(18) Typologies of Regimes Flashcards
parliamentary chains of delegation: responsibilities
> fusion of powers
- either no independently elected president or the president is not responsible to government
- government has agenda-setting-power
- no directly elected head of state
parliamentary chains of delegation: (vote of (no)) confidence
- government responsible to parliament (often also vice versa)
- government needs confidence in parliament
- parliament can remove government without cause
- Vote of Now Confidence ≠ impeachment
- government/PM can (sometimes) dissolve parliament
- government can request Vote of Confidence
- Maastricht treaty (EU) to Vote of Confidence
- tories were divided → didn’t get through HoC
- John Major tied it to Vote of Confidence
- all voted for it in fear of a general election
- Maastricht treaty (EU) to Vote of Confidence
- if government loses Vote of (No) Confidence
- has to step down
- now government must form
- if not possible → general elections
presidential chains of delegation
> separation of powers
- government not responsible to elected assembly
- legislative and executive branches elected separately
- legislature has agenda setting power (cf. US Congress)
Semi-presidential
- independently elected president who is responsible to parliament
- split executive (PM/gov. + President)
- government is responsible to parliament
FR:
- president appoints PM and Ministers (but has to take into account majority in national assembly)
- president can dissolve national assembly & ask PM to resign
- government is responsible to parliament
- Cohabitation curtails power of president (no majority of his party in national assembly)
- less likely since reduction of presidential terms 7 → 5 years
Cohabitation =
curtails power of president (no majority of his party in national assembly)
Linz-Horowitz-Debate =
Parliamentarism vs. Presidentialism
Parliamentarism
Pros (Linz)
- clear chain of delegation
- not two different branches who claim democratic legitimacy
- no fixed terms
- don’t have to wait for next general election
- PM must make decision in conjunction with others (parties, ministers…)
- not one single president who might become authoritarian
Parliamentarism : Cons
- unclear election outcomes
- biggest party ≠ government → coalitions
- no fixed terms
- instability (cf. Israel)
- who is responsible?
- coalition parties blame each other
Presidentialism
Pros (Horowitz)
- clear, easy to understand election outcomes
- one person “in charge”
- fixed terms
Presidentialism: Cons
- fixed terms
- two chains of delegation
- who claims “legitimacy”?
- one person in charge
which is longer lasting? presidentialism vs. parliamentarism
> parliamentary systems are more stable / last longer than presidential
- Linz: because of presidentialism per se
- Horowitz: other variables
- average income lower
- economic growth lower
- often small countries
- often in Latin America
majoritarian decision making: overview
quick decisions: simple majority (50%+1), sometimes plurality (biggest party, not even 50%)
- single party governments
- two party system
- unicameral legislature
- unitary state
- few checks on ruling party
→ UK, NZ before 1992
majoritarian decision making: Pros and Cons
Pros
- clear, easy to understand outcomes
- quick responsiveness
Cons
- minority needs to wait until next election
- representation?
Consensual decision making: overview
broad consensus has to be reached
- proportional elections → no single winner
- multi-party system
- bicameral legislature
- coalition government → compromise
consensual decision making: Pros & Cons
Pros
- find solutions acceptable to most
- more citizens have stake in government
Cons
- slow
- unclear how election lead to change
