POLITICAL

EXECUTIVE
MAKING SENSE OF POLITICS
TOPIC 5

1
THE QUESTION
1. What are “head of state” and “head of government”
2. What is presidentialism?
3. What is parliamentarianism?
4. What are their strength and weaknesses?
5. Why civil service needs to be politically neutral

2
THREE CATEGORIES OF POWER?
We know them well:
1. Executive: policy decision, administration, implementation
2. Legislative: law making
3. Judiciary: administering laws

How shall we arrange them?

3
FULL CONCENTRATION OF POWER

Have not always been in separation → power is power

Forms of government that concentrate three kinds of power

• Absolute monarchy
• Totalitarian regimes
• Most authoritarian regimes

4
SEPARATION OF POWERS

Have not always been in separation → power is power

Often attributed to Montesquieu

Clearest distinction appear in US system

5
THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT?
But is it really that clear cut?

Executive can get involved in legislative matters

• Lobbying, political alliances, threats
• Not likely to stay completely hands off
Legislature can get involved in executive matters
• Oversee policy implementation
• (in some systems) control funding of the policy
Judiciary (in some cases) may be, in de facto, involved in legislative matters
• Precedents gives full meaning to legislation
Not always clear-cut, but…
On the whole, we can tell the difference

6
SPEAKING OF EXECUTIVE: THE HEADS

Usual titles:
Monarch (king, queen), President, Prime Minister, Chief Executive,
Chief Secretary, General Secretary…

The title alone → can’t tell their function

• Head of state ≠ Head of government

7
HEAD OF THE STATE
Symbolic role: Represent the integrity and dignity of the “state”
• Government can change in every election
• The state does not easily change
• Mainly ceremonious figure

8
HEAD OF STATE ONLY CEREMONIAL?

9
HEAD OF STATE ONLY CEREMONIAL?

Chamlong Srimuang
(anti-military))

Suchinda 20 May 1992

10
Kraprayoon
HEAD OF GOVERNMENT

Political Role: bearing actual political responsibility of governance

Head of Government can also be Head of State → fused system

• One person→ two roles
• Totalitarian regime (North Korea), but not necessarily (The US)

Head of Government can be separated from the Head of states → dual system
• Constitutional Monarchy
• Separate election for two heads (dual executive model) (Taiwan, France)
• Religious leader with a president (Islamic Republic of Iran)

11
FORMS OF DEMOCRATIC
GOVERNMENTS
Two major forms:
• Presidential system
• Parliamentary system

Determined by a list of features

• Not about whether there is a president
• How the executive is elected
• Line of accountability between the executive, the legislature and the people

Mixed system

12
PRESIDENTIALISM
The people

President

Not directly
Legislature
accountable
Cabinet/Minsters

Bureaucracy

13
WITHOUT LEGISLATURE SUPPORT

The president can still

• Stay in office
• Appoint officials (except those required ratification of legislature)
• Issue executive orders
• Push forward foreign policies
• Make important decisions on national security
• Basically do anything that does not rely on new legislations

14
WITHOUT LEGISLATURE SUPPORT

The president cannot

• Create any new legislations
• Pass the budget for the government to function
• Add any new budget items after budget is passed (appropriation bill)
• Appoint high level judges
• (In some systems) appoint cabinet without approval of legislature

15
SEPARATION OF POWER
The spirit of Presidential system: Separation of power
• Different kinds of power should not concentrate in
the same group of people
• No overlapping of personnel

• Power needs to be checked and balanced by

power

John Adams:
“Power must be opposed to power,
and interest to interest”

16
STRENGTH OF PRESIDENTIALISM

1. Stability of the executive office

• The president does not rely on other branches on stay in power
• Election result is stable until the next election
• You will have a president at least for the term
• (except by very usual case of impeachment)

17
18
PROBLEMS WITH
PRESIDENTIALISM
(1) Difficult to remove ‘bad’ leaders

19
(2) Executive-Legislative Deadlock

a) Executive and legislature

are not directly accountable to each other
b) Legislature is not expected
to support executive every time
c) Separate election means that Executive and Legislature can be in the
hands of different parties
d) (a) + (b) + (c) = Legislature can obstruct any initiative by the president

20
CASE: US GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN 2013

1. Republican party controlled the House of Representative

2. Republicans don’t like the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ”
(Obamacare)
3. Challenged it in multiple ways
• Going to Supreme Court: it’s unconstitutional
4. In 2013, refuse to pass the budget or continuation resolution
5. US federal government shutdown for 16 days

21
(3) The deadlock can be even worse under multi party system

President led
Legislature Vote People Vote Executive
(controlled by
(controlled by
multi-parties)
one party)

Independent
Don’t feel power base
necessity
for coalition

Legislative Minority
Deadlocks Government

Endanger the survival of the

democracy
Ineffective
government

22
PRESIDENTIALISM AND DEMOCRATIC FAILURE

Continuous ineffective governance → people lose confidence in democracy

Executive is (therefore) tempted to by-pass legislature

• Moderate:
• rely on executive orders
• Issue legally ambiguous executive order
• Extreme:
• Coup and end the democracy

