The differences between a president and a prime minister largely depend upon the country to which one is referring. A president and prime minister may have relatively equal powers, but this again is dependent upon the type of government a country employs. There are many inaccurate definitions of differences, which throw more confusion on the matter.

A president usually achieves power by being elected. A prime minister tends to achieve power by being appointed. Appointing bodies vary. For example in England, the position of prime minister is appointed by the parliament. It is almost always the case that the parliamentary appointment will be made by the party with the most members in parliament. In this way, citizens who vote for parliamentary members indirectly influence choice of prime minister, since a high number of parliamentary members of the same party will elect a prime minister of that party.

In England, elections of a prime minister must occur no greater than every five years. They can however occur with greater frequency if parliament decides to oust a prime minister. Each week, the prime minister of England must appear before parliament and answer questions regarding his or her decisions. If parliament doesn’t like the answers, they can immediately decide to convene elections for a new prime minister.

A president, on the other hand, does not have to answer to the senate or the house in the US, unless the president has committed an illegal act. He or she may propose or support laws in speeches to the senate or house, and may also take questions. The house or senate cannot decide to oust a president without due cause. As well, the president is elected by the people, which means that the house and senate can be of different political parties than the president. This is part of the checks and balances system which keeps any branch of the US government from having too much power.

However, a president may be perceived as having too much power when the house and senate are both majority controlled by the same party as that of the president. It is more likely that the party agenda of a Democratic senate, house and president will be more easily passed. The same is true if Republicans control house, senate and presidency. Imbalance provides more checks to a president’s power, but can lead to disabling either the legislative or executive branch from acting.

In France, the government is constructed in a similar way to that of the US. However, the French president, who is elected by the people every five years, must appoint a prime minister. Thus the prime minister is likely to be a representative from the president’s political party. The prime minister in a country with a presidency has much less power to act. Actually, the prime minister in most countries is empowered to represent an executive body or person. So the prime minister, in most cases, cannot declare war.

In a country where the ruling family appoints the prime minister, the appointee usually acts in concert with the wishes of the country’s nominal heads. The prime minister may be of great assistance in making decisions about foreign and domestic policy, but serves at the pleasure of his king or queen.

It is not so different with the parliamentary prime minister appointment in England. The prime minister is the representative of what parliament wants. To fail to properly represent parliament will often result in dismissal.

The president, conversely, usually does not have to answer to a parliamentary or senatorial body once he or she is elected. He may require the legislative body in order to enact laws, but he can also overrule the legislature. Provided the president does not commit an illegal act, the legislature is not empowered to remove the president. The citizens also may not remove a president, unless the president has in some way committed gross illegal acts. The only possibility for removal of a president people simply don’t like, is through electing someone else at the end of a president’s term.