Week 4 Discussion: Differences and Similarities between Presidential and Parliamentary Systems

         

Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:

• Textbook: Chapter 7, 8
• Lesson
• Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook)

Initial Post Instructions
Discuss the differences  and similarities between the presidential and parliamentary systems,  including the executive and legislative branches. Which system do you  feel serves its citizen better? Why? Use evidence (cite sources) to  support your response from assigned readings or online lessons, and at least one outside scholarly source.

Follow-Up Post Instructions
Respond to at least  two peers or one peer and the instructor. Further the dialogue by  providing more information and clarification. Minimum of 1 scholarly  source which can include your textbook or assigned readings or may be  from your additional scholarly research.

Writing Requirements

• Minimum of 3 posts (1 initial & 2 follow-up)
• Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside scholarly source)
• APA format for in-text citations and list of references

answer 1:

 

Hi All,

Both the presidential and  parliamentary are popular types of democratic governments (The Borgen  Project, 2019).  Dissimilarities between the parliamentary system and  the presidential system include: the parliamentary system makes up the  legislative branch of government. The head of government is the Prime  Minister who has no time limit on how long they can stay in office and  is elected by parliament members and can only be removed by the  parliament. Citizens vote for members of the parliament (The Borgen  Project, 2019).  Whereas the presidential system has an executive branch  that only includes the president and is elected by citizens for a max  of 2 terms, The presidential system is autonomous of the legislative  branch, and the president can be impeached at any time (The Borgen  Project, 2019). 

In the Parliamentary system, the  legislative branch is either unicameral or bicameral. Many governments  prefer a two-house legislative branch to avoid total power in one body  and ensure the federal government can be held accountable for its  actions (Whitman Cobb, W. N., 2020). The Prime Minister writes laws  together with the legislature. In presidential systems, the legislative  branch writes laws for a president to approve. Though the president may  suggest laws, it is ultimately the legislative branch that will write  them (Whitman Cobb, W. N., 2020). 

Is one system better than the other?  Both government systems have strengths in different areas. Despite all  the differences between the parliamentary system and the presidential  system, it is ultimately the citizens who hold the power through the  voting process (The Borgen Project, 2019). 

Susan

The Borgen Project. 2019. The Parliamentary System Versus the Presidential System.Retrieved from https://borgenproject.org/parliamentary-system-versus-presidential-system/

Whitman Cobb, W. N. (2020). Political science today (1st ed.). Washington, DC: Sage, CQ Press.

answer 2:

 

Hello Class and Professor

Discuss the differences and similarities between the  presidential and parliamentary systems, including the executive and  legislative branches. 

             The executive branch of the presidential system consists  of one person, the President. The executive branch of the parliamentary  system consists of two people. The Prime Minister and the head of  state. According to Gaddipati (2019), in the presidential system, the  president or head of state, is elected by the citizens. They serve for a  maximum of two term limits. In the parliamentary system, there is a  distinction between head of government and head of state. The head of  government is the Prime Minister. The head of Parliament is the head of  state. The Prime Minister is elected by members of Parliament. Citizens  elect members of Parliament. The Prime Minister has no term limit. Both  systems are democracies. 

            Chamberlain University College of Nursing (2021) stated  that the legislative branch can be either unicameral or bicameral.  Unicameral contains one legislative house. Bicameral contains two  legislative houses. The U.S presidential system has the upper house, the  Senate and the lower house, the House of Representatives. Members of  the Senate and House of Representatives are elected by the citizens and  are elected every six years for the Senate and every two years for the  house. The British Parliament system has the upper house, the House of  Lords, and the lower house, the House of Commons. The House of Lords  serve a 15-year term. The House of Commons are elected every five years  (Elgie, 2016). 

Which system do you feel serves its citizens better? Why? 

I believe the presidential system  serves its citizens better than the parliamentary system. While both  systems are democracies and both systems have individual strengths, I  prefer the citizens voting for each member of congress. I also like the  fact that in the presidential system, the president is independent of  the legislature. I also like the fact that the president is elected  every four years and can only serve consecutively for eight years. An  additional aspect I like is that the president is held to the  Constitution and members of Congress can keep a check on the power of  the president. 

