Dissection 1 What are the relative merits of presidential v. parliamentary systems?

What
benefits in governance and policy-making could one foresee if the United States were to
adopt the parliamentary system of democracy rather than the current Presidential system?
The parliamentary system has only one elected body. This body is called a parliament of
representatives which says bills are law. The executive power is housed in a so called cabinet and
they provide a vote of confidence. The main distinction between parliamentary systems from
presidential systems is that the presidential systems have the separation of powers. They also
have differences in the party systems, structures, politics, and elections. Non-parliamentary
systems are committee dominated so they have the power and can easily obstruct the work of the
government. If the United States adopted the parliamentary system of democracy rather hat he
current presidential system there would be advantages as well and disadvantages to this system.
Some advantages are that we would always be a unified government. The United States would
have a greater party discipline plus there would be no veto to power and typically no judicial
review. If something goes wrong voters know who to blame or if something goes right then
voters know who to reward. These things can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how
you look at it. Sometimes a divided government may actually be a good thing for the country.
With this system the minority rights get washed away from the system and the judicial review
and veto power is important in the decision making proses.

Dissection 2 According to all scholars of American politics, the balance of power between
the Congress and the Executive branches has shifted decisively in favor of the latter over
the 20th century. This is reflected in the huge growth in the numbers, size, and scope of
activities of administrative departments and agencies both at the Federal and State levels.
How do you evaluate this shift? What implications does this shift have for the exercise of
democratic power in the country?
According to the all scholars of American politics, the balance between the Congress and the
Executive branch has made a shift for the latter over the 20th century. I do believe there has been
a shift in power to the executive branch. The president has more power than the congress men.
The executive branch sets the goals of departments and agencies at both the federal and state
levels. This controls the day to day activities of the federal and state government. The
implication of this shift is that it decreases the ability of checks and balances. The executive
branch has the ability to push through their own political party agenda. With the increased
number of organizations and agencies it gives the executive branch more influence on different
sectors of the country. One of the things they did was create home land security after 9/11
happened. President Roosevelt only had 9 cabinets while President Obama has 15 cabinets.
President Obama covered more cabinet positions then President Roosevelt. Obama coved the

Commerce, Defense, Education, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security,
Housing and Urban Development, Labor, Transportation, and Veterans Affairs, as well as the
Attorney General.

Today, after many many years of practice of democracy, gender inequality among elected
representatives in the US Congress (as in other legislatures around the world) remains
quite staggering. Do you think having a more balanced representation in the Congress
would enhance democracy? What specific measures can be taken to ensure a more genderbalanced Congress in the U.S. Suggest at least two such measures.
It seems to me that there will always be a gender inequality in some form. If things were more
balanced among the elected representatives in the United States Congress it would enhance
democracy. Many people still feel that women should stay home and be a housewife but women
can do so much more. Congress would be better organized and issues would be seen from many
points of view if there was gender equity. Everyone knows that women are highly opinionated
about everything so involving a mixture of males with females in the government could make
decisions more balanced. One way we can ensure an equal balance with gender in congress is to
have candidate quotas. You vote for so many men as well as women. Another way to balance the
gender in congress is to try to make it more enticing to women. Many women arent interested in
being part of the congress but if they start at a smaller government position such as mayor or
commissioner. This way they can get the feel of how things run they might find that they enjoy
it. They have to make it more appealing to women to want to get involved in congress.