Part of the system is the introduction of proportional representation that meant parties in the Riechtag would gain seats depending upon the number of votes they got in the most recent election. The consequence of this was that it brought a number of parties together with the help of another key feature of the constitution, the “Bill of Rights”. This meant that parties could express their views, as the “Bill of Rights” was a law that gave people the freedom of speech. This union made representation of many opposing parties very open, which effectively made the Weimar constitution more democratic. However P.R made it difficult for a lot of parties to gain a majority of seats in the Reichstag, which made it harder for one major party to take control of the country.
The top-down approach the rulers of Russia had in the period 1855-1964 were superficially different as the communists claimed to represent the people by giving power to the proletariat where as the Tsars were heavily elitist in their ideology. The communists’ efforts to represent the people is corroborated by the introduction of the soviet by the Provisional Government, which was organised as a grassroots effort to practice direct democracy. Although the presence of the Zemstva and Duma, introduced by Alexander II and Nicholas II respectively, presents some evidence the Tsars may have attempted to give Russia a sense of democracy, it was ran by the nobility so it was not representative of the people and thus heavily autocratic in their rule. Conversely, although the communists and the Tsars appear to have ruled differently in their top-down approach, they in fact did not because in practice the communists gave an extremely limited extent of power to the proletariat. The Provisional Government’s vacillating rule on the other hand, from heavily autocratic to democratic led to the governments demise.
Whereas what works best for the German culture is a multi party dual executive form of government where a majority of the power is located in the chancellor and the other branches are not quite as important but still serve their rolls to help the government to move forward. Ultimately, the distinguishing features of the two governments may seem small but they are actually quite significant and are the result of the two nations drastic difference in the way their relative histories progressed. The American presidential system is the result of the breaking away from the Great Britain; and the German presidential system is a direct result of the fall of Hitlers Nazi Germany. Both forms of democracy rose as a solution to tyranny and oppression and consequently produced two of the worlds front running
The system of the United States is a presidential democracy. We can categorise the United States as a democracy as there are competitive elections for the Presidency and the Legislature. However, the United States should be classified as a ‘flawed’ liberal democracy, as there is an entrenched two-party system which makes it nearly impossible for third parties to be elected to the legislature or the Presidency. Further, the political system of the United States lacks an even playing field for political candidates, as there are no limits on electoral campaign spending, a large amount of resources and funds is required to gain election. However, the United States’ regime does have many liberal facets including civil liberties, rule of law, accountability measures and fair
General - This is where all the seats in the House of Commons are open for election. The maximum time that a parliament can sit in for is 5 years and 3 weeks without a general election being called. The prime minister is the person that calls the election. He/she will normally call an election when they feel they have the best
Due to the increasing presidential style of recent prime ministers and the party loyalty of the executive one can consider Parliament’s control of executive power minimal. However, due to the development of independent bodies surrounding Select Committees and the delaying of legislation by the House of Lords it can still be argued to be effective. The government usually has an overall majority. This is due to our voting system of FPTP which gives preference to the two main parties, normally giving them majorities (and increasingly large ones) as opposed to coalitions and minority governments which are produced through other voting systems such as AV in Scotland and Wales. Although we are currently in a coalition the government still has a majority through the combination of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.
In Europe they vote for parties instead of candidates iii. The political party in America seeks to control government through elections and providing labels iv. America is less ideological and change easily 2. Development of United States party system a. Founding period i.
Parliament may face difficulties in controlling executive power as the government usually has an overall majority. This is especially the case when there has been a creation of a large majority after elections such as 1997 and 2001 with Labour majorities of 179 and 167 respectively. Majorities of 66 in 2005 and 83 with the coalition in 2010 have also been recorded. This allows the government to claim a mandate from the people for its policies when it is elected to power. Therefore the parliament lacks the legitimate right to ignore the mandate and tends to accept the government’s right to govern.
Therefore, the role of Prime Minister and cabinet is one which is much more encompassing than is the role of President. Thus the Parliamentary system has a duel executive, the cabinet is a collective decision-making body, Cabinet Ministers are also members of parliament, the cabinet is responsible to the parliamentary majority, the parliamentary majority can force the cabinet to resign, and the Prime Minister is not directly elected; although,
Separation of Powers Vanessa Totsch Everest University The separation of powers is considered to be the division of powers and responsibilities between the different branches of the government. (Magleby & Light, 2009 Brief Edition, p. 21) This can also be within the same lines as “checks and balances”. The different branches of the United States Government can overrule another, for instance, the judicial branch can overrule the legislature if it finds that a ruling that the legislature has passed is unconstitutional. (Magleby & Light, 2009 Brief Edition) The Framers of the Constitution of the United States wished to have a strong central government, yet have limited powers that could be used by the government. This was to help keep someone from making the democracy into a monarchy for one example.