Lessons:

   

Democratic Representation

Legislative bodies have existed since the days of Greece and Rome. No  political democracy today functions without a representative assembly.  This assembly is a body of lawmakers elected by citizens to represent  their interests in government for a specified term of office. What  distinguishes one legislative system from another is its composition;  the amount of power it exercises; and, the amount of power it allows the  executive or head of government to possess.

Representative government concentrates tremendous power in the  legislative branches. Legislatures can either be unicameral (one house)  or bicameral (two houses). Bicameral systems feature an upper and lower  house. Depending on the traditions of a given democracy, these houses  either share or hoard power. Additionally, most democracies feature  either a parliamentary or presidential system. In a presidential system,  the government leader is separate from the legislature denoting a  separation of power. Conversely, in a parliamentary system, the  executive and the legislature display a fused system of power.

Since the Cold War, the United States, along with ally Great Britain,  has been a champion for democracy around the world. Most modern  democracies have modeled their systems of government similar to the US  or Great Britain; therefore, we will focus our discussion on these two  nations this week. Both the United States and Great Britain believe in  representing the people’s wishes to create stability in each country. In  representing the people, the bicameral legislative branches of both  countries exercise the most power and their executives serve as head of  government. The way each nation governs their people is different, but  the systems do have some similarities. For example, both nations elect  their lower houses. Let us take a closer look at these two systems.

US and Great Britain Governing Systems

 
 

US

GREAT BRITAIN

 

SYSTEM

Presidential

Parliamentary

LEGISLATURE

Bicameral

Bicameral

 

DIVISION OF POWER*

*Refer to Lesson 2

Federal

Unitary

The Upper House

In bicameral systems, most of the work is customarily done in the  lower house. However, the upper house in the presidential model of the  US, the Senate, wields significant power and has a workload unlike many  other consultative bodies. The US Senate weighs in on legislation coming  from the lower house, the House of Representatives. The Senate may also  draft its own legislation. No legislation goes anywhere unless the  Senate approves it. Furthermore, the Senate has some unique  responsibilities. It ratifies treaties that the executive branch, in  this case the president, negotiates with leaders of other nations. It  approves appointments to executive departments whose heads form the  cabinet. It votes on the President’s appointments to the judicial branch  including the Supreme Court. Additionally, when the President is  accused of offenses that could result in dismissal from office, the  Senate acts as a jury, hearing the case and rendering a verdict.

In the British Parliament, the upper house, known as the House of  Lords, lacks substantial legislative powers compared to the lower body,  the House of Commons. The House of Lords is not even an elected body.  When comparing the House of Lords with the upper house in the U.S.  system, the Senate, you will find there are far more members in the  Senate engaged in the process of representative government.

This is not to say that Senators’ counterparts in the House of Lords  are not important to the legislative process. The well-educated and  legal-minded members of House of Lords can make very useful revisions on  items sent to them from the House of Commons. Additionally, like most  upper bodies in a bicameral system, its membership is smaller than in  the lower chamber which allows it to conduct business more efficiently.

Upper bodies of the legislatures provide an extra measure of  representation. For example, members of the House of Lords are chosen  through a process that includes thorough Appointment Committee vetting  of nominations, approval by the prime minister, and approval by the  monarch. On the other hand, the U.S. Senate, provides equal geographic  representation of the states. Each of the fifty states, regardless of  size, elects two persons to that body.

The Lower House

Regardless of the system, the presidential or parliamentary model,  the lower house is where the real power resides in most legislative  systems. In the United States, for example, most laws involving taxes  have traditionally originated in the House of Representatives. Lower  house representatives stand for election more often than their  counterparts in the upper house. This shorter election cycle makes these  representatives more in tune with their constituents. In many cases,  whatever is on the minds of the electorate will find a voice in the  lower house. The lower house is where political power is seen in its  most basic form.

