Advantages And Disadvantages Of A Parliamentary System

In federalist paper #4 John Jay, explains the pros of having one strong national government to protect the people from foreign forces and influences; Rather than having 13 or 4 separate states or confederacies. Jay explains in depth how essential it is for America to be one nation with one government in charge of all states (colonies), and be able to commanded and provide safety to all of the states and its people. He states how much more efficiently one government can,” harmonize, assimilate, and protect several parts and members, and extend the benefits of its foresight and precautions to each.” Through maintaining the upper hand over foreign nations in trading, managing finances efficiently, maintain strong militia, free and united powerful

The United States Government can be described in two ways. There is unified government, which appears when the President and both houses of congress share the same party. Divided government is the opposite, it occurs when one party controls the white house, and another party controls one or more houses of Congress. A unified government should seem to be more productive because enacting laws would be much easier. A bill has to pass through both houses of congress as well as the president before it can be an official law. When all three of these areas share the same party and same views, laws will be more easily agreed on, thus they will be passed quicker. Also in unified government, filibusters would not be needed. A filibuster is a tactic in the senate which delays an action or bill and ultimately defeats the bill until it is thrown out. In a unified government where the majority of people share the same views, it would be less likely to need to delay bills or throw them out because everyone would already find a way to agree on most of them. However, at the same time, unified government can prove to have disadvantages as the president’s ultimate goal is to be reelected which would mean appealing to the moderates. Therefore, he or she might refuse to pass laws that are too liberal or conservative in order to keep the moderates happy.

Introduction: Canada senate is a part of legislation institution in Canada, which represents the interests of upper class people. Different from America, it is not produced by election but directly-nominated by the premier and appointed by governor. Senate, governor, and the House of Commons are like three legs of a tripod which constitute the congress and legislation system in Canada. Senate undertakes the responsibility of proposing expostulation to governor and cabinet, which acts the role of supervision and restriction. Senate played critical role when Canada established federal government in 1867, the diversity of senators warrants the smooth convey of popular will to governors and legislators coming from different ethnic group and social status. Above all, the senators nominated by senate are the venerable politicians, nobles, and the people possessing good prestige and social status. So Senate is a good completion and supplement to the House of Commons from both the political background and diversity, which can reach a balance and stability for legislation system. With the social progress and continues development of legislation system, the rhetoric and proud of appointment and dismissal, the power of supervision and voting are replaced by the “Only relatives are employed”, ”political return” system. The shortcoming of system and its devoid of keeping pace to time finally hamper the development of itself, however. Under this circumstances, “Duffy” is the essential victim under the increasingly corrupt

The idea of popular sovereignty is heavily based on the idea that the government is a democracy. In this concept of democracy the people

1.) The legislative branch basically conceives the law while the executive I believe, is the main enforcer after the president signs whatever reform/bill into law. So, I guess I 'll go with the Executive Branch since it is home to the Department of State because its our foreign ministry.

The 1912 election was a time in history that brought politics, social reform and economic supporters together to debate the future of America. These candidates would make history in the Progressive Era as they tried to convince voters they had the answers to change economic, political and the social needs of this country. Progressivism was established so that the government could help with the political and social reform needed for economic growth. Two specific candidates, Woodrow Wilson and William Howard Taft, both agreed that the United States did not need a direct democracy. This type of democracy, where the people, no elected officials, decide on the laws and policies was not a good plan for the country. Although

After the Glorious Revolution there were many similarities to our current government today and during colonial times. Although, before the Glorious Revolution it was significantly different. Some of the similarities included a bicameral form of government and how the colonies would run their own affairs. Some of the differences between then and now include the amount of power appointed to one person and how a law was made.

