POSC 1000
Introduction to Politics
Formal Political Institutions
Russell Alan Williams
Unit Five: Formal Political Institutions
“Presidential Systems”
Required Reading:
MacLean and Wood, Chapter 5.
Outline:
1.
2.
Introduction
Presidential Systems
1. Legislative Institutions
2. Executive Institutions
3.
4.
Hybrid Systems - France
Conclusions
1) Introduction – Presidential Systems:
First developed in U.S.
Context:
Response to royal authority
=Need to limit the power of any branch of government
“Separation of Powers”:Division of power amongst several
branches of government to avoid a concentration of power.
E.g. “Checks and balances” = No “executive dominance”
However . . . . Also a need for state strong enough to fight
off British etc.
=Need for clear leader
Framers of constitution thought about
a “constitutional monarchy”, but . . ->
Opted for a “President” to head
executive and armed forces – chosen by “electoral college”
Implication: Negotiation and compromise needed between
branches of gov to get things done
=Modern complaints about “political
gridlock”:Lack of political progress because of
partisanship and differing opinions
2) Presidential Systems:
A) Legislative Institutions:
“Congress”:Legislative branch of American government
Same as Parliament
“Bicameral” – upper and lower houses
i) “House of Representatives”: Lower house
“Congressmen” elected for two year terms from a local
“congressional district”
Electoral districts each have over ½ million voters
• Allocated based on population
E.g.
-> California
= 53 congressmen
-> Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming
= 1 congressman
“Senate”: Upper house
“Senators” elected to six year terms
Two for each state (!)
Only 1/3 of senators face election in each 2 year
election cycle – better deal than congressmen(!)
• 2008 election
Must be over 30 years of age
Organization of Congress:
Both houses have own “officers”:
House of Representatives = Speaker of the House
(majority party leader)
Senate = Vice President
President Pro tempore
Committee Chairs (from majority party)
Floor leaders
Majority leader
Minority leader
Functions of Congress:
A) Responsible for passing all legislation and budgets
Can initiate own legislation - Either house . . . requires
coordination
Can also support or defeat presidential proposals - E.g.
the budget, or declaration of war etc.
=High level of independence
– President cannot call an election if bills are
being defeated
– Congress cannot “defeat” the President’s
cabinet
Result: Most activity requires
compromise or “Political gridlock”
E.g. Budgets and “log rolling”
Functions of Congress:
B) Oversight power
Can conduct investigations into executive
activities ->E.g. conduct of war in Iraq
Hold hearings
Ratify presidential appointees -> Supreme
Court Justices, Ambassadors, etc.
• Not a formality! E.g. George Bush Sr. . . .
–Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill
Behavior of Congress:
Independence – Congress often pursues policy
irrespective of who is president
Weak ”Party discipline” ?????
Committee chairs often very independent
Members “vote their own conscience”
Problems:
• Influence of money on individual members
– E.g. . . . .
Table 3. Top 25 dual contributors of soft money ($), 2000 election cycle
Contributor
Democratic
Republican
Total
Service Employees Intl Union (SEIU)
5,090,696
30,000
5,120,696
AT&T
1,457,469
2,302,451
3,759,920
AOL Time Warner
1,425,637
1,139,861
2,565,498
Freddie Mac
1,025,000
1,383,250
2,408,250
Philip Morris Cos Inc
296,663
2,098,922
2,395,585
Enron Corp
607,565
1,433,850
2,041,415
Thompson Medical Co Inc
1,882,000
20,000
1,902,000
Citigroup Inc
641,204
758,616
1,399,820
American Financial Group
622,000
685,000
1,307,000
MBNA Corp
200,000
1,035,905
1,235,905
BP Amoco
295,376
920,900
1,216,276
Source Common Cause (2001); Cited as FEC statistics.
Behavior of Congress:
Other Problems:
• Accountability of parties to voters
– What does the party label mean?
• President cannot always rely on his own party
E.g. Obama and democratic congressional
congress
Presidential Systems Cont.
B) Executive Institutions:
Presidency:
=Head of State
=Head of Government
President’s cabinet manages the
executive branch of government
Budgets and administration
• A.K.A. “the decider”
Presidential power:
“Commander and Chief” of military forces
Appoints Supreme Court judges, Ambassadors and cabinet
ministers
• Subject to congressional oversight . . . .
Can effectively decide to go to war or not . . . .
• E.g. “Gulf of Tonkin Incidents” (1964)
=Vietnam War
Presidential power cont. . . . .
“Veto”: Act of blocking a decision –
In U.S. = the Presidential power to
prevent enactment of legislation
• Congressional bills can be
blocked if president does not
like them
• E.g. “Stem Cell Research” Bush
Vetoed 2X
• However:
– Veto can be overridden
by 2/3 votes in congress
– Congress can retaliate by
not passing budget or
putting “riders” in
presidential legislation
Presidential System
“Separation of Powers”: Presidents may often have less power
than prime ministers in parliamentary system – this was the
intention!
• However, this can lead to “political gridlock” if parties are
ideologically divided and control different branches of government.
3) Hybrid Systems:
“Semi-Presidential Systems”: A system in which an elected
President shares power with an elected Prime Minster and
Cabinet
Prime minister and cabinet elected from legislature
Borrows “best” of both systems
In practice can result in very different dynamics . . . .
Example = France
Legislative institutions:
Parliament: Bicameral - Makes legislation and passes
budget
National Assembly = House of Commons
• 577 “Deputies” elected in majoritarian system
– Runoff ballot of leading candidates
• Has often failed to produce parliamentary majorities
Senate = Indirectly elected (powers are limited)
• Chosen by local governments
Executive Institutions:
President = elected (through a majoritarian “runoff”
electoral system)
President has always received at least 50% of votes
Gets five year term and can run again and again . . . .
President selects Prime Minster from National Assembly
• Prime Minster selects cabinet = Government
• Should be leader of most popular party
– PM’s cabinet must enjoy the support of the
legislature
– Cabinet can be defeated
-Result: President must select a new PM
Implications in practice:
France has:
Elected head of state
Some “separation of powers”
Some “fusion of powers”
Neither President or Prime Minister has power of Canadian
PM . . . .
Implications in practice:
France has:
Elected head of state
Some “separation of powers”
Some “fusion of powers”
Neither President or Prime Minister has power of Canadian
PM . . . .
Governing may require American-style negotiation
• Depends on the “Party System”!
When President’s party controls legislature (National
Assembly), the president has considerable power
E.g. Prime Minster effectively works for the president
When President’s party does not control the National
Assembly . . . things more complicated
If President’s party does not have majority
= negotiation and compromise with other parties
If another party has majority
=“Cohabitation”: Sharing of power between French President and
Prime Ministers of different parties
– E.g. Francois Mitterrand and
his conservative Prime
Ministers . . . .
4) Conclusions on Presidential Systems:
Pure presidential systems relatively common and seem to
be successful
Fewer demands for major institutional change in presidential
systems than in parliamentary systems
Hybrid systems that incorporate parliamentary government
have encountered difficulty
Often presidents end up abusing powers to overcome “gridlock”
Institutions are more unstable = less “legitimacy”
• E.g. Russia – Vladimir Putin
For next time:
Midterm Exam – Covers all of Units 1 – 5.
Focus on learning the “key” terms