Advantages And Disadvantages Of A Parliamentary System

This seems deceptive because the people of that state vote for their party, not the opposing side. However, as seen multiple times in history, representatives have voted against their party. Although it seems as if the state representatives have the power to manipulate the majority’s vote, it is noted that the people choose their representatives (so the voters receive what they voted for). Through the establishment of the Electoral College, people are allowed to vote for their representatives, candidates have a better understanding of the nation’s needs, and there is more equal representation. It is with these reasons that I support the Electoral College and do not think that it should be modified nor abolished.

Federalists and Anti-Federalists both have an arguable amount of supporters. I am in favor of the Anti-Federalist point of view. The Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution granted too much power to the federal courts, at the expense of the state and local courts. They argued that the federal courts would be too far away to provide justice to the average citizen. In addition the Constitution allows the government too much power,does not provide for a republican government, and it also does not include a Bill of Rights, which is vital.

The Westminster system of government comprises of a democratically elected lower house. After the executive members the head of government is the prime minister. The next system that falls in place is the opposition which is led by the leader of the party or the parties with the second largest number of seats in the lower house. It follows that in the British system the prime minister and the cabinets are fully in charge of Parliament.

Summary The three branches of government should be independent No branch should have power over selecting who makes up the other two branches However, the citizens cannot practically elect individuals for every office for example, the people may not be able to distinguish what makes a good judge (for judicial branch). the government has to be able to govern itself, meaning since men can be greedy, there must be constitutional walls that prevent one branch from becoming too powerful

Political parties has to earn respect from the public in order to succeed. Today parliamentary sovereignty is done away with and the Supreme law is the Constitution

The system allows for the voices of the people to be heard through the popular vote and have elected officials make educated decisions based on the opinions of the nation’s citizens. However, the way the Electoral college is set up makes it possible for a candidate to be elected president without the majority of the popular vote (U.S. Electoral College). The combination of the controversial nature of the College and the differing opinions of U.S. citizens leads to a question being asked: Is the Electoral College damaging to the democratic system in United States, or is it a pivotal extension of our democracy? While some U.S. citizens feel that the Electoral College should be abolished, there are those who feel the system plays a key role in our Presidential election.

First of all, the checks and balances guards against tyranny because if we don't stay in check someone might gain too much power. This is very bad because then if they have all the power they want they can do pretty much whatever they want. Many people would end up not agreeing to the laws they make this would basically guarantee a tyranny. The next reason is because checks keep a strong government. An example is without keeping check then the government wouldn't be as strong because of having multiple people with power there would only be one.

Madison brings up that it isn’t possible to divide power absolutely equally and “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” (2). And so, the legislative branch will be divided even more to try and combat the unbalance of power. Madison thought this system was a good method because he believed that it was part of human nature to have conflicting ideas and wants, and so each branch could keep the others in line and therefor no one power is above the others. Furthermore, Madison believes a bigger government with multiple branches is better because then it becomes difficult for one

Did the Constitution create a “more perfect Union?” After the American Revolution and The Declaration of Independence, America’s established its core government with the document known as the Articles of Confederation. The Articles possessed many structural weaknesses, mostly because it allowed states to operate like independent countries. The Articles of Confederation set up a government that consisted of a one-house body of delegates in which each state having a single vote. Acting collectively, these delegates could make decisions on certain issues that affected all the states.

Although this amendment isn’t brought up, or even known about, it helps the government control what companies enter the United States. Without this piece, there would be businesses from all around the world taking over our economy. Later on, there were disputes about the newly ratified Constitution. Federalists and anti federalists arose due to their differing views over the newest work. Federalists were for the Constitution, while anti federalists were against the Constitution, mostly because it didn’t have a guaranteed set of rights for citizens.

Unlike the Articles of Confederation, the new Constitution had Separation of Powers between the three forms of government in America. They are separated into three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. These three branches of government all have a role in American politics. The legislative branch of government consists of two houses.

However, the legislative branch of the new government proposed in the Constitution is able to control the malignant effects of factions because the representatives are able to pass legislation that affects large portions of the nation instead of individuals. Madison then states that a pure democracy, in which ordinary citizens govern themselves, are not able to control the effects of factions, but a republic, in which citizens elect representatives to govern, is able to. The reason that republics can control the effects of political parties is because the representatives have to consider the good of the whole nation; Madison hopes that their patriotism will override their temporary interests. Furthermore, representatives, given that they are elected into office, should be men of good morals and intelligence; Madison believes these men of this caliber are more fit to govern a country than average citizens. In conclusion, Madison discusses in Federalist 10 what factions are and how they work, and why a republic is the best government to combat the negative effects of

If the people were to elect the president directly, certain situations/problems wouldn’t be as analyzed like the Electoral College analyzes it. (McGraw Hill pg.385) If we were to get rid of the electoral college the states with a higher population would dominate the elections, therefore, leaving the small rural states unnoticed or with no voice. That would be very unfair towards rural areas, the present system gives the state’s power more strength and secures our federal system’s strength. (McGraw Hill pg.385)

These are the people that will be easily influenced by the government. If the government claims something and backs it up with a few facts and a whole bunch of lies, chances are, the public will not bother to check up on it and support the government’s claims. That may be okay, but if the Congress doesn’t even read thoroughly everything they are signing off on, who is to say that what they are doing is good for the country or even follows the Constitution? Keeping the public, and sometimes even the Congress, ignorant is a great way to keep them united and at peace. “We know more than we did two weeks ago, but there are still entire government agencies whose names and missions are unknown, and programs so secret that Congress votes to fund them without knowing what they do.”

Russia and the U.S. have similar judicial branches like the Supreme Court, both, nominated by the president. In the legislature, each government is bicameral (under two chambers); Russia’s branch consists of an upper house and a federation council while the U.S. consists of the HOR (House of Representatives) and the Senate. Russia has many different political parties and leaders including a Democratic Party in which the U.S. is accustomed to a Democratic and Republican Party. The age of suffrage is 18 years old; being universal. Lastly, both constitutional forms are