On the Magnitude of Presidential Executive Power A Comparative Study of Public Authority Based on the "Triadic Freedom Framework"

This paper challenges the popular perception that the "U.S. President holds the greatest power in the world" by conducting a comparative analysis of the executive powers of leaders from nine countries using the Triadic Freedom Framework. In response to the issue of conceptual overlap in existing indicator systems—whereby "constrained power" is simultaneously counted in both the rights list (R) and the friction coefficient (λ)—this paper introduces a fundamental methodological revision: R exclusively measures the existence of power (presence = 2 points, absence = 0 points), while λ specifically measures the difficulty of exercising that power. The two are logically separated without overlap. On this basis, the paper incorporates the authority to intervene in local affairs to construct a comprehensive rights list breadth (R_total) and an Effective Power Index (P = R_total × (1-λ) × 10). The findings reveal that, within the adversarial suppression regime, Russia (89) ranks highest, followed by Turkey (78); within the adversarial checks and balances regime, significant internal differentiation emerges: France (72), the United Kingdom (51), Brazil (46), the United States (39), India (31), and Japan (31) in descending order. After this revision, the United States is no longer an anomalously low outlier but still ranks in the lower tier. The widely held belief that the "U.S. President holds the greatest power" stems from a conflation of national capacity with individual rights—a classic case of conceptual contamination diagnosed by the Triadic Framework.