Parliamentary vs Presidential, Which is Better for the Philippines?

Ruling a state, a country is really not an easy task. The head of the government should really have his organize and well-planned plan so the organization of its each concept will operate systematically. Taking care of estimated 104 million Filipinos, their lives are all in the governments hands. It is not only the people of this country who’ll be depending in the government but the whole nation, including its resources, establishments, employment and others. The fact that the actions applied by the government will reflect to its people and the whole country, the steps that people who have their powers will take, will be the representation of what will happen to the whole nation. The actions, steps and decisions of the government should be

Along with the contrast in branches, the two democratic schemes further diversify as the leaders of presidential and parliamentary systems lose their power differently. In a presidential system, there is a fixed term limit that dictates how long the president can reside in power: the terms of office of both president and assembly are fixed.” (Shugart and Mainwaring, pg.14). A fixed terms causes the president to be in office with a much lesser danger of losing power, with his or her only danger being impeachment which has been extremely rare in North American presidential systems as only two presidents in the history of the United States have been impeached, Andrew Johnson in 1868 and Bill Clinton in 1999. Also, this leads to presidency having scheduled elections as the president’s time is limited. Conversely, in parliamentary, there is no fix term and an election is called on the advice of the prime minister, thus, the prime minister does not lose his or her place in office due to a time limit. However, the prime minister has a much greater chance of losing his or her position of power due to the need to be supported by the majority in legislature: “The chief executive power must be supported by a majority in the legislature and can

As a reference to the popular (paraphrased) Filipino saying, "Kung gusto mong guminhawa ang iyong buhay, kailangan mo ng malaking pera," this power imprisons and controls the every need of a person, from food to education, to housing, to death. I woudn't live in a house in Mandaluyong City, if it weren't for the funds of the government to pay for the lands and the structure of the house. The high quality education in Ateneo would not be free, if it weren't for some people who volunteered to shoulder the expenses. I won't be able to eat delicious foods like sinigang, adobo, and many others, if it weren't for the family to afford. The country is under the system of capitalism, which means that the state is controlled by private companies for profit (still money

Parliamentary democracy is a system of democratic governance, in which the executive branch is held accountable to legislative branch. In the other hand congressional democracy is a system of democratic governance in which the executive branch is separate from the legislative branch and the head of government is not a member of the legislature. Congress for example is a legislative branch of a congressional democracy. While these two have similarities they also have a few differences. In the parliamentary democracy; decisions are made by people following their party line and not many individual decisions, members aren’t able to make individual decisions. In contrast Political decisions in congressional democracy are mainly by the people behind

Greece politics are categorized under a parliamentary representative democratic republic. A parliamentary republic is a type of republic that functions under a parliamentary system of government and has several different branches. The prime minister of Greece is recognized as the head of government, the executive branch, and of a multi-party system. The legislative branch has power both in the government and in the Hellenic Parliament. The judiciary branch is independent of both the legislative and executive branches. It is important to note that

Parliamentary systems usually have the head of government and the head of state, with the head of government being the prime minister or premier, and the head of state often being a figurehead, often a hereditary monarch (often in a constitutional monarchy). Countries that have this type of government are the United Kingdom, Sweden and Japan. These countries have a administrations that are virtually always the outcome of parties’ coalitions, they inclined to be varied and represent an extensive swath of common opinion. In a parliamentary system, the chief executive (the prime minister) is chosen from the parliament by his peers after each parliamentary election. Consequently, he serves as the leader of both the executive branch and the legislative branch, a scenario appropriately referred to as a "fusion of powers". Given that a majority of parliament must confirm his/her appointment to the position, the Prime Minister is almost always guaranteed a working political majority or a favorable coalition.

There are two types of electoral systems which are First Past the Post (FPTP) and Proportional Representation (PR).

