Compare parliamentary and

presidential form of
government in India and USA
 INTRODUCTION
Every country in the world has its own constitution, according
to which policies are framed, government bodies and
institutions function and decisions are made. In finer terms, it
is the constitution, that covers all the aspects of the political
system adopted by the country.
Presidential and Parliamentary forms of Govt are two different
systems of Government, which are available in all countries of
the world. These two systems are for good governance and
these two are efficient in their tasks. For example, Presidential
form of government is prevalent in countries like USA, France,
Argentina, etc. and Parliamentary form of government is
prevalent in countries like India, UK, etc.
A presidential system is a system of government where a head
of government is also head of state and leads an executive
branch that is separate from the legislative branch. The United
States, for instance, has a presidential system.
In Parliamentary System, the political party winning the
majority seats in the parliament makes the government and
elects a person from among themselves as the Prime Minister
who is the head of the Government. The India, for instance, has
a parliamentary system.
Both form of government is different for each other in all
aspects and also they have some similarities. So, we will
compare both type of government with reference to India &
USA.
 BODY
Parliamentary form of government
(INDIA)
In the parliamentary system the
executive branch is led by the PM and
his council of ministers. They are all
members of the legislative branch.
In the parliamentary form of
government there are two heads. One
is the nominal head, while other is the
real head. For example, in India
president is the nominal head and the
prime minister is the real head. The
president of India is the head of the
state where as the prime minister is the
head of the government.
In the parliamentary system of
government, the prime minister is fully
free to choose his ministers among the
members of the parliament.
Presidential form of government
(USA)
In presidential system the legislative
and executive branches are separated
from each other, that means the
president is not responsible for the
government and the government is not
responsible for the president as in USA.
In the presidential system, there is no
such thing as the PM. The secretaries
of the departments are answerable to
the president only.
In the presidential form of government,
there is only one head. As in USA, the
president is the head of not only of the
states, but also of the government.
In Presidential form of government, the
president enjoys much more freedom in
selecting his ministers. He selects them
from much wider field taking into
account there experience and
expertise.
In the parliamentary system , the
president acts as a ceremonial figure
and the head of the state who appoints
the ministers and the PM, but has no
powers in terms of foreign or domestic
policy as in India.
The Parliamentary system of Presidential form of government, the
government is one in which there exists three organs of the government work
a harmonious relationship between the independently of each other.
legislative and executive body, while
the judiciary body works
independently.
As the ministers are chosen from party
men in the Parliamentary form, the
party is deprived of capable persons
needed to keep the organization
united, homogenous, strong and viable.
As a result of this drain of talent from
the party to government, the party
organization grows weak, and
indiscipline and infighting, are the
result.
In the Parliamentary system the Prime Minister and
Chief Minister are totally dependent upon their
respective Legislatures in the matter of selection of
Ministers. On the other hand, they are expected to
select men of vision, integrate, honest having
professional knowledge and practical experience.
They are also supposed to give adequate
representation to the privilege as well as to the
neglected sections of society. In case of the Centre,
for instance, Prime Minister has to select her or his
entire team from a small pool of 446 Members.
In the presidential system as in USA,
the president is the key actor in foreign
and domestic policy and also a
representative of constitutional
authority.
The Presidential system is largely free
from these drawbacks, as well as from
rivalry and friction between the party
bosses and the ministerial wing. The
party and the government thus work in
harmony.
Under the Presidential system, on the other hand,
the President is not hampered by such
considerations. He is not tied to or subordinate to the
legislature. He is free to choose his cabinet of
ministers from outside the members of the
legislature. In this way, he can induct really
competent, experienced and deserving people into
the government. He can choose freely men of vision
and integrate having professional knowledge and
practical experience.
Fusion of powers exists in the
Parliamentary system
In Parliamentary form, only those
persons are appointed as ministers in
the executive body who are the
members of Parliament.
In Parliamentary government, the Prime
Minister has the power to dissolve the lower
house before the completion of its term.
The tenure of the executive is not fixed in
Parliamentary government, as in, if a no-
confidence motion is passed in the Parliament,
the Council of Ministers is dismissed.
The Legislative branch of the Union of India i.e.
the Parliament is also bicameral with two houses
– the Lok Sabha or lower house and Rajya Sabha
or upper house, yet it also has various
differences. While the Lok Sabha also has
members elected from constituencies that are
divided on the basis of population, the Rajya
Sabha is indirectly elected by members of an
Electoral College comprising of state and
territorial legislatures.
powers are separated in Presidential
system.
In Presidential form, persons other
than those working in the legislature
can be appointed as secretaries.
The President cannot dissolve the lower house, in
Presidential government.
The executive has a fixed term in the Presidential
government.
The Legislative branch of the government is
known as the United States Congress. It is
bicameral, i.e. it has two houses – the House of
Representatives and the Senate. Members of the
House of Representatives represent
congressional districts, divided among states
according to their population but states elect two
senators each, irrespective of population. The
term of a senator is six years, with one-third the
total number coming up for elections every two
years while members of the House of
Representatives serve two-year terms. Almost all
of them are elected by the first-past-the-post
system in which the winner is the person with
maximum number of votes, whatever percentage
it is of the total, which is also followed in India.

