{{Short description|Form of government}}
{{Redirect|Presidential Republic|the period in the history of Chile|Presidential Republic (1925–1973)}}
{{Redirect|Congressional system|the 19th century European power arrangements|Concerts of Europe{{!}}congress system}}
{{Systems of government|upright=1.2}}
{{Politics sidebar|Systems}}
A '''presidential''', '''strong-president''', or '''single-executive system''' (sometimes also '''congressional system''')[{{cite web | title=OCR Document | website=static.pmg.org.za | date=March 12, 2008 | url=https://static.pmg.org.za/docs/080307rhoda.htm | access-date=May 19, 2025}}][{{cite web | title=Canadian Parliamentary Review |website=revparl.ca | date=April 17, 1982 | url=http://www.revparl.ca/english/issue.asp?art=573¶m=108 | access-date=May 19, 2025}}] is a [[Government#Forms|form of government]] in which a [[head of government]] (usually titled "[[President (government title)|president]]") heads an [[Executive (government)|executive branch]] that derives its authority and legitimacy from a source that is [[separation of powers|separate]] from the [[legislative branch]]. The system was popularized by its inclusion in the [[Constitution of the United States]].[{{Cite book|title=Political Representation|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2010|isbn=978-0521128650|chapter=Varieties of public representation}}]
This head of government is often also the [[head of state]].[{{cite web | title=Presidential System | Politics and Government | Research Starters | EBSCO Research | url=https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/politics-and-government/presidential-system }}] In a presidential system, the head of government is directly or indirectly [[Election|elected]] by a group of [[Citizenship|citizens]] and is not [[Responsible government|responsible]] to the legislature, and the legislature cannot [[Dissolution of parliament|dismiss]] the president during their term in office except in extraordinary cases. A presidential system contrasts with a [[parliamentary system]], where the head of government (usually called a prime minister) derives their power from the [[Confidence (politics)|confidence]] of an elected [[legislature]], which can dismiss the prime minister with an ordinary majority.[{{cite web | title=Parliamentary system | Definition & Facts | Britannica | url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/parliamentary-system }}] However, [[dictators]] or leaders of [[one-party states]], whether popularly elected or not, often carry the title of president.[{{cite book | last1=Baturo | first1=Alexander | last2=Elgie | first2=Robert | title=The Politics of Presidential Term Limits | date=20 June 2019 | publisher=Oxford University Press | isbn=978-0-19-257435-0 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ljmdDwAAQBAJ&dq=%22president+for+life%22&pg=PT90 }}]
== History ==
=== Development in the Americas ===
The presidential system has its roots in the governance of the [[British colonization of the Americas|British colonies]] of the 17th century in what is now the United States. The [[Pilgrims (Plymouth Colony)|Pilgrims]], permitted to govern themselves in [[Plymouth Colony]], established a system that utilized an independent executive branch. Each year, a [[Governor of Plymouth Colony|governor]] was chosen by the [[Plymouth General Court|colonial legislature]], as well as several assistants, analogous to modern-day [[Cabinet (government)|cabinets]]. Additional executive officials such as constables and messengers were then appointed.[{{cite web |last=Fennell |first=Christopher |title=Plymouth Colony Legal Structure |url=http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html |publisher=Histarch.uiuc.edu}}] At the same time, the [[British Isles]] underwent a brief period of republicanism as [[the Protectorate]], during which the [[Lord Protector]] served as an executive leader similar to a president.[Vile, M. J. (1967). The separation of powers. In: Greene, J. P., & Pole, J. R. (Eds.). (2008). ''A companion to the American Revolution'', Ch. 87. John Wiley & Sons.]
