A Comparative Study: US Presidential vs. British Parliamentary Systems

This report provides a comparative analysis of the United States presidential system and the British parliamentary system. It begins by outlining the core features of each system, including the separation of powers, the roles of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, and the electoral processes. The report then delves into a detailed comparison, highlighting the key differences in how power is distributed, how governments are formed, and how policies are made. The analysis covers the historical context, advantages, and disadvantages of each system, focusing on their contemporary relevance in world politics and policy-making. The report examines the roles of the Prime Minister, the President, the Parliament, and the Congress, as well as the influence of political parties and electoral systems. The conclusion summarizes the key findings and offers insights into the strengths and weaknesses of each system, contributing to a deeper understanding of comparative politics.

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 1
THE UNITED STATES PARLIAMENTARY VERSUS BRITAIN PRESIDENTIAL
SYSTEMS
by
Name
Course
Tutor
Institution
Date

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 2
UNITED STATES PARLIAMENTARY VERSUS BRITAIN PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEMS
Table of Contents
Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................2
Introduction......................................................................................................................................3
Overview of Parliamentary and Presidential Systems of Government...........................................4
Comparison and Contrast of Presidential and Parliamentary Systems............................................5
Differences in the Political Systems............................................................................................5
Similarities of the Political Systems............................................................................................9
Advantages and Disadvantages of the two systems......................................................................10
Effective State................................................................................................................................12
Conclusions....................................................................................................................................12
References......................................................................................................................................14

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 3
Introduction
The presidential and parliamentary type of government systems that are the most popular
governance types around the world. Comparative authors have claimed that the supremacy of the
executive as compared with the cabinet differentiates two types of state structures: parliamentary
systems, where the executive administrative authority is distributed amongst parties, which entail
the state’s coalition; and presidential systems, where the executive administrative authority is
concentrated on the hands of the president. The comparative studies on systems of a state have
claimed that the focus of executive administrative powers lies in the president, whilst a combined
administrative process could be a single characteristic of the parliamentary system of
governance. Considering the potential power of the government ministers in the cabinet may
posses on the policy making practice in certain presidential structures (Arujo, Freitas, & Vieira,
2015, pp. 52), it is astonishing that the responsibility of the cabinet ministers in the process of
making decisions has been under investigated, and to find out the lack of proportional literature
concerning the cabinet executive practice across plus within the organizations of the state. There
are some differences between the parliamentary and presidential systems, but the most common
system is the parliamentary democracies, as well as the supremacy of the executive over the
ministers is higher in presidential structures. The United States (US) adopted the presidential
system of government that has continued to guide its politics and policy-making process
(Jakubiak, 2018, pp. 32). On the contrary, Britain adopted the parliamentary system of
government where the powers are distributed between the three branches of the state and the
parliament is supreme, where it is answerable to people. In this system, the head of the state is

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 4
the President nominally whilst the prime minister is the real head of state (Martinez-Gallardo,
2010, pp. 24).
The paper will compare and contrast the United States (US) and Britain presidential and
parliamentary systems of government respectively, the overview of the two systems, how they
interact with each other and the way these systems are important in the contemporary context of
world politics and policymaking. The two states that I will compare and contrast are United
States and Britain.
Overview of Parliamentary and Presidential Systems of Government
The non-collegial decision-making course by the executive is reflected on as among of
the definitional features of the presidential structure of government, and, in some instances, has
been described as the most vital attribute of the presidential system. The presidential structure of
government is characterized by a solitary universally voted head of state not answerable to the
parliament. Additionally, this explanation is acknowledged as exceedingly constant worldwide
(Watts, 2012, pp. 87). Contrarily, as constituents of the ministers are honestly answerable to the
lawmaking organ in the parliamentary systems, the executive administrative course in the
parliamentary system is normally defined as a combined executive endeavor. In this system,
there are a number of powers awarded to the president, but the president merely gets an
opportunity to exercise these powers. The authentic powers are wielded by the ministers headed
by the prime minister (Araújo, Thiago & Vieira, 2016, pp. 39).
Moreover, via an endogenous practice, in a parliamentary arrangement, the lawmaking
majority establishes the head of state and the length of its tenure, creating restricts through