In India, the Executive is headed by the
Prime Minister, and takes the form of the
Cabinet of Ministers. The president of the
Republic of India is the Head of State, but
only has nominal powers.
In India, the judicial system consists of the
Supreme Court, High Courts and district
courts. In both cases, the judiciary is
independent, and can rule actions of the
Executive as being ‘unconstitutional’.
President’s powers are restricted by the
houses of Congress. He may veto a bill
unless it is passed by a two-thirds majority
of both houses override the veto. To make
treaties with foreign nations, he needs the
consent of two-thirds of the Senate. In case
of impeachment by a majority in the House
of Representatives, the president may be
removed by the vote of two-thirds of the
Senate. The vice-president serves as the
President of the Senate, and votes only in
case of a tie, besides being the first in the
presidential line of succession in case of
removal, resignation or death of the
President. The Executive extends to various
federal executive departments, whose
heads form a Council of Advisors often
referred to as the President’s “cabinet”. In
addition to these are a number of
government agencies which are staffed by
federal civil servants, including the
National Security Council and the Council
of Economic Advisors.
In a federal judicial system in the United
States, the courts in order of hierarchy are
the as follows – the Supreme Court, 13
courts of appeal and over 90 district courts.
Advantages of presidential government
It is democratic
The presidential system of government is usually regarded as
democratic in the sense that, under the system, the president is
directly elected by the electorates and is therefore directly
responsible to the people.

Effective Control by President

In a Presidential system, since the Ministers are appointed by the
President, the President is able to effectively control them. As his
direct appointees, they are answerable to him for every action they
take in the course of the performance of their duties.

Room for quick decision-making

The Presidential system promotes quick decision-making and
execution of government policies. This is so because, the president is
single executive and there does not need to do too many lengthy
consultations before a decision is arrived at.

Stability of government
One of the features of a presidential system of government is that
there is a fixed term of office. After each is ended, the voters must
elected another person or renew the mandate of the current
president. As a result of this feature, anybody interested in the
presidency, patiently waits for his or her turn to have a shot at it. The
presidential system therefore ensures stability of government.

Cheaper to operate
In a presidential system of government, there is only one executive
that must be catered for and once that is done, that is all. This is
unlike the parliamentary system where there are two people making
the executive so the state must fine resources to cater for the two of
them. This makes the presidential system less expensive.
Easy to locate responsibility
In the presidential system, it is easy to determine where
responsibility lies. One man can be held responsible for any acts of
commission and omissions.In fact, in Africa for example, the
president is blamed for anything that goes wrong even it is clearly
not his fault.

Disadvantages of presidential government

Can degenerate into dictatorship
The Presidential system has the tendency to degenerate into a
dictatorship. The result is that the rights of the citizens may be
trampled upon, the views of political opponents, suppressed and
their individual liberties taken away from them.

Thin line between partisan and national issues

In a presidential system, sometimes, it is difficult to differentiate
between issues that are purely national and those that are purely
partisan issues. This is because the same person represents the
face of the party in power and at the same time the leader of the
state.

Cannot change government midstream

In a Presidential system, the executive stays in power for a fixed
term. The disadvantage is that if by the middle of his term of office
his policies no loner favour the people, he cannot be removed
unless he serves his term in full.

Strain relationship between executive and legislature

In a presidential system, if majority of members of the legislature
belong to a party different from that of the president, they can
oppose policy proposals from the executive. Also when the
executive proposes nominees for vetting and approval by
Parliament, the nominees may be rejected by Parliament. On the
other hand, the president can also refuse to give his accent to bills
from parliament for it to become law. This could lead to a
stalemate.