The first true presidential system was developed during the United States [[Constitutional Convention (United States)|Constitutional Convention]] in 1787.[{{Cite book |last=Sundquist |first=James L. |title=Designs for Democratic Stability: Studies in Viable Constitutionalism |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=1997 |isbn=0765600528 |editor-last=Baaklini |editor-first=Abdo I. |pages=53–72 |language=en |chapter=The U.S. Presidential System as a Model for the World |editor-last2=Desfosses |editor-first2=Helen}}] Drawing inspiration from the previous colonial governments, from [[English Common Law]], and from philosophers such as [[John Locke]] and [[Montesquieu]], the [[Founding Fathers of the United States|delegates]] developed what is now known as the presidential system. Most notably, [[James Wilson (Founding Father)|James Wilson]] advocated for a unitary executive figure that would become the role of the president.[{{Cite journal |last=McCarthy |first=Daniel J. |date=1987 |title=James Wilson and the Creation of the Presidency |journal=[[Presidential Studies Quarterly]] |volume=17 |issue=4 |pages=689–696}}]
During the 1810s and 1820s, Spanish colonies in the Americas [[Spanish American wars of independence|sought independence]], and several new Spanish-speaking governments emerged in [[Latin America]]. These countries modeled their [[constitution]]s after that of the United States, and the presidential system became the dominant political system in the Americas.[{{Cite journal |last=Sondrol |first=Paul |date=2005 |title=The Presidentialist Tradition in Latin America |journal=International Journal of Public Administration |volume=28 |issue=5 |pages=517–530|doi=10.1081/PAD-200055210 |s2cid=153822718 }}][{{Cite journal |last=Mainwaring |first=Scott |date=1990 |title=Presidentialism in Latin America |journal=[[Latin American Research Review]] |volume=25 |pages=157–179|doi=10.1017/S0023879100023256 |s2cid=252947271 |doi-access=free }}][{{Cite journal |last=Valenzuela |first=Arturo |date=2004 |title=Latin American Presidencies Interrupted |journal=[[Journal of Democracy]] |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=5–19|doi=10.1353/jod.2004.0075 |s2cid=51825804 }}]
=== As a global system ===
The end of [[World War II]] established presidential systems in two countries. After the United States ended the [[Korea under Japanese rule|Japanese occupation of Korea]], it assisted [[South Korea]] in the formation of a presidential government. However, the early years of the South Korean presidency were marked by dictatorial control.[{{cite book|author=Tirman, John|title=The Deaths of Others: The Fate of Civilians in America's Wars|publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-19-538121-4 |pages=93–95 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2bC5Bsc1NEQC&pg=PA93}}][{{cite book|author=Buzo, Adrian|title=The making of modern Korea|publisher=Taylor & Francis|year=2007|isbn=978-0-415-41482-1|page=79|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KAbbtKCjHfUC&pg=PA79}}] At the same time, Indonesia declared [[Proclamation of Indonesian Independence|independence]] from the Netherlands in 1945. While it nominally used a presidential system, it was in effect a dictatorship where the president controlled all branches of government. A democratic presidential system was established [[Post-Suharto era in Indonesia|in Indonesia]] in 1998 and [[Sixth Republic of Korea|in Korea]] in 1987.[{{Cite book |last= |first= |title=Us indonesia diplomatic and political cooperation handbook. |date=2007 |publisher=International Business Publication USA |isbn=978-1-4330-5330-6 |location= |oclc=946753807}}][{{Cite book |last=Bush |first=Robin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Ssg0aiSEyy0C&pg=PA111 |title=Nahdlatul Ulama and the Struggle for Power Within Islam and Politics in Indonesia |date=2009 |publisher=Institute of Southeast Asian Studies |isbn=978-981-230-876-4 |language=en}}] Cyprus,[{{Cite journal |last=Ker-Lindsay |first=James |date=2006 |title=Presidential Power and Authority in the Republic of Cyprus |journal=[[Mediterranean Politics]] |volume=11 |pages=21–37|doi=10.1080/13629390500490379 |s2cid=145444372 }}] the Maldives,[{{Cite book |last=Heath-Brown |first=Nick |title=The Statesman's Yearbook 2016 |year=2015 |chapter=Maldives}}] and [[South Vietnam]][{{cite web |title=Ngo Dinh Diem |url=https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ngo-Dinh-Diem |website=Britannica}}] also adopted the presidential system following decolonization. Pakistan[{{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=Stephen Philip |title=The Idea of Pakistan |date=2004 |publisher=[[Brookings Institution Press]] |location=Washington, DC |isbn=978-0-8157-9761-6 |page=65 |edition=1st Pbk. |url=https://archive.org/details/ideaofpakistan00cohe}}] and Bangladesh[{{cite book |last=Rono |first=Haider Akbar Khan |title=Śatābdī pēriẏē |date=2010 |publisher=Taraphadara prakashani |isbn=978-984-779-027-5 |page=335 |language=bn |script-title=bn:শতাব্দী পেরিয়ে}}][{{cite book |last=Ahmed |first=Moudud |author-link=Moudud Ahmed |title=Bangladesh: Era of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman |publisher=Franz Steiner Verlag |year=1984 |isbn=3-515-04266-0 |location=Wiesbaden |page=245 |orig-year=First published 1983}}] did so as well, but they changed their governmental systems shortly afterwards.