The lower house of the parliament in Great Britain is called the  House of Commons. It selects the prime minister or head of government  from its own body as well as the cabinet. The House of Commons maintains  significant control over the executive and may even dismiss him or her  via a vote of no confidence. In the parliamentary model, it is not  uncommon for the largest party or the party in power to control not only  the lower house, but also the executive branch. Once parliamentary  elections are held, its members will select the next executive and  department heads from within its own ranks. This process can be good  news to voters weary of political gridlock. Political gridlock occurs  when nothing gets done and the various parties blame each other for the  inaction. With the executive and the legislature all hailing from the  same party, it would seem anything the executive wants to do will find  favor in the lower house. However, the system presents a problem for the  executive, who must make sure not to anger supporters in the lower  house, because parliament can remove the executive through a vote of no  confidence. Consequently, the executive and legislative members in a  parliamentary system tend to work closely together to ensure they agree.

 

Election/Selection Process

US Presidential System

Great Britain Parliamentary System

Election of Lower House

Citizens

Citizens

Selection of Upper House

Citizens

Appointment

Selection of Head of Government

Electoral College

Parliament/Monarch

Selection of Head of State

Electoral College

Birth Right

The Executive Branch

Executives in the presidential model are elected separate from the  legislature. The President is bound by statute to observe specific  election dates and is restrained by the Constitution from doing anything  that might exceed specified powers. Presidential powers are held in  check by the other two branches of government, the legislature and the  judiciary.

If anyone were to suggest that a job description for the U.S.  president might include prior national legislative experience, you would  not find many qualified applicants in the ranks of recent presidents.  In fact, before President Obama, only one American president in recent  U.S. history spent any time in the U.S. Congress – George H. W. Bush  (president 1989-1993). On the other hand, it would be impossible for  someone in the United Kingdom to rise to the post of prime minister  without legislative experience. In fact, in the British parliamentary  model, the executive is selected from within the legislative branch,  along with the cabinet that will help him or her guide the government.

Prime ministers can still serve as part of the legislative branch and  represent a local constituency, something presidents cannot do. Prime  ministers can also call for early national elections to be held to try  to strengthen their parties’ positions. The U.S. President cannot.  Former British Prime Minister, Theresa May, called for such an election  in 2017, hoping to strengthen her party’s position. She nearly lost the  party their position instead.

The executive in the presidential model is elected. In the U.S.; this  election takes place indirectly in the Electoral College, not the  legislature, or by direct citizen vote. The Electoral College is a  mechanism used to elect the US President every four years. The electors  are chosen according to rules set by each state individually and  codified by their own state law. When we vote for a candidate as a  citizen, we are actually voting for an elector to vote for the  president. These electors vote for the President based on laws of their  state which can vary between states. Every state has a number of  electoral votes equal to its number of congressional representatives,  plus three for the District of Columbia. A candidate must receive the  majority of votes in the Electoral College to win the election.

Executive Roles in the US Presidential System v. Great Britain Parliamentary System

 

HEAD OF GOVERNMENT

President

Prime Minister

HEAD OF STATE

President

Monarch

Additionally, the US President can veto legislation and can go to  voters directly to seek their support for issues. For example, the  President uses the State of the Union address to highlight the  Administration’s agenda for the coming year and push for support of its  causes amongst the public. The President uses platforms such as speeches  and press conferences to push the agenda on a regular basis. Gaining  the support of the public makes it difficult for a legislature to refuse  a presidential request. On the other hand, the British Prime Minister  is a working member of the Parliament. However, the Prime Minister is  also the leader of the government and sets its agenda within parliament  unlike the US President who works in a different branch.

As for dismissal of a president, in the United States, this process  is very difficult and resembles a trial in the legislature. A president  can only be removed for serious illegal actions. The executive is  afforded every opportunity to defend their actions as legal in this  process and remains in office unless found guilty. The process of  bringing charges against a public official is known as impeachment and  it is the job of the US House of Representatives. Former President Bill  Clinton was impeached by the US House of Representatives, but not found  guilty by the US Senate. The British Prime Minister can be removed from  office with a vote of no confidence in parliament. A vote is simply  called for by a member of parliament putting forth a motion of no  confidence in government and holding a vote upon it.

