parliamentary systems Flashcards
what are the two main powers of the executive?
1) leadership creating laws (foreign policy, budget and legislation proposals )
2) management of implamenting these leadership tasks (implementation of this policy seen in parliament)
what elements makes up a governemnt ?
- head of governemnt
- cabinet ministers
- junior ministers
- civil servents
in what ways can the executive be formed
direct election
election by parliament
or a special college
in what ways can an executive be removed?
- impeachement, vote fo no confidence or removed by their political party
what did chiebub and limogni find about democratic stability in these strucutres
between 1949 and 1999 1/23 pres reigmes died compared to 1/58 parl reigemes
party cohesion in parl systems
party cohesion is far stronger in parl as:
- party loyatly cna get yu prmoted to a ministerial level
- party whips enforce party cohesion when voting on leg
- if there is a vote of no confidence MPs are at risk of loosing their job if there is a general election
party cohesion in pres systems
- pes systems cant really promote cohesion
- there is no possibility for promotion
- seperate elections for parl and pres means that people vote based on hwat th represenaive has done for their consituncy rather than them being strong allies of their political parties
who has agenda setting and veto power in pres systems
Agenda setter: any member of pairlaent
- Veto: majority of parliament and president
- Parliament proposes and president accepts of rejects (but parliament have the power of veto override)
who has veto and agenda setting power in parl systems
agenda: the governemnt
veto: majoirty in parlaiemtn or the head of state
- governemtn prooses and prliament accepts or jctecs bills
is there an independent elected president in presidential systems
yes
is there an independent elected president in parliamentary systems
contstitutional monarchy no
parliametnary republic: yes
is there an independent elected president in semi-presidential systems
yes
what is the spatial model?
- helps to understand how governemnt works
1) politics and policy making can be conceptualised in political paces (like the right or left dimention)
2) each actor (eg a legislator or a party) has an ideal policy in this policy space
3) when making a choice between different policies, each actor will vote for the party who it closest to their ideal policy
4) if no policy is agreed the existing policy remains the status quo
what is the idea of the ‘median voter’
policies shoudl converge on the position of the median voter
the thory developed by Black is the idea that people running for office with converge in the centre of politics to gain votes and win
what are the 2 conditions that semi-presdiential systems can find themsleves in?
- in a unified government where pres and pm are of the same party policy making works like a presdiential system with a unifed governemnt:
the presdient controls the PM /cabinet which proposes legislative agenda whic he maj o parliament approves
cohabitiation: where the president and maj in parliament are not of the same party it works like a parliamentary system:
- the presdien is froced to appoing a Pm from the party of the maj n parl and then the P and cabinet govern like a parliamentary system with little input from pres
what are the 2 conditions that semi-presdiential systems can find themsleves in?
- in a unified government where pres and pm are of the same party policy making works like a presdiential system with a unifed governemnt:
the presdient controls the PM /cabinet which proposes legislative agenda whic he maj o parliament approves
cohabitiation: where the president and maj in parliament are not of the same party it works like a parliamentary system:
- the presdien is froced to appoing a Pm from the party of the maj n parl and then the P and cabinet govern like a parliamentary system with little input from pres
what argument does linz propose as the perils of presidentialism:
- stable democracies tend to be parlimentary rather than presdiential due to the insituional design og parliaments being stonger then presidential systems
- as a result presidential systems are more likely to break down
due to :
- winner takes all elections
- style of presidential politics
- dual legitimacy
linz on winner takes all elections in presidentialism
- in parliamentary systems (on the whole) coalitions are created creating concecnus and increased representation
whereas presdiential systems havign a winner takes all electoral system and fixed term persdiences its only the represetnation of one idea fr 4 or 5 years lack of representation
could also lead to protests
linz on the style of presidential politics
- president is both a non partisan head of state and the head of a governemnt
- but they are also the head of a political party making it hard to be non partisan
- presidents made conflate thier support beleiving the people voterd for them een if they got 51% of vote
- appoint people in cabinet who wnt challenge them ro infringe on thier power
- presidents dont have to be party players (trump used to fiannce the democrats unil he realsied he would be more succsessful as a republican)
- they may discrimnate agaisnt those who voted against them
linz on dual legtimacy
- in parl systems a conflict between the exective and legislature can be solved with a vote of no confidence
- presdiential systems ahve no real capacity to heal disputes between the two bodies, as they are both elected they both beleive they hae the will of the people causing conflic of views and gridlock due to fixed term
example of perils of presidentialism
bolivia
- winner takes all electoral systems
- fixed term presidency
- power vaccume after morales resigned it was uncler who woud succeed him
- morale’s rule became increasigly personalised as he regarded his own ethnic group sd he \true bolians
- the country was divided between many ethnic groups
how does horowitz challenge linz?
- linz focuses of latin america but if you look at asia and africa his conclusions would be different
- presidencies are more varied than linz allowed for
- electoral systems matters more than the politicla system ; electroal systesma re the real villain asFTPT and winner takes all systems lead to absolute majorities which cna be used to establish authoritarian reigmes
example supportng horowitzs; claims
in nigeria there deep religious divides between muslims and christians
westminster mdel collapsed in 1966 adn was replaced with presidential style
their electroal system the winer needs 25%of the vote share in 2/3 of consituencies (have to appela to both group sinsociety)
secod roud of voters were is a condition that the presdient and vice presdient need to be of opposite relgiions
what do cheibub and limongi argue is the rease casue of presidential systems collapsing
decenteralisation:
- democratic politicla systesms that are highly centerlised in decision making are less likely to collapse
- ceneteralised decisonmaking can hapen in pres and parl systems
example: brazil is a centeralised presdiential system and thus it has survied
what are the pros of presidential systems?
directly accountable exectuive
stong working parliament
checks and balences
more delibertive decision making
what are the cons of presidential systems?
prone to legislative gridlock
weak executive
weak parties
reigme instabilities
what are the pros of parliamentary democracies?
one election
powerful exectuive (if a stong majority)
cohesive parties
a mandate to govern
cons of parliamentary democracies?
indirectly accountable to government
weak parliament
powerful party whips
policy change can be too quick
example of mongolia as a semi-presidential system?
- one six year term
- presdiential candiates are nominated by parliament then have a popular vote
and then once elected nominate a PM from the majoirty party in parliament - president cant reject proposals for PM more than 3x
- pres can dissolve parliament but only with 2/3 parliamentary support
- can veto leg but needs approval of PM first
what types of parliamentary system are there?
westminster style: majoriarian
parteis face eachother in an adversarial way
concecnus model (seen in ireland)
parties sit in a horseshoe
committes more importnat that gov to pass laws
estonia is a conencus model nad they sit on deskes with 2 people from different parties