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 5
institutional authorities, like the vote of confidence. On the other side, the presidential system,
given the shared autonomy between the executive along with legislative authorities, and the
primary personality of the president as both the heads of state in addition to government, it is
presumed that ministers in presidential countries could posses a free supremacy to choose and
dismiss the member of the state (Ülgül, 2018, pp. 66). Accordingly, the ministers could have a
secondary responsibility to the president in the decision, as well as the policymaking process in
presidential systems. Hence, these types of governance systems are perceived as universal, where
the espousal of a form could mean distinctive executive influence systems. The organizations of
the presidential structures are centralized, that is, the president governs the process over the
ministers, while the arrangement is shared in the parliamentary organizations, in which the chief
executive (usually the prime minister) allocates power over the policymaking practice with the
cabinet ministers (Watts, 2012, pp. 90).
Comparison and Contrast of Presidential and Parliamentary Systems
Differences in the Political Systems
The United States has a federal democratic system that is composed of three branches
popular called the mainstays of US politics. These branches are the legislature, judiciary and
executive that creates the principle of separation of powers in the US. Thus, the framers of the
US constitution strictly complied with the principle of separation of powers that was designed to
have the balance of powers that may be achieved by checks in addition to balances amid the
different branches. The executive branch of government is accountable for matters like
proposing laws, formatting cabinet and designing internal besides foreign policies (Chaisty,

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 6
Cheeseman & Power, 2018, pp. 284). The legislative organ is accountable for primarily
finalizing different propositions from the executives and thus, exerts a great deal of the power in
US politics. On the other hand, the judiciary branch of government is accountable for legislative
matters with the authority to assess law passed plus the functions as a custodian of the civil rights
of the citizen in the US. Similar to the British system of government, the US has both the lower
in addition to upper house; however, this is remarkably where a considerable lies different amid
the two democracies (the US and Britain) (Tavits, 2009, pp. 43). This is because the US upper
house holds much more importance in regard to powers in the political scheme than the lower
house. Therefore, the political system comprises of both the lower and upper houses, whereby
the lower house is referred to as the House of Representatives while the upper house is called the
senate. Accordingly, the lower house is mostly accountable for interior concerns of law,
budgetary matters, like distribution and foreign policy, while the upper house or the senate
initiate plus controls what the lower house proposes; hence, the senate functions as a balance of
supremacy in the US political field (Strangio, In Hart & Walter, 2013, pp. 61).
Additionally, the US electoral system must be described in order to compare and contrast
to that of Britain, though not into more details. Eventually, the party delegates are voted by the
people through the popular vote utilizing the voting technique of proportional representation, in
which the delegates require a majority vote in order to become the delegate of the particular
party (Kuhn, 2013, pp. 98). Consequently, the delegates will then be accountable for the
procedure of presidential elections in which these delegates will vote for the person that will be
the party leaders that will be justifiable for a presidential runner. Additionally, via this process, it
is believed that a circuitous electoral procedure is utilized on presidential elections since the

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 7
normal voters are not straight accountable in regard to determining the outcome of the
presidential candidates (Clark, 2012, pp. 36). Therefore, formerly the presidential aspirant has
been unveiled; it is eventually down to the Electoral College system. This is a system that people
in the college are the agents of individual states plus have the ultimate vote towards ascertaining
the frontrunner, which is a method not applicable in Britain (Watts, 2012, pp. 104). In the US,
there are two predominant parties: Democrats and Republicans, where the Democrats belong to
the left wing and Republicans being right centrist, in which the two parties arguably contrast
slightly and lean towards the same direction when it comes to policy implementation. This
tendency has resulted in a stable political system in America for many years now. Finally,
America has a post-independence written constitution that ascertains the way the nation must be
operated internally like many other established democracies as a constituent of US politics that is
not present in the British structure (Araujo, Freitas, & Vieira, 2015, pp. 53).
Now, it is imperative to examine the political system of Britain, which is mainly a
parliamentary form of government. Britain like the US has three branches of administration:
executive, the legislative; plus the judiciary. In this organization, the executive organ is
composed of ministers that run the nation and are accountable for recommending laws, crafting
foreign plus internal policies, whereby it is headed by the Prime Minister (Ganghof, 2015, pp.
816). The Prime Minister in Britain has the power to appoint cabinet ministers. The legislative
organ is the voted body that passes laws, which have been recommended by the executive organ
and all the ministers are members of the legislative branch in Britain. Lastly, the judiciary is a
branch that makes sure that the laws passed are adhered to and has the authority to appraise laws

