How should the argument about example 1945-1997 1997 present — two examples demonstrating the power of the Prime Minister and cabinet to dictate events and determine policy making, including one example from 1945-1997 and one from 1997 to the present? Use the relevant political concepts and evidence from The Prime Minister and cabinet.

a legislative vote, executive order, ministerial convention, appointment or scrutiny example linked to the comparison and its consequence for executive power and accountability. This is correct because political evidence must connect a legislative vote, executive order, ministerial convention, appointment or scrutiny example to the stated UK-US claim.

Apply cabinet responsibility, party majority, executive orders, congressional checks, appointments, impeachment and legislative scrutiny precisely. the UK Prime Minister normally leads the parliamentary majority, whereas the US President is separately elected and operates within a formal separation of powers.

A structural viewpoint emphasises formal rules; however, a rational or cultural viewpoint may explain how actors use those rules. Overall, judge the evidence from a legislative vote, executive order, ministerial convention, appointment or scrutiny example and explain whether different executive-legislative relationships alter appointment, policy and scrutiny powers for "Analyse and evaluate two examples demonstrating the power of the Prime Minister and cabinet to dictate events and determine policy making, including one example from 1945-1997 and one from 1997 to the present.".