The election of 1796, John Adams versus Thomas Jefferson. The former won by only 3 single electoral college votes. In a highly competitive, controversial race filled with fake smiles and harsh glares, those votes made all the difference in the world to these two men and their running mates. Because George Washington refused a second term, political parties took root when election time came around. No one knew that this election in the early stages of Americas development would define the future of the United States of America. The Two-Party system soon controlled the decisions of all Americans. This is all this country has ever known, and if it were to every drastically change, our country would spin into ultimate turmoil. This system works

Knowing that they have a voice in the government urges people to be more educated and up to date on issues that are happening in the country as well as the world. Each year we see an increase in the amount of people showing up to vote for their officials.

It is important to keep in mind the difference between a Democracy and a Republic, as dissimilar forms of government. Understanding the difference is essential to comprehension of the fundamentals involved. It should be noted, in passing, that use of the word Democracy as meaning merely the popular type of government--that is, featuring genuinely free elections by the people periodically--is not helpful in discussing, as here, the difference between alternative and dissimilar forms of a popular government: a Democracy versus a Republic. This double meaning of Democracy--a popular-type government in general, as well as a specific form of popular government--needs to be made clear in any discussion, or writing, regarding this subject, for the sake of sound understanding.

The United States political structure is one of the most conducive and great political system in the world. One of the most popular aspects of it is the two party system, and the well-known Democratic and Republican parties.

Since the founding of the United States, there have been two main parties. Disagreeing on whether the constitution should be ratified, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton helped in founding the first political parties while serving on George Washington’s cabinet (ushistory.org). Starting with the Federalist and the Democratic-Republican parties, then Democratic Party and the National Republican Party, and then the Democratic and Whig Parties, and finally to the now well-known rivalry between the Democratic and Republican Parties, the two-party system is a long-standing tradition in the United states (Blake). The two-party system definitely has some advantages. It allows for political stability, a smaller pool of candidates for public office, a simplified version of political information, and the representation of multiple political ideals (“9 Advantages and Disadvantages”). However, the two-party system’s disadvantages outweigh these positives. At the state and local level, the two-party system has a negative effect on the government and voters, it ignores options outside of the main two parties, and is perpetuated by many

A democracy is a system of government that gives the people the power to govern. This can either be done directly, where citizens actively participate in the decision making of the country, or indirectly through elected representatives. The purpose of the democratic process is to protect the interests of all citizens of a country. In order to do so, every citizen in the country needs a medium through which to express his political opinion to defend his interests. This is the role of political parties. Political parties are politically recognized organizations of citizens who form to defend their interests. Having a political system that allows the freedom to form a new political parties or to declare membership in already existing ones, promotes democracy. As such, political parties are an indispensable part of the democratic process. However, there are also negative consequences to having political parties. Political parties saw their origins in the 17th and 18th centuries in the UK, evolving from previous political organizations called factions. The political party model then spread over many parts of Western Europe, including France and Germany, over the 19th century. Since then, they have become the most common political system in the world. In this essay, we will show how political parties are essential to ensuring democracy. We will also show that there are unavoidable negative consequences to the party system.

In South Africa we have different political parties that citizens vote for to represent them in Parliament and have their best interest at heart. The struggle against apartheid is over and we now live in a democratic society. Parliamentary sovereignty is done away with and replaced with constitutional supremacy which means the constitution is supreme and the highest law in South Africa. The majority party is the ANC which puts the DA second in line however the question is whether having such a strong majority party could have a negative impact on the parliaments function to represent the citizens of South Africa.

The precedent is a decided legal case, which is used as a basis for deciding later similar cases. The English Law system is a legal system where the precedent has a great weight. This law system can be subdivided into two main interrelated branches: statute (or statutory) law and common law. Statute is an Act of Parliament, which starts its life as a bill, goes through the parliament, receives royal assent and becomes law. [5] Common law works in a different way, the judges rather than the Parliament make common law or ‘judge-made law’. Considering criminal and civil cases, the judges take decisions based on the stare decisis principle (Latin “to stand by things decided”, the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent [4]), deliver rulings and create precedents, thus applying the law to real life situations. Therefore, the value of the precedent is very high in the English Common Law system.