Fixation on how to remain in power

Since there is fixed term of office for the president and periodic
elections to renew mandate, the executive may lose focus too
much on winning the next election and therefore lose his focus on
his core function. Also the party of the president will be more
concerned about staying in power than on the problems of the
people.
Advantages of parliamentary form of government
It reduces the workload
In a parliamentary system, there exists a dual executive. In other
words, there is a Head of State and head of government. It is easy,
therefore for the two executives to share the functions of the
executive between them. The sharing of the workload makes the
work less heavy for the two of them.

Ensures Continuity in government

Where there is a change in government, the Head of State does not
leave office. Only the head of government does, with his entire
government. The advantage is that, there is someone to hold the
state together until a new government is formed. It therefore
ensures that there is a peaceful transfer of power from one
government to another.

Loyalty to the state

The position of the Head of State is non-partisan or, at least,
expected to be. Therefore, the Head of State is an embodiment of
the states. For this reason, the citizens tend to be loyal to the Head
of State who embodies the state.

Less likely to become dictatorial

One of the features of a parliamentary system of government is the
existence of an official opposition.One of the main duties of the
opposition is to keep the government in check. Once the government
is kept in check, the leader is less likely to degenerate into a dictator.
Another feature of the parliamentary system that helps to prevent
dictatorship is the dual executive. The two executives act as a check
on each other thereby preventing the rise of a dictatorship.

Less expensive
In a parliamentary system of government, the parliamentary
candidates vie for the seats in their constituency and after that the
party that wins the majority seat is asked to form the next
government led by the Prime Minister. The advantage is that there is
only one level of election and therefore less expenditure to incur.

Ensures responsible governance

In a parliamentary system, the entire cabinet is collectively
responsible to parliament for all their actions. Parliament is a
representative of the people and they have the power to pass a vote
of no confidence in the cabinet if it no longer enjoy their support. In
which case, the government must resign en-bloc to be replaced by
another. The fear that it could be driven out of power for non-
performance, compels them ensure that the needs of the people are
met.

Disadvantages of parliamentary form of government

Expensive to operate
The dual nature of the executive in the Parliamentary system of
government creates more expenses as the office of the Prime
Minister and of the President or the Queen, must both be catered for
in terms of the provision of facilities and logistics. This results in
unnecessary waste of national resources. In effect, it is relatively
more expensive to operate the Parliamentary system of government
than the presidential system.

Struggles between the ruling party and the opposition

The system may lead to unhealthy rivalry between the ruling party
and the opposition party. The opposition is officially recognized, and
is seen as a government in waiting. So sometimes they fall into the
trap of over-criticizing the government of the day to gain political
advantage. Such destructive criticisms can delay the progress of
national development.

Conflict between the Head of State and head of Government

The dual executive can be a source of conflict in a parliamentary
system of government. This may result from the two executives
disagreeing on policy and programmes to be implemented in the
state. It was one of these reasons which led to the conflict between
Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba and President Joseph Kasavubu in
the former Congo in the 1960's. It is believed that this was what led
to the eventual assassination of Patrice Lumumba.

It violates the concept of Separation of Powers

The principle of separation of powers states the three arms of
government, the legislature, the executive and the judiciary must be
separate in functions, personnel and power. However, under the
parliamentary system, there is a fusion of powers in terms of the
executive and the legislature

May drift into instability

There is the tendency to drift toward instability. This happens when a
vote of no-confidence is passed in the government by the legislature
and it has to resign. In other words, the government could be
removed from power before its actual time is due. This situation can
hinder the implementation of government policies and thus retard
development.

Lack of initiative on the part of parliamentarians

In a parliamentary system, there is a strict adherence to party
discipline. For this reason, a Member of Parliament cannot, for
example, vote against his/her own party's policy. The party whip is
able to whip errand members of parliament into line. For this reason,
sometimes Members of Parliament are not able to take any
initiatives of their own.
 CONCLUSION
The members of the cabinet possess double membership, i.e. of
legislative and executive organ of government. Contrary to this,
in the presidential form of government, the members of the
cabinet possesses the membership of executive organ only.

When it comes to dominance, in the Parliamentary System, the

President is only the titorial head, while the real powers lie in
the hands of the Prime Minister. On the contrary, in the
Presidential System, the President has got the supreme power.