Several more countries adopted the presidential system in the final decades of the 20th century. A modified version of the presidential system was implemented in [[Iran]] following constitutional reform in 1989, in which the [[Supreme Leader of Iran|Supreme Leader]] serves as the head of state and is the absolute power in this country.[{{Cite book |last=Buchta |first=Wilfried |title=Who Rules Iran? The Structure of Power in the Islamic Republic |publisher=[[The Washington Institute for Near East Policy]] and the [[Konrad Adenauer Stiftung]] |year=2000 |isbn=0944029361 |pages=22}}] In 1981, Palau achieved independence and adopted a presidential system.[{{Cite journal |last=Shuster |first=Donald R. |date=1983 |title=Elections in the Republic of Palau |journal=[[Political Science (journal)|Political Science]] |volume=35 |pages=117–132|doi=10.1177/003231878303500108 }}] When the [[Soviet Union]] was [[Dissolution of the Soviet Union|dissolved]] in 1991, the presidential system was adopted by the new states that were created, though most of them adopted other governmental systems over the following decades.[{{Cite journal |last=Hale |first=Henry E. |date=2012 |title=Two Decades of Post-Soviet Regime Dynamics |journal=[[Demokratizatsiya (journal)|Demokratizatsiya]] |volume=20 |issue=2 |pages=71–77}}]
The presidential system continues to be adopted in the 21st century. Following its independence in 2011, [[South Sudan]] adopted a presidential system.[{{Cite journal |last1=Diehl |first1=Katharina |last2=van der Horst |first2=Judith |date=2013 |title=The New Electoral Law in South Sudan |journal=[[Law and Politics in Africa, Asia and Latin America]] |volume=46 |issue=2 |pages=215–233}}] In 2018, after the [[2017 Turkish constitutional referendum]], Turkey adopted a presidential system.[{{Cite news |last1=Kirişci |first1=Kemal |last2=Toygür |first2=Ilke |date=2019 |title=Turkey's new presidential system and a changing west |work=[[Brookings Institution|Brookings]] |url=https://www.brookings.edu/research/turkeys-new-presidential-system-and-a-changing-west/}}][{{Cite journal |last1=Adar |first1=Sinem |last2=Seufert |first2=Günter |date=2021 |title=Turkey's Presidential System after Two and a Half Years |journal=Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik}}][{{Cite news |date=2018-06-25 |title=Turkey elections: How powerful will the next Turkish president be? |language=en-GB |work=BBC News |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44574919 |access-date=2022-03-01}}] In 2025, following the adoption of the [[Constitutional Declaration of the Syrian Arab Republic|Constitutional Declaration]], Syria established a presidential system.[{{cite web |date=14 March 2025 |title=Syria's new constitution gives sweeping powers, ignores minority rights |url=https://www.rfi.fr/en/middle-east/20250314-syria-s-new-constitution-gives-sweeping-powers-ignores-minority-rights |accessdate=15 March 2025 |publisher=rfi}}]
== Features ==
=== Separation of powers ===
{{Main|Separation of powers}}
The presidential system is defined by the separation of the executive branch from other aspects of government. The [[head of government]] is elected to work alongside, but not as a part of, the legislature.[{{Cite book |last=von Mettenheim |first=Kurt |title=Presidential Institutions and Democratic Politics |publisher=[[The Johns Hopkins University Press]] |year=1997 |isbn=0801853133 |pages=2–15 |language=en}}] There are several types of powers that are traditionally delegated to the president. Under a presidential system, the president may have the power to challenge legislation through a [[veto]],[{{Cite journal |last=Tsebelis |first=George |date=1995 |title=Decision Making in Political Systems: Veto Players in Presidentialism, Parliamentarism, Multicameralism and Multipartyism |journal=[[British Journal of Political Science]] |volume=25 |issue=3 |pages=289–325|doi=10.1017/S0007123400007225 |s2cid=18060081 |url=http://revistas.usal.es/index.php/1130-2887/article/view/alh2016734566 |doi-access=free }}] the power to [[pardon]] crimes, authority over foreign policy, authority to command the military as the [[Commander-in-chief]], and authority over advisors and employees of the executive branch.[{{cite web | title=The 2nd Article of the U.S. Constitution | url=https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-ii }}]
==== Checks and balances ====
Separation of powers is sometimes held up as an advantage, in that each branch may scrutinize the actions of the other. This is in contrast with a parliamentary system, where the majority party in the legislature that also serves as the executive is unlikely to scrutinize its actions. Writing about the [[Watergate scandal]], former British MP [[Woodrow Wyatt]] said, "Don't think a Watergate couldn't happen here, you just wouldn't hear about it."[{{Cite magazine |last=Schlesinger |first=Arthur |date=1974 |title=No Way to Curb the Executive |magazine=[[The New Republic]]}}] The extent of this effect is debated. Some commentators argue that the effect is mitigated when the president's party is in power, while others note that [[party discipline]] is not as strictly enforced in presidential systems.[{{Cite book |last1=Depauw |first1=Sam |title=Intra-Party Politics and Coalition Governments |last2=Martin |first2=Shane |publisher=[[Routledge]] |year=2008 |editor-last=Giannetti |editor-first=Daniela |chapter=Legislative party discipline and cohesion in comparative perspective |editor-last2=Benoit |editor-first2=Kenneth}}]
