6. Nature of Executive Office
Electoral Mechanism
Continuance in Office
Executive-Legislative Relationship
7. PARLIAMENTARISM
Service in both branches
Dependent on legislature
Centralized decision-making
Can dissolve legislature
PRESIDENTIALISM
Separation of Powers
and Checks and Balances
Independent executive
Cannot serve in legislature
Decentralized decisions
Cannot dissolve legislature
8.
9. Splits executive power
President: Head of State; Direct Election
Prime Minister: Head of Govt.; Presidential Appt.
Passage of legislation requires both officials
Roles and functions spelled out in constitution
10.
11. Accountability
Direct election by citizens
Identifiability
President is head of national party
Clear choice about direction of country
Mutual Checks
Checks and Balances
Consensus in government
“Arbiter-in-Chief”
“Power to Persuade”
Can president be non-partisan?
12. Temporal Rigidity
FixedTenure in Office
Unpopular and Popular Presidents
Executive-Legislative Relations
Dual Democratic Legitimacy
Separate Elections Popular Mandate
“Outsiders” as Presidential Candidates
13.
14. Who were the “Gold Standard” Leaders?
Something From Nothing
MoreThan Before
Staying Power
Military Prowess
Social Engineering
Ideology
Economic Prosperity
Statesmanship
Moral Example
Political Legacy
Constituency Size
Editor's Notes
There are three main forms of governing arrangements involving executives:
#1: Parliamentarism
#2: Presidentialism
#3: Semi-Presidentialism
We can distinguish the first two types based on four elements:
#1: The nature of the executive office
#2: The electoral mechanism by which an executive gains political authority
#3: How an executive remains in office once elected
#4: The executive’s relationship with a national legislative body
Understanding these distinctions is a useful first step toward making an informed judgment on the nature of executives within the political system.
What is the relationship like between executives and legislatures?
Parliamentarism
- Simultaneous service in both branches
- Dependent on legislature
- Centralized decision-making process (with cabinet)
- May dissolve legislature
Presidentialism
- Separation of powers via checks and balances
- Certain degree of independence for executive
- Cannot serve in both branches
- U.S. presidents have served in Congress before and after term
- Decentralized decision-making process
- President can make unilateral decisions
- Cannot dissolve legislature
Semi-presidentialism splits executive power between an elected president and a selected prime minister.
President
- Elected by citizens as in presidential system
- Functions as Head of State but has power in running government
Prime Minister
- Head of Government as in parliamentary system
- Appointed by president; must have majority support in legislature
- Passage of legislation requires approval of both officials
- Power of roles must be spelled out in national constitution for arrangement to work
President gets foreign policy authority; PM over domestic issues
There has been a scholarly debate for some time over the advantages and disadvantages of a presidential system of government.
Instead of reading the entire Linz piece on this topic originally in the syllabus, I am only requiring you to know and understand the five reasons that Linz cites for why parliamentary systems are better than presidential systems.
You can find this information in the “Insights” box on p. 239 of your textbook titled, “The Perils of Presidentialism and the Virtues of Parliamentarism.”
There are four main arguments FOR a presidential system of government.
Reason #1: Accountability
This refers to the degree and means by which elected officials are responsible to citizens.
Accountability increases with choices made during elections and expectations to which
politicians and others are held.
Related to retrospective voting – “throw the bums out”
Officials want to get re-elected, so they are sensitive to voters’ concerns
Voters directly choose presidents that cannot be removed in cases of party shifts in
legislature
Reason #2: Identifiability
- This is characterized by the degree to which voters can identify before election the likely alternative governments that may emerge after election.
Accountability – Voters have clear choices in election
Identifiability – Voters have clear prospective choice
- In presidential systems, voters have a very good idea of the alternatives that are being put forth by candidates. However, the range of candidate choice may be limited
- Parliamentary systems, in contrast, allow voters to know what they are asking for, but presidential systems make it clearer what they are getting
There are two arguments AGAINST a presidential system.
Reason #1: Temporal Rigidity
Refers to fixed length of presidential and congressional terms
While impeachment is an option in constitutions, the threshold for actually removing an executive from office is very high.
One problem comes with an executive who is unpopular, or even mildly popular but faces opposition in legislature.
Cannot pass legislative program or gain support from citizenry
Opposite problem is when popular and competent chief executive has to step down following their term of office.
Do you lose effective government or tamper with constitution?
Presidential systems forced to have generate leader every 4-5 years.
Becomes a burden on the overall political system.
- President cannot dissolve legislature
