More handpicked essays just for you.
Contrast between the parliamentary and presidential system of government
Contrast between the parliamentary and presidential system of government
Contrast between the parliamentary and presidential system of government
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Presidential vs. Parliamentary Political Systems
There are two main types of political systems, one being a presidential system and the other being a parliamentary system. Both of them have their own benefits as well as their own disadvantages. No political system can be perfect or can always have stability, but shown in history there are successful countries that use either one. Also there are countries that have failed with one of the two systems.
Firstly there is the presidential system. There are many characteristics to a presidential system. The first main part of a presidential system is how the executive is elected. The executive is a president who is elected to a fixed term. Also a president is not only head of state, but is head of government. The president is the sole executive of the government. Even though there is a cabinet in a presidential system it does not have the power it does in a parliamentary system. The cabinet is chosen by the president instead of chosen by the parliament. A president has to follow a constitution rather than following history. The president actually has a large part in the government’s decisions. A big advantage to political scientists of the presidential system is that there is a separation of powers. The legislative branch being separate from the executive branch lets one another keep checks and balances on each other. This assures that no one branch will take over or attempt to take over the government. Another advantage of a presidential system is that the population elects the chief executive and the legislative branch. By winning a popular vote shows that most of a country is backing the executive which does not seem to cause revolution. The president can not dissolve an assembly as one can in a parliamentary system. Also in a presidential system there is the judicial branch, which is the court system. The judicial branch is important because it helps uphold the constitution. One of the last advantages of a presidential system is that there is more stability because a president is elected to a fixed term, where as in a parliamentary system a prime minister can be ousted at any time. A presidential system is not perfect, but it has it’s high and low points.
The other type of political system being analyzed is a parliamentary system. A parliamentary system has its executive branch in ...
... middle of paper ...
... be elected by the majority of the population of the country. Also there being a written constitution in a presidential system makes it easier to prefer because this explains the law precisely and accurately. In a presidential system there is a judicial branch which makes it fair to be tried for crimes, which is a plus too. I may be bias because I live in a country that has a presidential system, which is the United States and it is the most successful nation, but I feel that even if lived in another country I would envy our style of government and would want to live here. A presidential government is by the far the most successful and fairest way to run a country.
I feel that France is most comparable to the political system I prefer. It is semi-presidential, which is more effective than a parliamentary system. Their election process is similar to a presidential system, which shows a popular vote in the population wins. The parliament can censure the premier also, which is good because it does not let one part of government make any drastic changes without the parliament agreeing. I feel that France is most like my preferred type of political system because of these reasons.
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.
- this may be achieved through a parliamentary system of government or a constitutional monarchy of through the separation of governmental powers into agencies such as executive, legislative and judiciary, the classical example being the U.S, government
...ve. The legislative branch deals with the people, not directly, but in similar terms. The judicial branch could be considered the most democratic because the judicial branch is set-up to protect the people and their rights. While the legislative branch speaks for the people, the judicial branch protects the people. The executive branch does a combination of both the judicial branch and the legislative branch; however, it doesn’t focus solely on one power or the other. The executive branch works for the people, at the same time protecting the people. The executive branch has the power to veto bills and laws passed by the Congress, and the executive branch sees the laws through. All the branches, however democratic, are set-up for the people and to carry out the public’s will. If any of the branches were unable to do so, the system would not have survived 200 years.
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 Prime Minister cannot appeal to the people without going through the Parliament creating a more cohesive form of government. By contrast, a
The system of government we have today was starting to developed centuries ago by the Athenians and Romans. Both governments were established with the intent to give power to the people, even though it did not always play out that way in society. The Athenian democracy and the Roman republic were two very different governments in practice, but also maintained similar characteristics in both systems of government.
Discussions of which constitutional form of government best serves the growing number of democratic nation’s are being debated around the world. In the essay “The Perils of Presidentialism”, political scientist, Juan Linz compares the parliamentary with presidential systems as they govern 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 Prime Minister cannot appeal to the people without going through the Parliament creating a more cohesive form of government. By contrast, a President is elected directly by the
On the other hand, the democracy powers are divided into three independent branches of government; executive, legislative, and judicial. The leaders of the executive and legislative branches, the president, vice president and Senate, are decided by direct vote of the electorate. The judges in the judicial branch are sele...
Within parliamentary systems, the government i.e. the legislature consist of the political party with the most popularly elected Members of Parliament (MPs) in the main legislative parliament e.g. the House of Commons in the United Kingdom. The Prime Minister is appointed by the party to lead as the executive decision-maker, and the legislature work to support and carry out their will (Fish, 2006). In presidential systems, the President is directly elected with the support of their political party, with the legislative being separately elected and, in the case of the United States, being made up of representatives from different states (BIIP, 2004). This essay will provide examples to suggest that Presidents are generally more powerful than Prime Ministers. As two of the oldest forms of parliamentary and presidential governments (Mainwaring and Shugart, 1997), the United Kingdom and the United States will be the main focus of this essay, but other parliamentary and presidential countries will be mentioned.
The United Kingdom is formally called “United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.” Government in the United Kingdom is considered to be Parliamentary. Although it is parliamentary, it is also described as being “majoritarian.” Parliament in the UK works a little different than the United States; the people of the U.S. are allowed to elect their president. In the parliamentary system the people elect who will be in the legislature, and the legislature then selects who the next prime minister will be. Then, once the prime minister is selected he choses members of the cabinet. This system creates a quick and easy political decision-making by popular majority. In this essay we will discuss the strengths and limitations the majoritarian government of the UK. One of the strengths of majoritarian government is perhaps that it is the fastest to pass or veto legislation, however there are limitations or weaknesses also like it lacks checks and balances from the House of Lords, and the disadvantage that the smaller parties have when it comes to elections, and not having a set calendar date for elections.
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))
Every country differs in their preference of political system to govern their countries. For democratic countries, two possible choices of governing are the presidential system and the parliamentary system. Since both the presidential and the parliamentary systems have their own strengths and weaknesses, many scholars have examined these two forms of government, and debate on which political system is more successful in governance. In this paper, I will first provide a detailed analysis of both the parliamentary and the presidential system. I will also evaluate each system’s strengths and weaknesses, addressing any differences as well as any commonalities. Finally, I will conclude by using historical examples to analyze and support the presidential system, which would be a more desirable system for a democratic government.
The American Political System The American political system is a federal system, which consists of
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
The ideal political system can, and is, very challenging to create. We believe that the ideal system should accurately reflect the views of the people and create a system of powers that works throughout each branch of government. The branches of government include the executive, the legislative, and the courts. We also go into how these positions are elected, as well as the parties in which they are elected from. They all work together to create a sound government that will work in the best possible way.
This fusion of power allows the people’s representatives in the legislature to directly engage the executive in debates discussion in issues that will bring positive development in the state. This is not possible in the presidential system since the legislative and the executives arms are constitutionally separated and thereby restricted to engage the legislature in a discussion in which reasons are advanced against some proposition or proposal. The outcome is that party leaders in parliamentary system are more reliable than those in presidential systems. Presidential systems have turned the aim of electoral campaign into personalities rather than platform and programs because the focus is on the candidate and not on the party in general. But parliamentary systems on the other hand focus much more relating structured they do not do anything outside the scope of the party. We can compare the quality of leadership or administration in British, Canadian prime minister to the United State president. In all the country presidential system of government are chosen because people think been a good leader is by popularity and the ability to win election not minding if the candidate is fit for the task of presidency. But in parliamentary system, the person that has high quality of leadership competent enough and trustworthy is