Has the use and perhaps abuse of the informal powers created an imperial presidency?

Although the answer to this question will vary depending on your personal opinion, I would argue that this is not the case. I do not think that the use and abuse of the informal powers have created an imperial presidency.

The informal powers of the President are not especifically written out in the Constitution. Nevertheless, they are required to be used under certain specific circumstances. These are not meant to be used regularly, and they include the ability to enact a legislative agenda, executive orders, sending troops without a declaration of war and conducting certain foreign policy initiatives.

These informal powers, even in the present, are used only on very specific circumstances. Most of the time, the president only employs the powers that are given to him especifically by the Constitution. Therefore, informal powers still represent only a small part of the role of the president and of national legislation.

congress also has implied powers, which derive from the necessary and proper clause of the constitution and permit congress "to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this constitution in the government of the united states.