More handpicked essays just for you.
Unicameral and bicameral legislatures pdf
Unicameral and bicameral legislature
Unicameral and bicameral legislature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Comparative Politics of the French and Mexican Governments
The political systems of today’s world vary tremendously as you span the world. Each of these systems has gone through an evolution based on mistakes of the past and the needs of a stable and equal government. Most nations throughout the world observe political means through either Unitary or Federal legislation. The Federal government of Mexico and the unitary government of France are perfect examples of the differences and similarities of unicameral and bicameral legislature.
When looking at the political systems we must first understand the ideologies behind it. The main ideology that has help to define the French political system is that of bicameral legislation. In bicameral legislation the power of making laws is vested into two chambers, both, which must approve a bill before it officially becomes a law. In French politics these two chambers are part of the parliament. One chamber of parliament is the National assembly, which is elected directly by the people, and the second chamber is the senate, in which the Electoral College indirectly elected the members. A bicameral system can be either unitary or federal. The French government is unitary which means that laws give virtually all authority to the central government. The central government may delegate duties to cities or other administrative units, but it retains final authority and can retract any tasks it has delegated. The central government in a unitary system is much more powerful than the central government in a federal system. The reason a central government is more powerful in a system is because unitary governments exercise one level of government unlike that of a federal gover...
... middle of paper ...
...rnment. Not to say that the government of France is inefficient, but I feel the representation of the people is very important in any society. I also must say I do not totally agree with all that the Mexican government abides by. The extreme governmental power of the president is ludicrous, but no government is perfect. They can only work towards it. From the government policies that I have presented and the intense studies that I have done, I conclude that neither the federal or unitary system have a comparable advantage. Only when the government of a nation exercises and uses the power vested within that political ideology efficiently, will one be able to say that a federal system is better then a unitary system. Until each system is used through absolute efficiency, we have no basis to compare the two unless each system achieves maximum benefits for the people.
In order to secure the protection of the people’s rights of freedom from the imprisonment of tyranny, a compound government was formed. Central and State government came together to form the compound government, which in other words means federalism. It is one of the many elements that make up the protection of freedom from tyranny, “Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people.” (Madison FP # 51) The states combined covered our need of protection, protection of the countries by the Central government and protection of the people by the States government. Also by joining themselves together, “The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” (Madison FP # 51)
The Franco-Mexican War The Franco-Mexican War was a war fought by two very different countries than they are today. The war was fought over reasons that seem very unlikely to arise ever again. between these two countries. The war was fought over gaining territory, group thinking, and pure human. Nature.
If one were to visit different countries and societies throughout the world, they may notice the many differences and similarities each region shares. This makes the world a very unique place because there is constant change and diversity everywhere we look, no matter the distance traveled. A prime example of this would be the similarities and differences between the United States of America and Mexico. Although the two are neighboring countries, there is a great deal of diversity amongst them that deserve a thorough examination.
The American Revolutionary system served as a model, exemplifying the potential for great change and consolidation. The United States Constitution also provided a template for the French National Assembly. Montesquieu’s proposal of the separation of powers, as well as democratic conventions with representatives of the French people provided protection for the people against their government, securing “the greatest freedom and security for a state” (Duiker and Spielvogel 463). According to Article XV, people possessed the right to hold government officials accountable for their actions, developing a moral incentive as well as a foundational right for a more democratic society (National Assembly). France’s preparation for their independence showed a strong desire for equality and representation that mirrored that of the United
Since the Constitutional convention the government of the Unites States has being improving the government system. The government has many progressiveness, it went from an authoritarian country to a self-governed country by the people. The politicians has being changing the structure of the government system to a better a much better version of the last one making it a more fair system for the people. For instance, during the convention in Philadelphia congress had develop a more effective and unified constitution than the past. They started the changes of the system to a more complex government system that benefited the people and the states. For example, the congress came up with the idea of making an upper house for the senate and a lower house for the House of Representatives along with the Great Compromise that gave the president a substantial power over the government. The congress did this because after the Americ...
