The topic of this essay is „Presidential systems – strenghts and weaknesses.“ I chose this topic because I am very interested into the comparison of presidential and parliamentary systems. For quiet a long time, I have been trying to figure out which one is better for countries. This essay might be a good stepping stone for me to figure it out.
This essay will go step by step analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of presidential systems. Examples of countries will be concluded to each point. For every argument I tried to find a An interesting fact is, that every advantage can be seen from another point of view and I will like to show this in my essay.
First of all, the most most important argument in favor of presidental systems is the separation of the executive and legislative institutions of government according to classical democratic theory which means that these two can monitor each other, and therefore there is a lesser chance to abuse the power. According to Newton, Costa Rica has typical separation of powers, that means: Independent executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. There is an obvious division of offices and powers in this system. For example the president, vice-presidents and ministers in the Government Council represent the executive branch, and therefore have the power to tax and spend. The legislature represented by the Legislative Assembly can amend the president's budget (Newton, 2005).
In the United States, president is in charge of the executive branch and he initiates the legistlation, but he is dependent on the the legislature to pass it into law. On the other hand, he can veto anything the legislature has passed into law. If we compare this system with a parliamentary s...
... middle of paper ...
...diaite.com/tv/a-brief-history-of-the-2013-government-shutdown/> [Accessed 25.12.2013].
Borgna Brunner, (2007). A Short History of Impeachment. [online] Available at: [Accessed 25.12.2013].
Európska justičná sieť v občianskych a obchodných veciach, (2004). Právny poriadok - Slovensko. [online] Available at: [Accessed 25.12.2013].
Gustavo Coronel, (2011). Is Venezuela a Dictatorship?. [online] Available at: [Accessed 25.12.2013].
Juan Linz, (1990). The Perils of Presidentialism. Journal of Democracy, 51-69.
Newton, K. & J. W. Van Deth (2005). Foundations of Comparative Politics: Democracies of the Modern World, Cambridge: CUP, Ch. 4, ‘Presidential and Parliamentary Government’, 60-71.
Examining the conceptualizations and theories of Neustadt and Skowronek’s in comparative perspective, this essay makes the principal argument that both of these theories only represent partial explanations of how success and efficiency is achieved in the context of the Presidency. With Neustadt focusing saliently on the President’s micro-level elite interactions and with Skowronek adopting a far more populist and public opinion-based framework, both only serve to explain some atomistic facets of the Presidency. As such, neither is truly collectively exhaustive, or mutually exclusive of the other, in accounting for the facets of the Presidency in either a modern day or historical analytical framework. Rather, they can best be viewed as complementary theories germane to explaining different facets of the Presidency, and the different strengths and weaknesses of specific Administrations throughout history.
Can you imagine president controlling your life? The constitution use three different forms to make a group or a person from getting too much power on his hands. The are three types of power that each contusion have in order to keep power equal. One of them is Legislative Branch Congress “Can approve Presidential nominations”(Document C). It’s a example how governments try to keep power equal.
The Evolution of the Power of the Presidency The views of the presidency by the first sixteen presidents varied widely but all of their actions set precedents for their successors to use, expand, or even curtail the power of the office. Some believed in the Whig theory of strict adherence to the constitution, while others believed the president was the steward of the people with a loose interpretation of it. The power of the office expanded through the years, however it only expanded as far as the public and congress allowed. George Washington was the first President of the United States of America and realizing this he acted carefully and deliberately, aware of the need to build an executive structure that could accommodate future presidents.
Without this system, one branch of government might become more powerful than the others. It is necessary that we keep each branch equally powerful so that one matter doesn’t get more attention than the others. For example, the president could veto a law passed by Congress. Congress can override that veto under certain circumstances. Another example is that the Supreme Court may check Congress by making a law unconstitutional. The power is balanced by the fact that members of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president. Those appointments have to be approved by
The approach focused on in this analysis will be the Neustadtian approach; a theory presented in Neustadt’s seminal work entitled Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents. Also up for analysis is an article by Matthew Kerbel, a follower of the Neustadtian approach who provides empirical analysis that substantiates Neustadt’s work.
The presidency of the United Sates of America has been an evolving office since the term of our first president, George Washington. This evolution has occurred because of the changing times and the evolution of society itself, but also because of the actions of the men who have become president. Starting in the 20th century, most have referred to the presidency as the modern presidency due to changes in both a president's power and the way that the office itself is viewed. As the office of the president has evolved so has who can become president evolved. Yet, even today there are certain individuals who because of their gender or race have yet to hold the office of the presidency. The men that have been president in our modern era have all had faults and greatness, some having more of one than of the other. The modern presidency is an office that many aspire to, but that few hold. The evolution of the office of the presidency has been one from that of a traditional role to that of a modern role that is forever evolving.
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system.
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
In summation this paper discussed the three correct types of regimes according to Aristotle; furthermore it examined the deviations of these regimes. This was done by firstly examining a regime led by royalty, secondly by observing the characteristics of an aristocratic regime and thirdly by discussing a regime ran by constitutional government. Finally defining the three correct types of regimes the deviations of these regimes: tyrannical, oligarchic and democratic were examined.
Political society today, has taken many lessons from Plato and Aristotle’s political ideas. As was the case in Ancient Greece, there are many different political ideologies and regimes that will may serve the purpose for one society, but in another, could cause utter chaos. Aristotle attributed the need for there being a number of political regimes due to the fact that there are “many parts to a city.” (4.3.1) The many parts to a city that he was referring to, simply enforces the necessity of having different forms of office for each of these parts. Not every method will work for each society. Aristotle’s concepts of political regimes have deeply rooted itself in society today. In order to understand the concepts of regime as suggested by Aristotle, this paper will consider the three different types; royalty, aristocracy, and constitutional government, as well as each of their deviations.
Several aspects of the executive branch give the presidency political power. The president’s biggest constitutional power is the power of the veto (Romance, July 27). This is a power over Congress, allowing the president to stop an act of Congress in its tracks. Two things limit the impact of this power, however. First, the veto is simply a big “NO” aimed at Congress, making it largely a negative power as opposed to a constructive power (July 27). This means that the presidential veto, while still quite potent even by its mere threat, is fundamentally a reactive force rather than an active force. Second, the presidential veto can be overturned by two-thirds of the House of Representatives and Senate (Landy and Milkis, 289). This means that the veto doesn’t even necessarily hav...
The United States government braces its power among three powerful branches, legislative, executive and judicial. These branches interact with one another to establish authority that is strong, yet equal to have power over the country. Each branch pursues certain responsibilities and duties to operate in an efficient and effective manner in which society upholds. The executive, legislative and judicial branches all interact amid each other to validate accuracy of the nation’s most powerful law of the land, the Constitution. It is important to know how these branches interact with each other to learn how a bill becomes a law. Reflecting on how the three branches promote a balance of power that is constructive to include the agendas and electoral roles that also plays a vast part in the government’s operation.
Garner, R., Ferdinand, P. and Lawson, S. (2009) Introduction to Politics. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
In this work, Socrates presents four different types of political constitutions. The four types are as follows: Timocracy; Oligarchy; Democracy; and Tyranny. Socrates points out the kind of men grow out of these different constitutions and how one is in fact less desirable and transferred from its preceding form of government/constitution. All four are different stages of deterioration from the perfect, just style of constitution Kallipolis.
Hague, R. & M. Harrop (2010). Comparative Government and Politics. 8th ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 64.