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 8
and functions autonomously of the state and is headed by a senior minister. Accordingly, the
Supreme Court is the highest court in the political organization of Britain.
The parliamentary system in Britain is bicameral, which implies that it has two chambers:
lower house (the House of Commons) plus the upper house (the House of Lords). In the British
system, the House of Commons comprises of 650 seats that are taken by the members of
parliament (MPs) who meet each day for around half the weeks of the year, in which the
opposition parties have the chance to confront the government of the day on policies. It is also
responsible for governing of the country plus the political nature is founded on transparency and
the public domain. Those who attend meetings and proceedings in the House of Commons
include the prime minister and its cabinet and MPs. These proceedings are chaired by the speaker
that monitors the meetings plus maintain orders in the house. The House of Lords is more elite
but do not have the final political power in addition to hugely found on noble custom and class
(Paroske, 2016, pp. 11).
Moreover, it functions as a check on activities of the government where it has the
capacity to amend the law, which has been ratified through the House of Commons; however,
fundamentally will not obstruct the determination of the House of Commons. The association of
the House of Lords is wholly reserved for an elite class or the aristocrats who are nominated by
the queen, with the guidance from the state that compares with that of the House of Commons in
which the members of parliament (MPs) are voted and not appointed. Similar to the US, there
exist two parties that have been in the British politics for decades and have shaped the politics:
labor party that is a conventional working class party that lean to the left wing; and the
conservative party that leans to the right. The two parties in Britain are primarily centrist with

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 9
slightly opposing perspectives majorly, that of public spending reformations. The Liberal
Democrats have more often been powerful with their existence; however, botched to be the
general contending authority in parliament till the last alliance with the conservatives, who are
currently on power (Elmelund-Præstekær & Kjaer, 2013, pp. 156).
In terms of electoral system, first, past the post is the method utilized through most of
Wales and England at the local levels, in which a candidate that represents a constituent is voted
based on one person equals one vote that embraces the popular winning. Hence, the political that
has the mainstream constituents (with the mainstream of the seats in the House of Commons)
would form the government of the day, which implies that it will create and pass most of the
policies. The runners up will create “her majesty’s royal opposition” that would occupy the other
seats in parliament. Nonetheless, in Scotland besides Northern Ireland, the voting system
employed varies from that used in England and Wales. For instance, Scotland utilizes a mixed
structure referred to as “additional member system”, in which voter normally will get two votes,
single for an individual runner and the remaining for the larger part (Jensen & McGrath 2011,
pp. 658).
Britain being a legitimate Monarchy, the queen is legitimately the head of state; however,
will not exercise higher political authority plus infrequently hampers the political system. Thus,
the House of Lords could be the primary participant for the queen in regard to political actions
via tradition, as traditionally the queen could select House of Lord members. Unlike the US,
Britain does not have written constitution; nonetheless, it comprises conventional folk laws with
contemporary additions to past ideas of how the nation must work based on monarchy, politics,
as well as civil society in the modern period (Elkins, 2013, pp. 7).

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 10
Similarities of the Political Systems
Similarities between the American presidential and Britain parliamentary system are
easily distinguishable while examining the creation plus working of the political systems in line
with functions internally and general system. It is apparent that the political structures have
similar aspects of the executive, legislative, as well as judiciary bodies, in which the model
represents that the decision-making is accountable for the suggestion plus the crafting of laws
and the instigation of policy creation. The executive organ in both democracies is in the lower
house and exercises much political authority. Nonetheless, it is apparent that in the contrasting,
the authority of the lower house varies in regard to the stability of supremacy amid the lower
houses and upper houses. Thus, in Britain, the House of Commons is at the other end is the most
powerful political institution and is not, in premise, open to checks plus balances of superior
power, since the governmental houses state ministers that launch laws plus policies. In the US
system, though the lower house is accountable where it has the authority to propose such
concerns, the Senate has the capacity to launch the proposed law that is principally via the
lawmaker looking for sponsors in Senate, which is not the practice in Britain (Elkins, 2013, pp.
8).
Advantages and Disadvantages of the two systems
With these checks plus balances in the American system, it makes sure that authority is
distributed in the political field and authority is not subjected to one body. Thus, this
demonstrates the reasons there exist diverse variations in terms of powers of the upper houses in
the two countries. Furthermore, it may be claimed that in the instance of the British system, the
House of Lords is not voted by the citizens or in reality, by anybody with political power plus the

