Constitutional Development
The distinctions between the United States and other countries in the globe have been a fascinating subject for many scholars, dating back to the French political thinker Alexis de Tocqueville, who described America as an exceptional region in the early 19th century. Nearly two centuries later, work ethics and individualism in the country stand out from the rest of the planet. However, this particular essay looks at the leadership system in the United States. For the articulate development of the political and social ideologies in the nation, a comparison is created between America and the United Kingdom.
The federal government has been the basis of leadership in the US since its enactment by the Constitution in 1789. The government is termed as federal because it combines 13 states or political units. When the Declaration of Independence came into existence in 1776, it called the nation the United States of America. However, the 13 states did not act as one country since they each had individual powers and conducted trade negotiations and trade policies separately. The full potential of the federal government was realized after the Civil War when it overcame the authority of the States (Bjørnskov and Niklas, 700).
Unlike the US where the power was given to the states, the United Kingdom first started out with a monarchy system. With time, people demanded a parliamentary system that allowed them to practice their democratic rights. Now, the nation has both leadership systems: the monarchy and parliament. The prime minister of the region leads the government while the monarch acts as the head of state. The United Kingdom has four countries: Northern Ireland, Wales, Scotland, and England. The four nations each have varying power systems based in their capitals (Birch, 18).
Government Structure
There are four fundamental levels of government in America: municipal, county, state, federal. The different levels possess different responsibilities, functions, and roles that have varied from one historical period and state to another. Except for the advancements of Medicaid, Medicare, SSI, and Social Security, the federal government has received limited authority for human and health services. States play the primary roles mostly. The Founders in 1787 provided the basis structure of the United States that includes the Judicial, legislative, and executive branch (Howes, 20).
The executive branch is controlled by the President of America. The leader also acts as the Commander-in-Chief and the head of diplomatic relations. The President is placed in charge of enforcing and implementing laws created by Congress. He or she also appoints the members of the executives. The Vice President is also inclusive in the executive structure and must be prepared to assume leadership roles in case the need arises. Every society requires rules. The authority to formulate the laws in America is given to Congress that represents the legislative part of the government (King, 29).
The regulations in the United States are a complicated tapestry of weaving throughout the history of the region. Sometimes they are confusing, specific, or vague. It is thus the responsibility of the judicial system to sort the ambiguity in legislation and chose what is appropriate or not. The Constitution in America is based on power sharing between the state and national governments. The authority distribution form of leadership is a contrast from the one in England where the government is allowed to possess total power. As highlighted earlier, the Prime Minister controls the leadership in the United Kingdom (Bjørnskov and Niklas, 710).
The Prime Minister executes his or her authority with the assistance of the ministers and cabinet. The leader is in charge of all decision and policy-making. Just as the President in the United States, the Prime Minister appoints government members and oversees the civil service and agencies. The Prime Minister also acts as the principle leadership figure who manages the House of Commons. The Cabinet entails a group of senior members of the government who meet every week to discuss various national issues. The total representatives in the UK government are 118. Out of the number, 1 is the Prime Minister, 21 are Cabinet members, and 96 are general ministers (Jones and Philip, 25).
According to Howes (32), the 96 ministers in the UK government are appointed by the Prime Minister from the House of Lords and Commons. There are placed in charge of the successes, failures, and actions of their respective fields. The agencies and Civil Service carry out the policies created by the government by putting them into practice. Examples of executive agencies and departments include the Department of Transport and the Ministry of Defense. The Civil Service completes the administrative and practical works of the leadership. The department is managed and coordinated by the Prime Minister.
The Civil Service performs roles such as issuing driving permits, running job agencies, staffing rehabilitation centers and prisons, and paying pensions and benefits. Under the unmodified Constitution in Britain, the executive authority remains with the monarch. However, their powers are only executed through the advice of the Prime Minister. The Cabinet leaders give advice to the monarch as members of the Privy Council. The reigning monarch also does not have the power to make any political choices. Both the US and the UK have a multi-party system. In America, the most dominant political parties are the Republicans and Democrats while in the UK, they are the Labour Party and Conservatives (Horton and Montgomery, 43).
Before the Labour Party acquired prominence, the Liberal Party was considered the other major political association alongside the Conservatives. The Conservatives-Liberal consolidated government has been in leadership since 2010. The same can be said about the Republicans and Democrats. The constitution in the UK is termed as uncodified meaning it has conventional statutes and elements such as the EU Policy. The system is called the Westminster. It has been adopted by different nations that were previously under the control of Britain. The Parliament in the UK is divided into two primary houses: Commons and Lords (Birch, 21).
According to Jones and Philip (33), the House of Commons is classified as the lower institution, but it holds more power compared to the House of Lords. Decisions made by the House of Lords can be revoked by the House of Commons. Even though the House of Lords has the authority to create bills, the ones formulated by the House of Commons are accorded more importance. Under the UK system, the government is expected for practical and conventional reasons to sustain the overwhelming confidence and support of the House of Commons. It needs an alliance with the house to maintain supply and to pass essential legislations.
