Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Legislative power over executive
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Legislative power over executive
A COMPARITIVE STUDY OF ARGENTINA, MEXICO AND BRAZIL
INTRODUCTION
For populations, especially on the scale that we know them today, societies must have a set of rules in order to function. The government passes the laws, provides law enforcement and protects the nation’s boundaries. Most governments also provide education for its citizens and a wide variety of such services to improve the standard of living. Philosophical theories have been put forth by Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Montesquieu about the legitimacy of government.
This project focuses on one of the various forms of government namely, the Presidential form of government and a comparison has been drawn between two Latin American states (Argentina and Mexico) and an independent
…show more content…
Latin American presidentialism while sharing a fair number of features with the U.S, archetype, is very much its own breed. What appears to distinguish the Latin American variety is the high degree of executive law making powers. Specially Latin American constitutions are uniquely inclined to empower presidents to decree laws, initiate legislative proposals and exert powers in emergency …show more content…
The main point about a presidential system is that its president is directly elected and his/her executive power is balanced by legislature that is independent of the president because it, too is popularly elected. The president, alone among all the officials of state, has general responsibility for public affairs. He or she may appoint ministers or cabinet members, but they are responsible only for their own department business, and they are accountable to the president, not to the legislature. To ensure a real separation of powers neither the president nor members of the cabinet can be members of the
This paper will be exploring the book The Vanguard of the Atlantic World by James Sanders. This book focuses upon the early 1800 to the 1900 and explores the development of South American political system as well expresses some issues that some Latino counties had with Europe and North America. Thus, Sanders focus is on how Latin America political system changes throughout this certain time and how does the surrounding countries have an effect as well on Latin political system. Therefore, the previous statement leads into some insight on what the thesis of the book is. Sanders thesis is, “Latin American’s believed they represented the future because they had adopted Republicanism and democracy while Europe was in the past dealing with monarchs
Models for post-revolutionary Latin American government are born of the complex economic and social realities of 17th and 18th century Europe. From the momentum of the Enlightenment came major political rebellions of the elite class against entrenched national monarchies and systems of power. Within this time period of elitist revolt and intensive political restructuring, the fundamental basis for both liberal and conservative ideology was driven deep into Latin American soil. However, as neither ideology sought to fulfill or even recognize the needs or rights of mestizo people under government rule, the initial liberal doctrine pervading Latin American nations perpetuated racism and economic exploitation, and paved the way for all-consuming, cultural wars in the centuries to come.
All throughout the 20th century we can observe the marked presence of totalitarian regimes and governments in Latin America. Countries like Cuba, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic all suffered under the merciless rule of dictators and military leaders. Yet the latter country, the Dominican Republic, experienced a unique variation of these popular dictatorships, one that in the eyes of the world of those times was great, but in the eyes of the Dominicans, was nothing short of deadly.
As the Latin American nations set out to construct a new government and society in the 1800´s, two opposing models aroused regarding which one would best benefit the countries. ¨Civilization vs. Barbarism¨ by Domingo Sarmiento, a recognized Argentinean revolutionary, contrasts Jose Marti´s ¨Our America¨ ideology which critiques U.S. capitalism and focuses on developing a good government based on the needs of the nations and each nation´s autochthony. Contrastingly, Sarmiento, guided by his beliefs in democratic principles, declares his preference towards the European urbanized way of life as the key to progress and stability for the nations. Despite the differences in the models proposed by Marti and Sarmiento for the New Nations to follow,
“Latin America includes the entire continent of South America, as well as Mexico. Central America, and the Caribbean Islands. Physical geography has played an important role in the economic development of Latin America.” (Doc A and Doc G) Latin America has many unique cultural characteristics, industrial products, agricultural products, and human activity.
...nuel Antonio, Newman, Edward. Democracy in Latin America: (Re)Constructing Political Society. The United Nations University Press, 2001. New York, N.Y.