==== James Wilson's theories ====
[[File:JusticeJamesWilson.jpg|200px|thumb|right|Portrait of [[James Wilson (Founding Father)|James Wilson]], who largely designed the powers of the [[president of the United States]].]]
[[James Wilson (Founding Father)|James Wilson]], who advocated for a presidential system at the [[Constitutional Convention (United States)|constitutional convention]], maintained that a single chief executive would provide for greater public accountability than a group and thereby protect against tyranny by making it plain who was responsible for executive actions. He also submitted that a singular chief executive was necessary to ensure promptness and consistency and guard against deadlock, which could be essential in times of national emergency.[{{Cite book|last=Yoo|first=Christopher S.|title=The Life and Career of Justice James Wilson|url=https://www.law.georgetown.edu/public-policy-journal/wp-content/uploads/sites/23/2019/06/17-1-Yoo.pdf|publisher=Georgetown Center for the Constitution|year=2019|isbn=978-1-7341939-2-3|editor-last=Barnett|editor-first=Randy E.|location=Washington, D.C.|pages=55–57|chapter=James Wilson as the Architect of the American Presidency}}]
Presidential systems are largely able to avoid [[Cabinet crisis|cabinet crises]], due to a [[Unitary executive theory|unitary executive]] being solely responsible for running the government. This was highlighted by James Wilson, who is quoted below.
{{blockquote|The executive as well as the legislative power ought to be restrained. ... The restraints on the legislative authority, must from its nature, be chiefly internal; that is, they must proceed from some part or division of itself. But the restraints on the executive power are external. These restraints are applied with the greatest certainty, and with greatest efficacy, when the object of restraint is clearly ascertained. This is best done, when one object only, distinguished and responsible, is conspicuously held up to the view and examination of the publick [''sic'']. . . . In planning, forming and arranging laws, deliberation is always becoming, and always useful. But in the active scenes of government, there are emergencies, in which the man, as, in other cases, the women ''[sic]'', who deliberates is lost. Secrecy may be equally necessary as dispatch. But, can either secrecy or dispatch be expected, when, to every enterprise, mutual communication, mutual consultation, and mutual agreement among men, perhaps of discordant views, of discordant tempers, and of discordant interests, are indispensably necessary? How much time will be consumed! and when it is consumed, how little business will be done! When the time is elapsed; when the business is finished; when the state is in distress, perhaps on the verge of destruction; on whom shall we fix the blame? Whom shall we select as the object of punishment?|James Wilson[{{Cite journal|last=DiClerico|first=Robert E.|date=Spring 1987|title=James Wilson's Presidency|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/40574453|journal=Presidential Studies Quarterly|volume=17|issue=2|pages=301–317|jstor=40574453}}]}}
==== Efficiencies and inefficiencies ====
When an action is within the scope of a president's power, a presidential system can respond more rapidly to emerging situations than a parliamentary system. A prime minister, when taking action, needs to retain the support of the legislature, but a president is often less constrained. In ''[[Why England Slept]]'', future U.S. president [[John F. Kennedy]] argued that British prime ministers [[Stanley Baldwin]] and [[Neville Chamberlain]] were constrained by the need to maintain the confidence of the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|Commons]].[{{Cite book |last=Kennedy |first=John F. |title=Why England Slept |publisher=[[Wilfred Funk|Wilfred Funk, Inc]] |year=1940}}]
It is easy for either the president or the legislature to escape blame by shifting it to the other. Describing the United States, former treasury secretary [[C. Douglas Dillon]] said, "The president blames Congress, the Congress blames the president, and the public remains confused and disgusted with the government in Washington".[{{cite book |last=Sundquist |first=James |url=https://archive.org/details/constitutionalre00sund_1 |title=Constitutional Reform and Effective Government |publisher=Brookings Institution Press |year=1992 |page=[https://archive.org/details/constitutionalre00sund_1/page/11 11] |url-access=registration}}] Years before becoming president, [[Woodrow Wilson]] famously wrote "how is the schoolmaster, the nation, to know which boy needs the whipping?"[Wilson, ''Congressional Government'' (1885), pp. 186–187.] [[Walter Bagehot]] said of the American system, "The executive is crippled by not getting the law it needs, and the legislature is spoiled by having to act without responsibility: the executive becomes unfit for its name since it cannot execute what it decides on; the legislature is demoralized by liberty, by taking decisions of which others [and not itself] will suffer the effects".[{{cite book |last=Balfour |title=The English Constitution |chapter=The Cabinet}}]
