COMPARING U.S. REPRESENTATIVE AND BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACIES
COMPARING U.S. REPRESENTATIVE AND BRITISH PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACIES
INTRODUCTION:
The debate on which form of democracy, representative versus parliamentary, can best manage a global energy crisis is a matter of much concern. The study addresses the following question: which form of democracy, U.S. representative versus British parliamentary can best manage a global oil crisis between 2009-2011? The question is important to address because understanding which form of democracy, U.S. representative versus British parliamentary can best manage a global oil crisis between 2009-2011 is critical in assessing the efficiencies of democratic energy decision making.
Currently, it is a raging matter on which form of government, representative or parliamentary, is best suited to solve a glove crisis such as the prevailing energy crisis or another gulf war. For instance, both governments may contemplate introducing speed limits on their highways of up to 53 mph because, of the worsening energy crisis. Interestingly, the two democracies have different methods of approaching any policy-making initiative owing to their differences in governance. Further, each democracy, representative (USA) or parliamentary (British), has its benefits and shortcomings. Despite this, the study argues that the U.S. representative democracy is best able to manage a global energy crisis between 2009-2011. The study is organized as follows: Section 1 compares the two forms of democracy. Section 2 is the case study.
Both America and Britain employ two different systems of governance. While the US has a representative system of governance, Britain employs a parliamentary system. Policy makers in both nations opine that the 35 mph limit can help in conservation of oil. In the U.S., there is a clear separation and division of power between the government and Congress. The U.S president heads the executive arm of the government, and is elected in a separated
INTRODUCTION:
The debate on which form of democracy, representative versus parliamentary, can best manage a global energy crisis is a matter of much concern. The study addresses the following question: which form of democracy, U.S. representative versus British parliamentary can best manage a global oil crisis between 2009-2011? The question is important to address because understanding which form of democracy, U.S. representative versus British parliamentary can best manage a global oil crisis between 2009-2011 is critical in assessing the efficiencies of democratic energy decision making.
Currently, it is a raging matter on which form of government, representative or parliamentary, is best suited to solve a glove crisis such as the prevailing energy crisis or another gulf war. For instance, both governments may contemplate introducing speed limits on their highways of up to 53 mph because, of the worsening energy crisis. Interestingly, the two democracies have different methods of approaching any policy-making initiative owing to their differences in governance. Further, each democracy, representative (USA) or parliamentary (British), has its benefits and shortcomings. Despite this, the study argues that the U.S. representative democracy is best able to manage a global energy crisis between 2009-2011. The study is organized as follows: Section 1 compares the two forms of democracy. Section 2 is the case study.
Both America and Britain employ two different systems of governance. While the US has a representative system of governance, Britain employs a parliamentary system. Policy makers in both nations opine that the 35 mph limit can help in conservation of oil. In the U.S., there is a clear separation and division of power between the government and Congress. The U.S president heads the executive arm of the government, and is elected in a separated