Influences on Representative Government in the US

The United  States Constitution guarantees the right of the people to petition the  government for redress of any grievances. In other words, citizens have  the right to protest or ask for help from their government without fear  of government retribution. For example, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) of  2010 required employers to provide birth control as part of their  health care insurance; some religious employers petitioned the  government for exclusion from this piece of the Act which they felt  interfered with their First Amendment religious rights. This guarantee  of the right to petition the government is a fundamental right in the US  representative-constitutional democracy. An essential part of this  process is voting for our representatives who will enact public policy  to deal with our grievances. Although the voter is at the center of this  process, getting public policies passed to deal with complicated issues  in the complex system can be difficult in a diverse nation. There are a  variety of actors that play a role in developing public policy that are  not discussed in the Constitution such as political parties and  interest groups.

Political Parties and Interest Groups

Whether you follow politics or not, there is little doubt that you  have heard of interest groups or political parties. They are a fixture  in our everyday lives. The idea of representing the people requires that  the government listen to the people. However, a country as large as  ours contains many voices demanding to be heard. Some voices can easily  be lost in the crowd. Interest groups and political parties form to aid  people attempting to be heard over the cries of the many because as more  and more people come together, their demands become stronger and  louder. As the old adage states “the squeaky wheel gets the grease.” So,  let’s take a moment to understand these key components of the political  process!

Interest groups and political parties have some similarities. They  both attempt to sway public policy. Where they differ from one another  is to whom they answer when all is said and done. An interest group  responds only to itself and its members. It lobbies politicians and may  even run ads to support particular candidates, but in the end, it is  outside of government. An interest group is not responsible to the  public. It represents only the specific goals of its particular  interests.

In contrast, a political party is comprised of representatives who  ultimately answer to the public. Their goal is to win elections, not  just promote their interests. In doing so, they must have a much broader  platform of interests or goals. It is kind of like the difference  between working for the private sector versus the public sector. Your  job may have the same responsibilities, but in the private sector you  represent the interests of your company and in the public sector you  represent the interests of the citizens.

The Impact of Electoral Systems

As we discussed last week, there are different types of electoral  systems. These systems influence party structure. Single-member  districts largely support a two-party system because of the power they  must obtain to be elected by a majority while proportional systems allow  for a multiparty structure because more parties can be represented in  the system.

In a plurality system where the winner takes all, the platforms of  smaller parties must band together to become viable contenders in the  race to receive the majority of votes. This banding promotes the  emergence of two strong parties as a means of obtaining enough votes to  win the election. However, in a system where a portion of the vote goes  to the percentage of votes received, two-distinct parties are not  essential to being represented. Smaller parties can retain their  distinctive agendas during the election process. However, it is  important to note the need for coalitions in this structure also. While  the smaller parties can achieve representation in government, a majority  must still be obtained in order to pass legislation. Therefore, the  smaller parties form coalition agreements to support the platform of the  member parties. Coalitions require the complete support of party  members because the loss of one representative’s vote can mean the clear  majority is lost. Although elected officials may try to support certain  policies, their efforts may be thwarted by the lack of support within a  coalition or even their own party. Compromises are needed to run an  effective government. Each of these two systems require compromise at  one stage or another.

Summary

Democracy is an old idea that continues to evolve. Even though a  democracy might look different from country to country, the bottom line  is the people are being represented. Regardless of whether a government  operates under a parliamentary or presidential model, the legislative  and executive branches are two key government components. Additionally,  electoral systems play a key role in these democracies ensuring the  election of government officials.

Both interest groups and political parties attempt to influence the  acts of government in these representative democracies, but they do so  from two different perspectives. The first is from the outside (interest  groups), and the second is from the inside (political parties). The  political party’s job is to win elections and the way to win is to get  eligible citizens to the polls to vote. In the US’s representative  government, the people vote on representatives to the executive and  legislative branches while in Great Britain citizens vote for members of  the House of Commons. Voting is not done in a vacuum. There are a  variety of actors dedicated to getting people to the polls, swaying  public opinion, and assisting with passing laws. A candidate must be  voted into the office before any public policy can be implemented to  address the people’s issues so political parties work diligently to get  people to the polls to vote for their person. Interest groups, also,  work with their members to get people to the polls to vote. If the  candidate wins, then the interest group works with the candidate to pass  favorable legislation for the cause.