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.
Although, president reserves some key competences. Generally, the members of government are also members of parliament, and accountable to Parliament. If the government doesn't get the vote of confidence, it can be dismissed by the Parliament or achieves the appointment of new elections to government. Such republics often have proportional electoral systems. The voters vote for parties rather than candidates.
It is important that the president’s power be tempered by the ideals of the democracy. Whether or not the president feels that his actions are justified because of circumstances he must always consider the will of the people as his driving force. The presidency can not be evaluated with out taking into account our democratic government and likewise the democracy can not be judged without considering the role and influence of the president.
We have a constitution that is followed by each elected official and their successors. There isn’t 100% discretion given to the one ruler without communication from other people. The word democracy is used when politicians want something from “the people,” and they use the word “republic” when they don't. Regardless, American is unique with ups and downs but has windows of opportunity for citizens to matter as much as the President of the United States. Even the opportunity for the citizen to become President of the United States.
Other forms include the parliament and presidential, and hybrid of direct democracy. A representative democracy entails a system in which citizens’ vote for a representative who enacts legislations and policies to govern the community and maintain order in the society (Janda, 2012). On the other hand, a direct democracy is a form that the people vote directly for the policies they want by carrying out a referendum. In a parliamentary democracy, which is a representative one, the parliament is elected by the representatives chosen by people and can be dismissed by the officials in case of misconduct (Newton, 2010). The presidential democracy, unlike the parliamentary one, it is the president, who is democratically elected by the people, who is the head of the government and can dismiss the parliament, and at some states he or she is given the mandate to elect the Parliament.
According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary, “democracy is a government by the people.” Merriam additionally specifies democracy as the “rule of the majority.” In government, this definition may be a contradiction. A classic democratic state is defined as a government in which the supreme power is invested in the people which is exercised directly or indirectly through the use of elections. However, according to the definition of Merriam-Webster the power comes from the masses. In the parliamentary democracy of the United Kingdom and Sweden either theory may be applied. In both countries, the Constitution declares the people as the main source of public power.
In parliamentary systems, the leader becomes prime minister through the majority party and can almost always rely on their support. If no majority is elected, the first who came into the party is requested by the monarch to form a government. The prime minister will then select all remaining government officials, all of whom must be within the majority party. This is quite different than the elections of any Unites States President, who had to win their nominations based on personal beliefs and promises for change and improvement. (95) Of the two systems we know today, the United States of America practices the truest form of democracy.
This system allows citizens of the United States to elect representatives who make rules for the rest of the people. These officials are held accountable “through periodic elections and the rule of law” (Text, 4). The ideas of majority rule and minority rights give power to the rules made by the officials but also protect the ideas of the minority. This is an important element in democracy as it gives a voice to the minority party. In the United States, we elect the members of each of the three branches of government differently.
I like that there is a separation of powers within a presidential system, which I feel is necessary for any system. Additionally, I believe it is beneficial to the country to have fixed terms for the chief executive. Moreover, I do not feel that the president should have the authority to dissolve the parliament and hold new elections. For these reasons, I think that at this time in history the United States benefits from a presidential system, but the Electoral system used could be reviewed and
Great Britain is currently viewed throughout the world as a parliamentary dictatorship due to the presiding power that the prime minister has over the entire government. In Great Britain the Prime Minister controls both the executive and judicial branches of government through their party having the majority of the seats in the house. With both the executive and legislative branches belonging to the same party the judicial branch loses some of its relative power through the legislative branch’s ability to pass new acts in parliament, which can overturn judicial rule. Afterwards the judicial branch has no power to declare the law as invalid, limiting the role of the judge to a mere law interpreter. In essence the judge would only be able to reflect the view of the legislature through his interpretation of the laws that had been reconfigured by the legislative branch.