Conversely, a presidential system can produce [[Gridlock (politics)|gridlock]] when the president and the legislature are in opposition. This rarely happens in a parliamentary system, as the prime minister is always a member of the party in power. This gridlock is a common occurrence, as the electorate often expects more rapid results than are possible from new policies and switches to a different party at the next election.[{{Cite book |last1=George |first1=Edwards |title=Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy, AP* Edition – 2016 Presidential Election, 17th Edition |last2=Warrenberg |first2=Martin |publisher=Pearson Higher Education |year=2016 |isbn=9780134586571 |pages=16}}] Critics such as [[Juan Linz]], argue that in such cases of gridlock, presidential systems do not offer voters the kind of accountability seen in parliamentary systems and that this inherent political instability can cause democracies to fail, as seen in such cases as Brazil and [[Presidency of Salvador Allende|Allende's Chile]].[{{Cite journal |last=Linz |first=Juan |date=1990 |title=The perils of presidentialism |journal=[[The Journal of Democracy]] |volume=1 |pages=51–69|doi=10.1353/jod.2005.0026 }}]
A 2024 meta-analytical review found that presidential systems were associated with more corruption than parliamentary systems.[{{Cite journal |last1=Dawson |first1=Stephen |last2=Schwenk |first2=Jana |last3=Xezonakis |first3=Georgios |date=2024-10-04 |title=The Distribution of Executive Power and Corruption: A Meta-Analytical Review |journal=Comparative Political Studies |volume=58 |issue=10 |pages=2329–2355 |language=en |doi=10.1177/00104140241290213 |issn=0010-4140|doi-access=free }}]
==== Continuity and crisis response ====
The structure of the political system can affect how quickly the government responds to national emergencies like economic collapse, terrorism, natural disasters, and so forth. The presidential system's structure enables it to respond more quickly and steadily than the parliamentary system, particularly in emergency situations, according to proponents of presidentialism.[{{cite book |last1=Shugart |first1=Matthew Soberg |last2=Carey |first2=John M. |title=Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=1992 |isbn=9781139173988}}] A fixed executive term, the division of powers among the departments, the concentration of decision-making authority, and ongoing leadership are all characteristics of the presidential system.[{{cite journal
|last=Linz
|first=Juan J.
|year=1990
|title=The Perils of Presidentialism
|journal=Journal of Democracy
|volume=1
|issue=1
|pages=51–69
|doi=10.1353/jod.2005.0026
|jstor=422010
|url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/422010
|access-date=2025-11-08
}}
]
=== Presidential elections ===
{{Main|Fixed-term election}}
In a presidential system, the president is elected independently of the legislature. This may be done directly through a popular vote or indirectly, such as through the [[United States electoral college|electoral college]] used in the United States. This aspect of the presidential system is sometimes touted as more democratic, as it provides a broader mandate for the president. Once elected, a president typically remains in office until the conclusion of a term.[{{Cite journal |last1=Riggs |first1=Fred W. |year=1997 |title=Presidentialism versus Parliamentarism: Implications for Representativeness and Legitimacy |journal=International Political Science Review |volume=18 |issue=3 |page=258 |doi=10.1177/019251297018003003 |jstor=1601343 |s2cid=145450791}}][{{Cite journal |year=1994 |title=Conceptual homogenization of a heterogeneous field: Presidentialism in comparative perspective |journal=Comparing Nations: Concepts, Strategies, Substance |pages=72–152}}] The list of the world's 22 older democracies includes only two countries (Costa Rica and the United States) with presidential systems.[{{Cite book |last=Dahl |first=Robert A. |title=How Democratic Is the American Constitution? |year=2001 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=0-300-09218-0}}] Yale political scientist Juan Linz argues that:[{{Cite journal |last=Sargentich |first=Thomas O. |date=1993 |title=The Presidential and Parliamentary Models of National Government |journal=[[American University International Law Review]] |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=579–592}}] However, presidential systems may have methods to remove presidents under extraordinary circumstances, such as a president committing a crime or becoming incapacitated. In some countries, presidents are [[Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution|subject to term limits.]]
