress to get bills out of committee, through both houses, and into law. It can be difficult to distinguish the effects of different influences and other factors must also be taken into account. Presidents can work on their relationship with individual legislators. In doing so they should learn what legislators' concerns are and at the same time be sensitive to them. This is a great opportunity for presidents to demonstrate their skills and capabilities, and at the same time have an impact on government and politics. Davidson exclaims, “The legislative-executive balance of power is constantly shifting. The influence of both branches can be affected by problems, circumstances, or personality” (p. 274). Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Therefore, presidents must take into account not only the unity of their own party, but also that of the opposing party. On the basis.