Abstract: The relevance of the research is due to the fact that the President of Russia has become the embodiment of the state for both the population and the world community, serving as the most influential political player in the structure of state power. The goal of the article is to trace the personalization of presidential power in the political sphere in Russia based on the analysis of the transcripts of State Duma meetings. The object of the study is presidential power. The subject of the research is the personalization of presidential power in the political sphere in Russia. The author conducted an analysis of the transcripts of State Duma meetings because, firstly, the State Duma expresses the interests of Russian society through the adoption of relevant legislative acts. Secondly, being an independent body in its decisions, it develops the political "innovations" necessary for a democratic and legal state. The analysis of 215 State Duma transcripts is conducted based on the following phases: understanding the problem and including it in the agenda, preparing draft resolutions, and adopting the bill. The article presents the results of the study of the transcripts of State Duma meetings from 2017, 2020, and 2023, revealing active support and implementation of the legislative power, primarily for the ideas and views of the president. The materials of the article provide practical value for increasing knowledge and addressing contradictions in the field of public administration in Russia. The uniqueness of the research results lies in the conclusions made by the author, indicating the dependent work of the State Duma and the lack of independence in the development and adoption of decisions. The author comes to the following conclusions: - Members of the State Duma do not initiate significant laws for the state and society; they most often originate from the president or the government of the Russian Federation (in fulfillment of the same president's assignments); - Members of the lower house of parliament do not engage in seeking independent effective solutions to various problems; - There is a lack of adequate political debate during the promotion and adoption of legislative proposals; - Political innovations cannot always be effectively implemented in practice.