The inability to remove a president early is also the subject of criticism. Even if a president is "proved to be inefficient, even if he becomes unpopular, even if his policy is unacceptable to the majority of his countrymen, he and his methods must be endured until the moment comes for a new election".[{{cite book |last=Balfour |title=The English Constitution |chapter=Introduction}}]
Some critics{{like whom|date=August 2026}} argue that the presidential system is weaker because it does not allow a transfer of power in the event of an emergency. [[Walter Bagehot]] argues that the ideal ruler in times of calm is different from the ideal ruler in times of crisis, criticizing the presidential system for having no mechanism to make such a change.[{{cite book |last=Nelson |first=Dana D. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qgAWphms5oMC&q=Dana+Nelson+vanderbilt%3F+%22bad+for+democracy%22&pg=PA223 |title=Bad for Democracy: How the Presidency Undermines the Power of the People |publisher=[[University of Minnesota Press]] |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-8166-5677-6 |location=Minneapolis, Minnesota |page=248 |author-link=Dana D. Nelson}}][{{cite web |last=Sirota |first=David |author-link=David Sirota |date=August 22, 2008 |title=Why cult of presidency is bad for democracy |url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/21/EDCQ12G3M0.DTL |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080901180352/http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/21/EDCQ12G3M0.DTL |url-status=dead |archive-date=September 1, 2008 |access-date=2009-09-20 |newspaper=[[San Francisco Chronicle]]}}]
==== Political budget cycles ====
A 2019 peer-reviewed [[meta-analysis]] based on 1,037 regressions in 46 studies finds that presidential systems generally seem to favor revenue cuts, while parliamentary systems would rely on fiscal expansion characterized by a higher level of spending before an election.[{{cite journal |last1=Cazals|first1=A. |last2=Mandon |first2=P. |year=2019 |title=Political Budget Cycles: Manipulation by Leaders versus Manipulation by Researchers? Evidence from a Meta-Regression Analysis. |journal=[[Journal of Economic Surveys]] |volume=33 |issue=1 |pages=274–308 |doi=10.1111/joes.12263 |s2cid=158322229 |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/joes.12263|url-access=subscription }}]
== Comparative politics ==
The separation of the executive and the legislature is the key difference between a presidential system and a parliamentary system. The presidential system elects a head of government independently of the legislature, while in contrast, the head of government in a parliamentary system answers directly to the legislature. Presidential systems necessarily operate under the principle of structural separation of powers, while parliamentary systems do not;[{{cite journal | url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3066654 | doi=10.2139/ssrn.3066654 | title=Neopatrimonialism and Democracy: An Empirical Investigation of Africa's Political Regimes | year=2017 | last1=Sigman | first1=Rachel | last2=Lindberg | first2=Staffan I. |journal=V-Dem Working Paper 2017:56 | hdl=2077/54296 | s2cid=158437511 | hdl-access=free | url-access=subscription }}] and presidential power scores.[{{cite journal | doi=10.1017/S0007123414000465 | title=Maximizing the Reliability of Cross-National Measures of Presidential Power | year=2016 | last1=Doyle | first1=David | last2=Elgie | first2=Robert | journal=British Journal of Political Science | volume=46 | issue=4 | pages=731–741 | doi-access=free }}] The table below shows for individual countries the V-Dem presidential index, where higher values indicate higher concentration of political power in the hands of one individual, such as the [[General Secretary of the Communist Party|general secretary of the Communist Party]] in [[One-party state|one-party]] ruling [[communist states]].