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 11
members can lack the political practice to exercise such authority with hampering politics, as
well as may function as a blockade because of their conservative prejudices. In Britain’s
political customs, it is embodied as a steady democracy based in their inherited influence that
stresses the insignificance of the aristocrats to join contemporary politics, with a feudal upper
house system (Clark, 2012, 17).
On the contrary, the US political traditions of powerful democracy plus freedom are
anchored in the background of the Senate plus the House of Representatives since they are both
nominated for a fixed term in the office. This implies that if all members of the upper in addition
to lower houses are voted, there is the call for checks and balances for complete representation
that is availed by the culture of democracy (Dam, 2010, pp. 11). It is apparent that the US and
Britain have constituted democratic system as their political scheme; however, there are
comprehensible variations, in the process of choosing the PM or in the case of the US, the
president. In these systems, the management of the party is not determined by the civilians, but
through party delegates; nevertheless, it can be claimed that in Britain, via the first past the post
system, the PM is directly voted by citizens once the general elections come on track, which is
contrary to the US arrangement that uses the Electoral College that determines the executive
(president). This has got impacts as to the reason the PM has unwieldy power of selecting their
members of the cabinet and has the capacity to dictate when the elections would be carried out
provided it is in 5 years (Clark, 2012, 38). Since they are directly democratically elected by
citizens with no obstruction in the first the post system to characterize the country as a unitary
nation, which leaves no issue on circumstances ascertained in the political process. The Electoral
College systems fashions the concept of the indirect method during the election of the president

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 12
in civil society, in which their have instances whereby the frontrunner has not won the
preponderance vote need, but important state votes (Vercesi, 2012, pp. 9).
Moreover, with this kind of voting system, there is the need to develop a balance of
power in the presidential system in the US, so the state representatives still posses the capacity to
safeguard the rights along with the interests of the citizens (Chaisty, Cheeseman & Power, 2018.
421). This will ensure that these citizens are not totally subjected to the law of the head of state,
who does not have the interest of the citizens. This is widespread in the concept of state
questionably, being in a position to hold a kind of self-government from the main government
and can launch independent state laws plus policies that will preserve the democratic political
structure in the United States (Cheibub, Rasch & Martin, 2015, pp. 971).
Effective State
The parliamentary system of government appears to be effective because of the fact that
the mainstream of the members of legislative are voted by the citizens. Britain does not
experience this challenge as a unitary government because of the size plus decentralization of
countries that represent Great Britain since they allocate the same political liberties as compared
to those of diverse states in the US. This appears that the Britain parliamentary is more
successful in addressing the modern world politics (Araújo et al., 2016, pp. 79).
Conclusions
It has come apparent that the parliamentary system is more decentralized as compared to
presidential systems with comes to powers of the ministers. Despite the differences and

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 13
similarities in both the US presidential systems and parliamentary system in Britain, it is
apparent that both democracies preserve democratic values as a political culture. This is apparent
in their liberalist approach to the world of politics that has allowed these nations to promote
effective policies. With the concept of global peace, the launch of democracy in addition to
powerful business orientations, the US along with Britain have continued to support each other
in many conquests, like the Middle East where they have fought the concept of fighting terrorism
and promoting democracy (Martínez-Gallardo, 2010, pp. 63). The variation in the systems of
government shows that in spite of the differences, the presidential, as well as parliamentary
democracies can distribute the same institutional characteristics concerning not only their
legislative-executive associations, but too the association in the executive branch. Despite the
arrangement of government, the joint decision-making while making policies will require both
countries to develop effective checks and balances that will ensure that the different branches
will be responsible.