(Think about the new democracies)

23
 PARLIAMENTARIANISM
People

Prime Ministers
Vote of
+ Cabinet
confidence
Legislature (Ministers)

Directly
Winning
Losing Accountable
Party
Party
Bureaucracy

24
People
PARLIAMENTARIANISM

Party
A Party Vote of
C
Prime Ministers +
confidence Cabinet (power
Party Party sharing between
B Legislature D Directly parties)
Party Accountable
E

Coalition Bureaucracy

25
WITHOUT SUPPORT OF LEGISLATURE

Vote of no-confidence → government collapse

Legislative Supremacy

26
FUSION OF POWER

The spirit of parliamentarianism: fusion of power

• Concentrating executive and legislative powers in the same group of people
• No overlapping of personnel
• Maintain independent judiciary

27
 STRENGTH OF
PARLIAMENTARIANISM
(1) Responsive government → easy to remove leaders
• Prime Minister and the Cabinet relies on Parliamentary support
• If PM becomes unpopular, the parliament can call for vote of no-
confidence
• PM needs to resign or call for reelection
• Executive is sensitive to popular pressure during its term
• Unlike presidential system → cannot make unpopular decisions

28
STRENGTH OF
PARLIAMENTARIANISM
(2) No executive-legislative deadlock
• The executive rely on parliamentary support
• If the executive survives, it is basically supported by parliament
• A lot smoother in passing legislations and budgets
(3) Encourage power sharing in executive branch
• In multi-party system
• Only coalition government can get a vote of confidence
• Strong incentive to share cabinet positions between different parties
• Executive power is not dominated by one party
(4) Functional coalition government → steady policies

29
PROBLEMS OF
PARLIAMENTARIANISM
(1) Lack checks and balances
• Unclear separation of power
• Very difficult for the opposition to check the government
• In presidential system, voters can empower opposition in legislature to check
government
• Especially under two-party system
(2) Unstable executive
• Election alone is not enough to secure government terms
• Other factors → uncertainties
• Especially under multi-party system → coalition government can easily collapse
• Also under two party system → PM’s party may revolt

30
PROBLEMS OF
PARLIAMENTARIANISM
(3) Party loyalty competing with voter support
• In presidential system:
• After election, even the party cannot remove the president
• Independent power base
• Personal appeal to the people
• The party rally behind a winnable candidate
• President can act for the people and against his/her own party if
necessary
• In parliamentary system:
• The Prime Minister is still under party control
• Or the PM must control the party
• PM must align his/her position with the party (even against the
voters)

31
PARTY DISCIPLINE & PARLIAMENTARIANISM
Executive is less reliant on party discipline under presidential system
• Separation of power
• legislature is not required to support executive,
• while executive does not rely on legislature support
Whereas party discipline is essential under parliamentary system
• Executive stability relies on parliament support
How to ensure support?

“Because they are in the same party”

What do you think?

32
PARTY DISCIPLINE
Official disciplinary measure
• Fine
• Official condemnation by party
• Expulsion

Problem:
a) Costly method
b) May damage public confidence
c) Intra-party fight → media disaster

~ Last resort only ~

33
PARTY DISCIPLINE

(1) Social pressure

• Appeal to friendship, fair play and loyalty
• Adhere to basic social norms
• Ask for reasonable sacrifice only
• Assure compensation
• Informal threats (negative campaign information)

34
PARTY DISCIPLINE
(2) Screening candidates for election
• Withdraw electoral support from candidates
who repeatedly defect from the party
• Replace candidate as punishment

Problem: sometimes it is risky and difficult to change local candidates

• Election requires much preparation
• May lose the seat if change for a weaker candidate

35
(3) Linking party loyalty with promotion to executive positions
a) Under parliamentary system, the cabinet positions are appointed by the party
leadership
b) Back bencher that deviate from party line a lot → will not be promoted
c) All policy making powers are concentrated in the cabinet
d) (a) + (b) + (c) = if you wish to have any influence on actual policy (making a
difference), you need to be loyal to the party

Under presidential system, legislature itself have various powerful positions

→ less reliant on resources of executive positions

36
Frank Allaun (UK labor MP):

“As a backbencher you can say

what you like, take up whatever
issue you like, mix with unpopular
trade unionists, MPs or journalists –
and the whips can’t touch you. It is
only when you are tempted by
ambition for office that you are no
longer free.”

37
Problems:
• There are not enough executive cabinet positions for everyone
• Distribution of cabinet positions may not satisfy everyone
• Especially if you win by a big margin
• Some MPs lose hope and ambition for getting cabinet positions

Linking loyalty with promotion → not enough

But, executive offices under parliamentary system is a valuable resources

for maintaining party discipline

38
REMEMBER THE COMPARISON
Presidentialism Parliamentarianism
Accountability Directly accountable to voters Directly accountable to legislature

Checks and balances Less checks and balances

Responsiveness to Less pressure to be responsive More pressure to be responsive
public opinion
Stability of Very stable → stuck with the same Unstable but easy to change leader
executive leader
Executive- Easy to be in deadlock Seldom in deadlock
legislative
Party Discipline Less important Very important
Two party system Checks and balances Powerful executive
Multi-party system Chronic minority government Coalition government (power
sharing)
Policy direction Prone to constant changes (good coalition gov’t) → more long
term planning
Democratic Weaker record Stronger record
survival
Governance ??? ???