After gaining independence, Latin American countries had difficulty in how to govern the newly instated states. In the chaos, people took advantage of this and instated themselves as dictators. They had simply took the position from the Spanish that they tried to vanquish (class notes). The power structure remained and the people who fought for independence were largely ignored and continuously oppressed. These dictatorships had remained in power until very recently. Paraguay was finally freed from the dictatorship in 1989 (Chapter
The Times favored the democratic concepts professed by the middle class. A wave of freedom of speech, press, and assembly engulfed much of Latin America and bathed the middle class with satisfaction. New political parties emerged to represent broader segments of the population. Democracy, always a fragile plant anywhere, seemed ready to blossom throughout Latin America. Nowhere was this change more amply illustrated than in Guatemala, where Jorge Ubico ruled as dictator from 1931 until 1944.
Who has the greater legitimacy to represent the people? The president or the legislatures. In comparing the Chilean 1970 Presidential Election to 1979 Spanish appointment of Adolfo Suirez as Prime Minister, Linz notes “Allende received a six-year mandate for controlling the government even with much less than a majority of the popular vote, while Suirez, with a plurality of roughly the same size, found it necessary to work with other parties to sustain a minority government”. Linz supports the fusion of the executive and legislative branches because it forces a sense of cooperation. He points out that “presidential systems may be more or less dependent on the cooperation of the legislature; the balance between executive and legislative power in such systems can thus vary considerably” Linz admits that “presidential elections do offer the indisputable advantage of allowing the people to choose their chief executive openly, directly, and for a predictable span rather than leaving that decision to the backstage maneuvering of the politicians.” but qualifies it by stating that it is only and beneficial if the majority of the people of spoken. In Scott Mainwaring and Matthew Shugart’s critical appraisal of “The Perils of Presidentialism” they offer counter arguments when they suggest that a bicameral parliament can just as easily have dual legitimacy issues as a President and legislative body. It should be recognized that Linz does not address the checks and balances that allows for a more regulated government ensuring that power is not concentrated in the hands of one group. Nor does he address that elections
Peeler, John A. Latin American Democracies. Chapel Hill, NC and London: The University of North Carolina Press, 1985. Print.
History is usually outlined by critical moments which have had enduring effects in the world. Several turning points have defined the history of Latin America. Two major climaxes in Latin American History were the 19th-century Wars of Independence and the Mexican Revolution of 1910. Both of these events have significantly changed the course of Latin American history.
Juan Linz – The Perils of Presidentialism. Discussions of which constitutional form of government best serves the growing number of democratic nation’s are in constant debate all over the world. In the essay “The Perils of Presidentialism”, political scientist, Juan Linz compares the parliamentary system with presidential democracies. As the title of Linz’s essay implies, he sees Presidentialism as potentially dangerous and sites fixed terms, the zero-sum game and legitimacy issues to support his theory. According to Linz, the parliamentary system is the superior form of democratic government because the Prime Minister cannot appeal to the people without going through the Parliament, creating a more cohesive form of government.
Democracy has been the root of a limited government, the system of which government powers are distributed so that one group of leaders do not have too much influence. The limited government has been structured to keep peace amongst all parties that are involved in the government. And under the U.S. Constitution, citizens are given ultimate power by their right to choose their representatives through the democratic process of voting. Each levels of the government are limited as they have their own responsibilities. The city government has the most local level of government as the residents elect a city council and mayor to represent their interest at the city level. All city governments establish housing and health regulations, and are responsible
Mexico politics take framework of presidential representative whose government that is based on congressional system. The country has the president as head of both state and government, and multi-party system. The government represents Mexico and divided by three branches that are: executive, legislative and judicial. Currently the president of Mexico is Enrique Pena Nieto that is trying to transform Mexico for a better future. The paper, New Internationalist, expressed doubt because he comes from the Inst...
Wiarda H. J. and Skelley E. M., 2005, Dilemmas of Democracy in Latin America: Crises and Opportunity, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers Inc