{{Sticky header}}
{| class="wikitable sortable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed sticky-header"
! Country !! Presidentialism Index for 2021[{{cite web|url=http://www.ipm.edu.mo/cntfiles/upload/docs/research/common/1country_2systems/academic_eng/issue4/09.pdf|title=The Executive Authorities and the Legislature in the Political Structure of the Hong Kong SAR|last=Chen|first=Albert Hung Yee|date=n.d.|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170329110928/http://www.ipm.edu.mo/cntfiles/upload/docs/research/common/1country_2systems/academic_eng/issue4/09.pdf|archive-date=2017-03-29|url-status=dead}}]
*{{MAC}}
=== Former presidential republics ===
*{{flag|Islamic Republic of Afghanistan}} (2004–2021)
*{{flag|Azerbaijan SSR}}/{{flag|Azerbaijan|1991}} (1990–1991, 1992–2016){{efn|as the [[Azerbaijan SSR]], it was a [[presidential republic]] in 1990–1991, a [[semi-presidential republic]] after [[Azerbaijan Republic|independence]] in 1991–1992, a [[presidential republic]] in 1992–2016 and a [[semi-presidential republic]] in 2016. Under a [[hereditary dictatorship]] since 1993}}
*{{flag|Cuba|1902}} (1902–1959)
*{{flag|Estonia}} (1938–1940)
*{{flag|Georgia|1990}} (1995–2004){{efn|as the [[Georgian SSR]] and after independence, [[parliamentary]] in 1990–1991, [[semi-presidential]] in 1991–1995, [[President (government title)|presidential]] in 1995–2004, [[semi-presidential]] in 2004–2019 and [[parliamentary]] since 2019.}}
*{{flagcountry|Weimar Republic}} (1930–1933) ''de facto''{{efn|A [[semi-presidential republic]] as the [[Weimar Republic]] in 1918–1930, a presidential republic in 1930–1933, a [[totalitarian]] [[dictatorship]] under a [[parliamentary system]] in 1933–1945 as a [[Nazi Germany]], a [[Allied-occupied Germany|military occupation]] in 1945–1949 and a [[parliamentary republic]] in 1949.}}{{failed verification|date=January 2022}}
*{{GRC}} ([[First Hellenic Republic|1822–1832]],[{{Cite book |url=https://www.hellenicparliament.gr/UserFiles/f3c70a23-7696-49db-9148-f24dce6a27c8/syn09.pdf |title=Πολιτικὸν Σύνταγμα τῆς Ἑλλάδος |trans-title=Political Constitution of Greece |chapter=Κεφάλαιον Ε' {{endash}} Περὶ συντάξεως τῆς Ἑλληνικῆς πολιτείας |language=Greek |trans-chapter=Chapter 5 {{endash}} Concerning the organisation of the Hellenic state |quote=Ἡ νομοτελεστικὴ [ἐξουσία] ἀνήκει εἰς ἕνα μόνον ὀνομαζόμενον Κυβερνήτην, ἔχοντα διαφόρους ὑπ' αὐτὸν γραμματεῖς τῆς ἐπικρατείας. |trans-quote=The Executive [power] belongs solely to one [individual] titled Governor, who has under him state secretaries. |location=[[Troezen]] |date=5 May 1827 |publisher=[[Third National Assembly at Troezen|Third National Assembly]] |via=the [[Hellenic Parliament]] |access-date=29 December 2024 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110705000814/https://www.hellenicparliament.gr/UserFiles/f3c70a23-7696-49db-9148-f24dce6a27c8/syn09.pdf |archive-date=5 July 2011}}] [[Greek junta|1973–1974]])
*{{flag|Haiti}} ([[Republic of Haiti (1859–1957)|1859–1957]], [[Duvalier dynasty|1957–1986]])
*{{Flag|Katanga}} (1960–1963)
*{{flag|Kirghiz SSR}}/{{flag|Kyrgyzstan|1992}} (1990–1993){{efn|[[President (government title)|Presidential]] in 1990–1993, [[Semi-presidential system|Semi-presidential]] in 1993–2010 (''de jure''); 1993–2021 (''de facto''), [[Parliamentary republic|Parliamentary]] in 2010–2021 (''de jure''), and presidential again in 2021.}}
*{{Flagicon image|Flag of Mali.svg}} [[Mali]] (1960–1992){{efn|A presidential republic (1960–1991, 2023-present), military dictatorship (1968–1991,1991–1992, 2012, 2020-present) single-party state (1960–1968, 1974–1991) semi-presidential republic (1991–2023).}}