The political association that obtains most votes in the election and the House of Commons establishes the new government and its head becomes the Prime Minister. If no union wins, the one with majority members may form the minority leadership, or they may opt to form a coalition government. Just like in the US, the parliament or legislature in the UK scrutinizes the operations of the leadership on behalf of the nations’ citizens by forming investigative committees and asking the government members queries. One prominent distinction between the Britain and American leadership is that president in the US is his own entity (Horton and Montgomery, 47).
Although the American leader is appointed by the civilians and belongs to a particular party, he or she is an independent body. In the UK, the Prime Minister is subject to the control of the Monarchy and the House of Commons. The American government wields both legislative and executive authority. The one in Britain only makes laws that have to be scrutinized by the Parliament. Another difference is the lack or presence of a constitution. The United Kingdom thrives on uncodified or unwritten rules since most of the constitutional provisions are scattered across the Parliament’s Acts (Jones and Philip, 48).
The United States has a written documentation that serves as the guideline for most of the political functions of the government called the Constitution. The uncodified laws in Britain make it easier to change or update policies while in America is difficult or impossible to institute different meanings of the written regulations. Elections in the US are carried out after every four years while those in the UK occur after five years. The government structure of Britain is not split into branches as that in the America since specific powers are given to one branch, that is, the House of Commons (Birch, 44).
Democracy
The word democracy entails a government instituted by the people. The aspect means that the citizens should disclose everything that is affecting their lives. The phenomenon comprises of eight elements: the rule of law, human dignity, personal freedoms, respect, involvement and being informed, common good, political equality, and political freedoms. Individuals must enjoy their rights and speak freely. On the core surface, the leadership in both the USA and Britain fulfill the primary requirements of democracy. The two governments are accountable to their citizens and have a universal suffrage (Howes, 46).
The judgment concerning which of the two governments is more democratic involves looking critically at how each of the system works. When viewing the leadership structure at a closer and better angle, one realizes that none of the countries is democratic fully. In both regions, people have the right to take part in elections as long as there are adults in front of the law. However, a closer look at the issue of elections shows that America is slightly more democratic because the voting dates are fixed and occur every four years. In Britain, the Prime Minister sets the election dates as long as they do not exceed the gap of 5 years (Horton and Montgomery, 50).
The customized settings can favor the Prime Minister in the sense that he or she will set the election dates when the publicity of the office is extremely good. In doing so, the leader secures himself or herself another term in the office. The strict separation of authority in the USA allows democracy to prevail (De Magalhães, Leandro, and Lucas, 22). None of the branches have an influence on one another unlike in Britain where the House of Commons is given too much power. The powers of a leader are also controlled arbitrary in America. The president is not allowed to have total control over making political or appointment decisions.
Conclusion
The evaluation of the two nations helps in understanding the political atmosphere in the two countries respectively. Both America and Britain have long and rich histories that describe the journeys that people have taken to reach their current positions. They are both considered super powers due to the extent of development in the regions (Howes, 57). Their relationship can be traced back to the time that British controlled America and after the nation was declared independent. Historians and political analysts term the interactions between the two regions as a “special relationship.”
Their relations have been characterized by periods of love and hatred. During the 1812 War and American Revolution, US and UK fought each other. In the World Wars and Civil Battle, they joined forces. The differences can also be seen in the leadership systems in the country. They both have a sense of democracy in their governments; though, America is more democratic that the UK. The USA is classified as a republic that has different independent branches that assist in managing the people in the country (De Magalhães, Leandro, and Lucas, 39). On the other hand, Britain is categorized as a constitutional monarchy that accords more power to certain departments.
Regardless of how America and Britain are ruled, the individuals living in the regions have better living standards that anywhere in the globe. The condition shows that countries have different systems that work best for their people. The same form of leadership cannot apply for all the regions universally. The citizens together with their chosen leaders should come up with the appropriate strategies for controlling the resources and authority in their nations. It is also essential to preserve the traditional principles of the Founding Fathers. Both the US and the UK have not let go of the fundamental political ideologies of the nations’ founders.
Works Cited
Birch, Anthony H. British system of government. Routledge, 2013.
Bjørnskov, Christian, and Niklas Potrafke. "The size and scope of government in the US states: does party ideology matter?." International Tax and Public Finance 20.4 (2013): 687-714.
De Magalhães, Leandro M., and Lucas Ferrero. Separation of Powers and the Size of Government in the US States. Centre for Market and Public Organisation, 2012.
Horton, Sylvia, and Montgomery Van Wart. "The United Kingdom." Leadership and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2015. 41-55.
Howes, Michael. Politics and the Environment: Risk and the Role of Government and Industry. Routledge, 2013.
Jones, Bill, and Philip Norton. Politics uk. Routledge, 2014.
King, Cheryl Simrell. Government is us 2.0. Routledge, 2014.