Debating which constitutional form of government best serves democratic nations is discussed by political scientist Juan Linz in his essay “The Perils of Presidentialism”. Linz compares parliamentary systems with presidential systems as they govern democracies. As the title of Linz’s essay implies, he sees Presidentialism as potentially dangerous. Linz points out the flaws as presidentialism as he sees them and sites rigidity of fixed terms, the zero-sum game and political legitimacy coupled with lack of incentive to form alliances as issues to support his theory that the parliamentary system is superior to presidentialism.
Federalism could be portrayed in three general ways, unitary, con-elected, or a hybrid of the two (Bardes, Shelley II, & Schmidt, 2011). In the United States, we like a cream between unitary and con-chose schemas, which we insinuate as a chose skeleton. To better like our system we ought to first assess interchange sorts. An unitary skeleton is described as a system in which general force is controlled by a robust central government (Bardes, Shelley II, & Schmidt, 2011). The con-chose model embodies an assembly of free states with extensive powers united with an obliged controlled central government much like the European Union or the Articles of Confederation America (Bardes, Shelley II, & Schmidt, 2011).
Every country has a particular system of government, a system that regulates the political spectrum of the nation as well as assuring the citizens’ needs and freedoms and managing the economic resources. Since the government is the stepping stone of the nation, it requires the appropriate system that establishes an anchored base of a strong country; there are three types of government systems: a unitary system, Federal system and a Confederate system. This paper will spot light on the last two systems by identifying their notions through United States and Canada, because regardless to their many similarities, there are significant distinctions in the ways they constructed their federalisms throughout history, in which they emphasized on the
PGCPS. (n.d.). Government Systems: Unitary, Confederate, and Federal Systems. Retrieved March 17, 2011, from www. pgcps.org: www.pgcps.org/~croom2/Reading_Government%20Systems.doc
The French government was a complete monarchy. At the time France had thirteen different regions. Each of these thirteen regions made up their own rules. What did that mean? France didn't have a unified law system, basically a government, to make up the rules; everyone made their own through Parliament. The Parliament had the jurisdiction to make laws in their own region. Each individual Parliament had between 50 to 130 members made up of judges and “legal elites” in that region. This was the only government in France. The Parliament were the ones set prices on foods, and held trials including murders and thefts. Even though they served as the government of the region, they were hated by everybody, including the king. The King had people called intendents who “curbed the power of nobility” who were hated even more than Parliament.
In addition, due to the establishment of the three branches the negative effects of factions have been discouraged. One of the numerous institutions that have helped with the discouragement of factions is the Legislative branch. The Legislative branch is comprised of two parts, The House of Representatives and The Senate. The House is composed of Representatives elected by the people within a district and is determined by population, thus the more people in a state, the m...
Federal and state authority differs in order to protect us from any one governing body making all the decisions. This delegation of power seeks to prevent imbalance and helps to create equality. “Absolute power corrupts absolutely (Moreell, 2014)”. This famous saying perhaps portrays the resoning behind the division of power. The Federal g...
On the other hand the USA is a federal republic characterised by division of sovereign...
For years, countries have had different legislatures bicameral and unicameral. The features of each legislatures are distinct from one another. It even accounts to various vices and virtues. Both legislatures exist in various countries in the world. The reason to which varies in each place. Legislatures are essential for a society to perform politically well. However, the political structure of every nations varies thus, there exist no simple generalization. The structural arrangements of different legislatures are distinct in relation to their number of chambers available. (Danziger, J. N. (1996))
State sovereignty means that the states would remain sovereign over important spheres and that more states would be created under the control of the national government. Bicameralism refers to each state being provided with equal representation regardless of the population and also means that the Senate has the authority to ratify treaties and is considered the protector of state sovereignty. Lastly, the multiple layers of representation refer to the direct power that the national government has over its citizens. This means that each citizen has direct representation in the House of Representatives and don’t always have to go through the state governments.