There are two major systems of government in our democratic society – parliamentary system and congressional or presidential system. These systems are selected by majority of citizens because of the personal and policy of government. As Dickerson, Flanagan, and O'Neil (2010) said, both parliamentary system and presidential system were originated from Britain in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. These systems can be found everywhere in the world even though these are transformed (p. 299). In this essay, I will argue that the presidential system is better than the parliamentary system. In particular, the presidential system has not only principle the separation of powers so that it can be prevented to concentrating power, but also it is more efficient and stable during terms of office.
First of all, although both parliamentary system and presidential system are divided into three branches, there are clear differences such as principles, functions and the separation of powers. Basically, two systems have different structures. Parliamentary system is consisted of three parts: House of Commons, Senate, and executive team which include a Crown, a Prime Minister, and a Cabinet office (Dickerson et al., 2010, p. 306). One of features in parliamentary system is the fusion of power from these three parts. Dickerson et al. (2010) stated that if one party wins a majority of seats in the House, a leader of the party would form a majority government. .
Conversely, if any parties win a majority, a minority government could be made by the leader of one party. A coalition government can be formed by two or more parties which may be forced to joining, it also "dividing ministerial appointments between them" (pp. 306-307). As Lijphart (1992) found, a parliament can be the Assembly, and "a prime minister or chancellor becoming head of the government and the monarch or president acting as head of state" (pp.