39
Performance
SYSTEMS IN BETWEEN
Merging features of parliamentarianism and presidentialism
• Directly elect president
• Prime Minister elected by legislature
• President and Prime Minister hold different power
PM dominant: India, Germany, Austria, Ireland
Balanced share of power: Finland
President dominant: France (semi-presidential system)

40
COMBINATIONS OF
DEMOCRATIC SYSTEMS

1. Electoral systems (simple plurality, absolute plurality, PR)

2. Presidential / Parliamentary system
3. Party system (two, multi-party)

Influence the strength, stability of executive and relationship with legislature

41
 SIDE ISSUE:
BUREAUCRACY & NEUTRALITY
The executive is composed by:
a) Political positions (cabinet)
➢ responsible for political decisions (deciding and making policy)
b) Bureaucracy (civil service)
➢ Policy implementation Cabinet/
➢ NOT supposed to make any political decisions Minsters

Bureaucracy

42
BUREAUCRACY & ITS GOOD NAME
Bureaucratic is associated with bad names
•Inflexible
•Unresponsive
•Red-tape
•The iron cage: turning human beings into heartless cogs in a big bureaucratic
machine
Bureaucracy was a neutral term (some positive connotations)

43
WEBER’S BUREAUCRACY
1. It covers a fixed area of activity, which is governed by rules
2. It is organized as a hierarchy
3. Action is based on written documents
4. Expert training
5. Official devote their full activity to their work
6. The management of the office follows general rules which can
be learned

44
FOUNDATION OF MODERN
STATE
Bureaucracy is powerful
1. Detailed, meticulous planning
2. Large scale projects becomes possible
3. Greatly strengthen state’s institutional capacity
• Power now penetrates deeply into smallest details of life
4. Bureaucracy is efficient, productive, and rational
5. Policy implementation relies on civil service (bureaucracy)

If cabinet/head of government/ legislature are the brain of the state,

bureaucracy are the limbs of the state

45
NOW IMAGINE CIVIL SERVICE AS
POLITICALLY PARTISAN…
1. Civil service implements policy
2. It is nearly impossible to micro-manage civil service from outside
• Rules, implementation details, clerical work
• Requires manpower of the whole bureaucracy
3. Party B just defeated Party A in election
4. But civil service support Party A
• the civil service can easily sabotage the policy of Party B
5. Party B knows that → began replacing civil servants with their own party men
• Confusion, inefficiency, institutional conflicts
6. Party A win in the next election → repeat the process

46
POLITICAL NEUTRALITY
Politicized civil service would be
• Chaotic
• Inefficient
• Full of cronyism (buddies get the job)
• Undemocratic (elected leaders frustrated by unelected civil servants)

Civil service should be politically neutral

• Follow rules and procedures
• Execute policies disregarding personal preference
• Cannot be fired by politicians (near tenure protection)

47
Woodrow Wilson:

“Public administration lies

outside the proper sphere or
politics. Administrative
questions are not political
questions. Although politics
sets the tasks for
administration, it should not
be suffered to manipulate its
offices.”

~ The Study of Public Administration ~

48
So next time you blame civil servants
for not taking a stance…

Be ware what you are wishing for…

49
DO YOU THINK CIVIL SERVICE
IS REALLY NEUTRAL?

50
NEUTRALITY: IDEAL? EXCUSE?

The ideal: civil service does not make political decision

But civil servants have enormous influence because
they…
1. Draft the actual policy (devils in the details)
2. Prioritize tasks
3. Asymmetrical access to information
• Civil servants stay in same positions for a long time
• Have staff to process information
• Access to information (ability to hide information)
• “Ministers come and go, but permanent secretaries
are permanent” (Yes, Minister)

51
If a minister is the head of a department
Permanent secretary is like the neck of a department

(btw, remember everything is politics…?)

52
What if…
1. Civil servants begin to believe that they are the real ruler
of the country?
2. Civil servants pursue their own group interests?

Political control over bureaucracy is a major subject of study

53
IF YOU FORGET EVERYTHING, REMEMBER
THESE…
1. Bureaucracy in political science and public administration is a neutral term
2. Bureaucracy runs on legal-rationality (rules rules rules)
3. Bureaucracy is the technical foundation of modern state
4. Bureaucracy (civil service) is supposed to be politically neutral
5. It is difficult to control civil service that hide behind “political neutrality” while
pursue self-interest
6. Political control over bureaucracy is a major subject of study
7. Politics and Public administration are essentially different study (focus only on
institutional influence on human behavior)

54
NEXT TOPIC

55