*{{Flag|Mauritania}} (1960–1978){{efn|A one-party presidential republic (1960–1978), military dictatorship (1978–1992, 2005–2007, 2008–2009), semi-presidential republic since 1992.}}
*{{Flagicon image|Flag of Niger.svg}} [[Niger]] (1960–1974, 1989–1993){{efn|A [[One-party state|single-party]] presidential republic (1960–1974, 1989–1993), a [[military dictatorship]] (1974–1993, 1996–1999, 1999, 2010–2011, 2023-present), a [[Semi-presidential system|semi-presidential]] republic (1993–1996, 1999–2010, 2011–2023)}}
*{{flag|Pakistan}} (1958–1973, 1978–1985, 2001–2002)
*{{flagcountry|Second Polish Republic}} (1935–[[Invasion of Poland|1939]])
*{{flag|RSFSR}}/{{flag|Russia|1991}} ([[Cabinet of Boris Yeltsin and Yegor Gaidar|1991–1992]]) ''de facto''
*{{flag|South Korea|1949}} (1963–1972){{efn|All South Korean constitutions since 1963 provided for a strong executive Presidency; in addition, the formally authoritarian [[Yushin Constitution]] of the [[Fourth Republic of Korea|Fourth Republic]] established a presidential power to dissolve the [[National Assembly of South Korea|National Assembly]], nominally counterbalanced by a vote of no confidence. Both of these provisions were retained by the [[Fifth Republic of Korea|Fifth Republic's constitution]] but repealed upon the transition to democracy and the establishment of the [[Sixth Republic of Korea|Sixth Republic]]}}
*{{flag|South Vietnam}} (1955–1975){{Citation needed|date=November 2022}}
*{{flag|Tajik SSR}} (1990–1991)
*{{flagcountry|Republic of Texas}} (1836–1845)
*{{flag|Togo}} (1960–2024)
*{{flag|Turkmen SSR}} (1990–1991)
*{{flag|Ukraine|1992}} (1995–1996){{efn|An interim constitution passed in 1995 removed the President's ability to dissolve the [[Verkhovna Rada]] and Rada's ability to dismiss the government by a vote of no confidence. Both of these provisions were restored upon the passage of a permanent constitution in 1996.}}
*{{flag|Uzbek SSR}} (1990–1991)
*{{flag|Zimbabwe}} (1987–2026)
====Republics with executive governors====
*[[Vermont Republic]] (1777–1791)
*[[United Provinces of the Río de la Plata]] (1820–1832) and [[Argentine Confederation]] (1835–1852)
*[[Alabama in the American Civil War|Alabama]] (1861–1865)
*[[Georgia in the American Civil War|Georgia]] (1861–1865)
*[[Louisiana in the American Civil War|Louisiana]] (1861–1865)
*[[Texas in the American Civil War|Texas]] (1861–1865)
*[[Mississippi in the American Civil War|Mississippi]] (1861–1865)
*[[South Carolina in the American Civil War|South Carolina]] (1861–1865)
*[[Florida in the American Civil War|Florida]] (1861–1865)
*[[Virginia in the American Civil War|Virginia]] (1861–1865)
*[[Arkansas in the American Civil War|Arkansas]] (1861–1865)
*[[North Carolina in the American Civil War|North Carolina]] (1861–1865)
*[[Tennessee in the American Civil War|Tennessee]] (1861–1865)
*[[Confederate government of Missouri|Missouri]] (1861–1865)
*[[Confederate government of Kentucky|Kentucky]] (1861–1865)
== Notes ==
{{notelist}}
== References ==
{{Reflist|30em}}
== External links ==
* [http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Sites/LOP/Infoparl/english/issue.asp?param=108&art=573 The Great Debate: Parliament versus Congress]
* Castagnola, Andrea/Pérez-Liñán, Aníbal: [http://hup.sub.uni-hamburg.de/giga/jpla/article/view/41/41 Presidential Control of High Courts in Latin America: A Long-term View (1904-2006)], in Journal of Politics in Latin America, Hamburg 2009.
{{Government}}
{{Authority control}}
[[Category:Political systems]]
[[Category:Presidents|System]]
[[Category:Republicanism]]
[[Category:Separation of powers]]
[[Category:Types of democracy]]
[[Category:Types of republics]]
[[Category:Political concepts]]