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 14
References
Araujo, V., Freitas, A & Vieira, M. 2015. “Parties and Control Over Policy: The Presidential
Logic of Government Formation”. Paper presented at 73rd Annual Conference of the Midwest
Political Science Association. Chicago.
Araújo, V., Thiago S & Vieira, M. 2016. “Measuring Presidential Dominance over Cabinets in
Presidential Systems: Constitutional Design and Power Sharing”. Brazilian Political Science
Review. Vol. 10. Iss. No. 2; pp. 6-98.
Chaisty, P., Cheeseman, N., & Power, T. J. 2018. “Coalitional presidentialism in comparative
perspective: Minority presidents in multiparty systems”. Oxford, United Kingdom Oxford
`University Press.
Cheibub, J. A., Elkins, Z & Ginsburg, T. 2014. “Beyond Presidentialism and Parliamentarism”.
British Journal of Political Science. Vol. 44. Iss. 3. Pp. 284-312.
Cheibub, JA, Rasch, BE & Martin, S 2015, “Government Selection and Executive Powers:
Constitutional Design in Parliamentary Democracies”, West European Politics, Vol. 38. Iss. 5.
Pp. 969–996.
Clark, D. S. 2012. “Comparative law and society”. Cheltenham, U.K: Edward Elgar.
Dam, S 2010, “Constitutional Fiat: Presidential Legislation in India’s Parliamentary
Democracy”, Columbia Journal of Asian Law, Vol. 24. Iss. 1; pp. 1–61,

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 15
Eduardo, A, & Tsebelis, G. 2011. “Political Parties and Government Coalitions in the
Americas”. Journal of Politics in Latin America. Vol. 3. Iss. 1. Pp. 3-28.
Chaisty, P., Cheeseman, N., & Power, T. J. (2018). Coalitional presidentialism in comparative
perspective: Minority presidents in multiparty systems. Oxford, United Kingdom Oxford
University Press.
Elkins, Z. 2013. “Comparability and the Analysis of National Constitutions”. APSA-Comparative
Democratization Newsletter. Vol. 23. Iss. 1. Pp. 7–9.
Elmelund-Præstekær, C & Kjaer, U. 2013, “Presidentialisation of Parliamentary Systems?
Frontrunner Concentration in Danish Local Elections”, Representation, Vol. 49. Iss. 2. Pp. 155–
167.
Ganghof, S 2015, “Is the “Constitution of Equality” Parliamentary, Presidential or Hybrid?”,
Political Studies, Vol. 63. Iss. 4; pp. 814–829.
Jakubiak, Ł 2018, “The Rationalisation of Parliamentary Responsibility of the Government in the
French Semi-Presidential Architecture”, Romanian Journal of Society & Politics, Vol. 13. Iss. 1.
Pp. 30–50.
Jensen, C. B & McGrath, R. J. 2011, “Making Rules about Rulemaking: A Comparison of
Presidential and Parliamentary Systems”, Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 64. Iss. 3; pp. 656–
667.
Keman, H. 2006. “Parties and government: features of governing in representative democracies”.
In Handbook of party politics, ed. Richard Katz and William Crotty. London: Sage.

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 16
Kuhn, R 2013, “The French Presidential and Parliamentary Elections, 2012”, Representation,
Vol. 49. Iss.1; pp. 97–114.
Martin, L, & Vanberg, G. 2004. “Policing the Bargain: Coalition Government and Parliamentary
Scrutiny”. American Journal of Political Science. Vol. 48. Iss. 1; pp. 13–27.
Martínez-Gallardo, C. 2010. “Inside the Cabinet: The Influence of Ministers in the Policymaking
Process”. In How Democracy Works. Political Institutions, Actors, and Arenas in Latin
American Policymaking, ed. Ernesto Stein Carlos Scartascini and Mariano Tommasi.
Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank.
Paroske, M. 2016. “Role Fulfillment as a Measure of Argument Quality: Lessons from British
Parliamentary Debate’, Contemporary Argumentation & Debate, Vol. 35. Iss. 3; pp. 8–26.
Strangio, P., In Hart, P. ., & Walter, J. (2013). “Understanding prime-ministerial performance:
Comparative perspectives”. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
Tavits, M 2009, “Direct Presidential Elections and Turnout in Parliamentary Contests”, Political
Research Quarterly, Vol. 62. Iss. 1; pp. 42–54.
Ülgül, M 2018, “Framing a Presidential Foreign Policy in a Parliamentary System: Erdoğan and
Mukhtars’ Meetings”, Turkish Journal of Middle Eastern Studies / Türkiye Ortadogu
Çalismalari Dergisi, Vol. 5. Iss.2; pp. 65–92.
Vercesi, M. 2012. “Cabinets and Decision-Making Processes: Re-Assessing the Literature”.
Journal of Comparative Studies. Vol. 5. Iss. 2; pp. 4-27.

The United States Parliamentary Versus Britain Presidential Systems 17
Watts, D. (2012). British government and politics: A comparative guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh
University Press.