In a parliamentary system the government’s authority is completely dependent on the will of the parliament itself. However in a presidential system the governments separate sectors are power unto themselves and as such have the ability and power to enforce what they see fit. (Linz)

Other politicians have made poverty alleviation top priority, but the pro-poor discourse of Duterte’s competitors such as those of Mayor Binay and Mar Roxas fell on deaf ears as voters had by that time grown weary of false promises. These people wanted something different and in Duterte they saw an outsider, like them, trying to make way in a world dominated by elites. During the 6 year period before his presidency the Philippines experienced a major economic boom that vanquished its title as the sick man of Asia. From 2011 to 2016, Aquino’s term, the Philippines was consistently the fastest growing economy in Southeast Asia. Republic of the Philippines’ sovereign bonds reached investment grade status. The peso appreciated and held steady at PHP44 to one USD. These gains unfortunately did not translate into a change in per capita among the poor. A Huffington Post article in evaluating Aquino’s record says that “The incidence of poverty remains virtually unchanged — at 25 percent since 2009 - as has the unemployment rate, which has remained in the 6-7 percent range.” This skewed economic progress played directly into Duterte’s hands. He capitalized on this frustration, cultivated it, and gave it roots. In a speech in Los Baňos Duterte said “I’m really disgusted the way government is being run because it is oppressing the

[I]n pursuit of its long-range goal of recovering the substance of democracy, restoring individual rights and promoting the welfare of the Filipino people, the government has successfully waged a Democratic Revolution founded upon a series of reforms[.] (1)

Looking back to the previous government systems in different periods in Philippine history, we can see that our present government system is somehow shaped and patterned from the previous systems that prevailed in our country. Pre – historically we have seen how they established their government and basically, we can say that it is far more primitive than the present system that we have. However, the basic principles like the consultation of the datus to the elders can somehow be seen in the present by the presence of political advisers where our president consults aside from the members of the senate and the congress. The barangay system

Unity of elite and masses resulted to the Philippine independence in 1896 as well as freedom from authoritarian rule in 1986 EDSA revolution. The abovementioned national identity can be attributed to the unity of the elites and the masses since they only have one goal and that is freedom. According to Fartz Fanon (1961), national consciousness should embrace the innermost hopes of the whole people. Hence, it is only compared to any case of an empty shell. An idea of what it might have been. It is considered as traditional weakness which is present in most under-developed country. It cannot only be attributed to the result of the colonization period but also to the intellectual laziness of the nation. Ignorance and lack of information can be a good example. History teaches us to appreciate the past and learned from them. However, it was ignored and the process of enlightenment was not revealed.

From the 1960’s through the 1990’s, during what is referred to as the East Asian economic miracle period, several East Asian economies experienced unexpected high growth that was sustained for more than 20 years. The Philippines had great potential early on to become a developed country, due to an abundance of natural resources, a special relationship with the United States, a high literacy rate, a high domestic savings rate, and a promising manufacturing sector Leipzeger 448-449. However, despite these advantages, they experienced far slower growth than many of the other economies in the region. Today, they continue to face numerous obstacles to becoming a developed state.

The Philippines is one of eight countries that comprise Southeast Asia. A mass of thousands of islands, the country has been struggling to obtain true democracy and freedom for its citizens. After a review of the political history and demographics of the country, an in-depth analysis of the economic condition of the Philippines will be explored. Appendix A contains a map of the Philippines by different cultural regions. Economic topics will include Fiscal and Monetary policies, as well as a review of the peso. Next, significant economic indicators will be discussed, including unemployment, interest

The Philippines is rich in human and natural resources, it seemed then that the Philippines was destined to become one of Asia’s real superpowers. However, the overwhelming power of corruption tainted its leaders, and the Philippines struggled under Marcos’ long rule. By 1981, the nation was heavily in debt, the country was facing problems making payments on its international loans, and poverty was endemic as economic and democratic institutions collapsed. Plunged into a deep recession in the 1980s, the Philippines suffered from what came to be known as crony capitalism, as President Marcos built up a