Differences Of Parliamentary Vs. Presidential System Of Government

What are the relationships and distinctions that characterize a parliamentary system of government compared to a presidential system of government? In light of this response or answer, both systems of government have their specific characteristics that define them. Although, when compared and contrasted, one stands out in particular as it will be further discussed in the paragraphs to come. Before answering this question, the complex backgrounds and context of these systems of government must first be examined. To start off, a parliamentary system of government is characterized by its fused government between its distinctive legislative and executive branches where government is mutually dependent of each other, as in the United Kingdom (Puig
Characteristics for which parliamentarism lacks, those being more power in regard to the executive and selection of cabinet members. It is evident that the President, as leader of the executive, is granted more exclusive power than that of a Prime Minister under a parliamentary system of government. The two most regarded powers of the President are the legislative veto and decree power. The constitutional veto power given to the executive allows the President to reject a proposed bill from the legislature that is in consideration to become law (Cheibub, "Systems of Government" 3). In most bicameral systems, which contain two chambers of a particular branch, require a 2/3 majority in order to override a presidential veto (Carey 107). Whereas, in a parliamentary system of government it is more difficult to achieve as a supermajority is needed in most cases (Cheibub et al. 530). Therefore, a presidential government has a stronger veto power when compared to the veto power of a parliamentary. Decree power, however, is defined as the ability for the executive to create laws without legislative approval (Carey 103). Most commonly referred in the United States as the President's ability to make executive orders aside from legislation that comes directly from Congress. Here the President works separately from the legislature to pass initiatives that are
Presidentialism is limited by gridlock/deadlock. Whereas, parliamentarism is criticized for the method in which the executive is selected, as it can seem undemocratic. Deadlock/gridlock in presidential systems of government prevent any progress from being made. As stated, "It becomes impossible to secure agreement between the branches of government, and so much needed reforms… cannot be introduced" (Ashbee 4). Therefore, government becomes unstable. The result is, "gridlock between the executive and legislative branches, impairing the accountability of the chief executive to the elected assembly and hampering the ability of a government to govern" (Riggs 257). Thus, limiting a presidential system of government in its government functions. In support, "deadlock occurs in about one third of the cases (33.52%), and it is… the root of the instability of presidential regimes" (Cheibub, "Minority Governments" 297). On the other hand, parliamentarism can seem undemocratic in terms of selection and election of its executive. The Prime Minister is selected by the legislature and not the electorate, thus undermining the concept of a democracy. It is not exactly democratic since citizens don't have a direct say on selecting the Prime Minister. Therefore, "The parliamentary executive is only indirectly responsible to the electorate… the