Canadian Politics Essay

Some historical theorists say that the dissimilarities between America and Canada argon established in the transmutation of America, a subject that dominated most studies in the history of Canadian. With the creation of the US, the core founders of the US support re mankindanism, refusing the Westminster structure of parliamentary democracy. Re everydayanism that inspired Americans pressured independence, an aversion to corruption, and innovation, counterbalanced by an appargonnt need for loyalty to public duty.Many Americans in planning a unique American path, freighted, and on that pointfore refusing, a sturdy nation, which is fundamental government. This paper looks into the different ways to which the Canadian semipolitical structures differs with those of the US. America and Canada are two governed under constitutions Canadas constitution is partly conventional and partly written, and that of the US fully codified. The ultimate interpreter of the constitutions of both count ries is their knowledge supreme courts.Nevertheless, the eminent Court of the US has a more stretched history of constitutional implementation than the High Court of Canada. Canadas Constitution contains of Acts of both the legislature of the UK and the National Assembly of Canada, but because of the Canadas federalism, several(prenominal) Acts of regional parliaments bid the lawmaking Assembly of Ontario. The Constitution was altered in 1982, at which the Canadian exact of Rights, Freedoms and amending formulas were included.The other one basic concept on these differences is the dis affinity between the US congressional frame and the Canadian parliamentary system. More differences occur from the legal/political perception of division of powers and the dictum of the decimal point of state. The chairman of the US is the head of government and head of state, while Canadas old diplomatic minister is not head state but further head of government (Charlton, 1998). Another dis tinction is the Governor superior frequent and his or her cabinet ministers- in addition playing roles as legislators, represent the combination of power in Canadas system, with the part of the monarch.Ministers of the crown are normally directly elected by their respective electorates known as ridings who advise the monarch or the Vice Governor General on how to practice his Crown authority and as Members of the legislature in the Canadian House of Commons. Even though neither the Governor general nor monarchs are lawfully required to select his or her cabinet Members from the House. This indicates those in charge of executive duties also contribute as legislators in the policy discussions and lawmaking process features of their duties as Members of National Assembly.By contrast, the US president has no official duty as a legislator, but only implementing and enforcing laws passed by Congress. The President of the US contributes in only informal, occasional, gatherings with Sena tors and Representatives. Only formally, addresses once in a year in the ii term of his Presidency the gathered houses of the Congress, the Cabinet, and the Justices of the High Court of the US (James, 2004). The checks and balances in Canada are very reversal from those in the US, it can be debated that within Canada that the Prime Minister has additional authority than the US President.Canadas executive and legislative branch draw from each other, the viceroy hardly uses their powers without the consent of the Prime Minister. This only occurs from situations brought on by constitutional crisis. To ensure the firmness of government, the Governor must always select for his Prime Minister a member who has the biggest group of followers in the Canadian Common House. The Prime Minister must resign or order the General to call for an emergency election or be forced out by the governor general if a big number of the house pick out against the government on serious matters of the count ry.The Prime Minister of a marginalized government is in a a good deal dangerous situation than any United bring ups president, which his presidency term is secured by the law. Often times of cohabitation are also there in the US known as divided government. Happens when different group than the gabardine house directs congress. The President has incomplete control over the members of the House and must regularly make deals for there support. This leads to a stalemate that greatly slows down the law-making process (Charlton, 1998).It is known that the lack of individual identity which characterizes the resulting ability of the combined policy activity of the individuals participating in, and influencing the progression of, the US separation-of-powers system in contrast to the individual(prenominal) identity that characterizes the resulting efficacy of the aggregate policy activity of individuals participating in, and influencing the progression of, the Canadian fusion-of-powers system that unfeignedly makes this distinction meaningful.An example (putting federalism aside, arguendo) would be the one political actor in Canada responsible for motivating field of study defense policy decisions for Canada, the Minister of National Defense, contrasted with three(the Secretary of Defense, and the two chairs of the Senate Committee on Armed run and House Committee on Armed Services) sometimes adverse political actors responsible for the direction of content defense policy Centralization of power in Canada has some benefits and legal responsibility when matched with the United State system.A good line of authority/power showing to whom the government is accountable for any circumstance duty Unlike the U. S. (James, 2004). There is also the issue of political parties whereby the Canadian House of Commons has seat for four political parties while US has only two political parties in Congress. Both Canada and the US use first post system to elect their represen tatives. This type of a system can sometimes exaggerate regional interests and disparities, e. g. Dixiecrats and Quebec of the southern. The meltdown of progressive Conservation party and the rise Quebecois party changed the political field in Canada.At the past only two parties dominated federal politics like the US, these parties were the Progressive Conservatives and the liberals, the Liberal held power for most of the 20th century until they were known as Canadas congenital governing party. Different from the US, Canadian third parties have always been able to get Members of parliament elected into the National Assembly since 1921, at times succeeding one of the two main parties as Her majestys Loyal Opposition or forming casual coalition governments (Paul, 1992), In my opinion there are great differences regarding the way political cultures in Canada and the US.This is clearly shown on how the different political institutions in both countries are being managed and the struct ure through which these institutions are developed. Therefore, it would be appropriate for one to say that the Canadian political culture is not and has never been Americanized even though there are some aspects of similarity in other government structures References Charlton, Barker (1998). Crosscurrents Contemporary Political Issues Edition 5. ITP Nelson, Michigan collins, Richard. (1991). burnish, communication and theme identity The case of Canadian television.Toronto University of Toronto Press. James Bickerton, Alain Gagnon (2004). Canadian politics. Broadview Press, New York John C. Pierce, Nicholas P,(2000). Political culture and public policy in Canada and the United States only a border apart? Edwin Mellen Press, Michigan Paul Attallah (1992), Richard Collins and the Debate on Culture and Polity, Canadian Journal of Communication, Vol 17, No 2 Nelson Wiseman (2001) Pathways to Canadian Political Culture consensus, Retrieved on 14th March 2009 from www. ubcpress. ca/books/ pdf/chapters/2007/insearchofcanadianpoliticalculture. pdf