Hannah Padilla Comparative Politics Comparative Essay April 12, 2013 Presidential vs. Parliamentry Systems When it comes to presidential and parliamentary systems they each are seen around the world. There are many significant differences between the two systems, and benefits that are represented. Presidential systems make up a minority of democratic systems, while parliamentary systems can be found in a majority of democracies. Each system has its merits, but presidential systems are clearly more democratic since there is the ability for voters to directly elect the chief executive who holds the power for their country. Parliamentry systems are comprised of two basic elements (O'neil, 2013). First, prime ministers and their cabinets come out of the legislature and the second element is that the legislature is also the instrument that elects and removes the prime minster from office (O'neil, 2013). It is seen that there is a division of power and different roles between a head government and head of state. There is a majority of power that resides with the head of government known as the prime minster. In a Parliamentry system a prime minister is elected from the legislature, which reflects the power between parties in the legislature (O'neil, 2013). In most Parliamentry systems the prime minister actually has a seat in the lower house of the legislature. When there is a tight connection between the executive and legislature then it means that there is a separation of power and responsibility and that these two branches of government do
Presidential vs. Parliamentary Political Systems Essay
1173 Words5 Pages
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…show more content…
The monarch is a figure head and does no decision making. The voters of a parliamentary system elect parliament who then elect the prime minister and the cabinet. The prime minister is normally the leader of the most popular party in parliament. The PM even being the head of government is not as powerful as the head of government in a presidential system. The parliament of the system withholds the most power. They make or break any law. Compared to the separation of powers as in a presidential system there is only a separation of functions. Each part of government has its own function to perform, but there is no system of checks and balances. An example of the overlapping of powers is the need of a vote of confidence. A vote of confidence is proposed by a party and needs backing from the other part of government. With no system of sorts there is more likely of upheaval and change of rule. There is not as much stability in a parliamentary system as there is in a presidential. Lastly there is no judicial rule as there is in a presidential system. A parliamentary system has had success in the past but still is seen as not as successful as a presidential system.
Most European countries have a parliamentary political system. Britain has a parliamentary system. Britain’s system starts at the voters who vote for Parliament. Parliament then elects and can oust the executive branch, which is headed by a prime