Presidencialismo

President’s strong claim to democratic, even plebiscitarian, legitimacy; the
second is his fixed term in office. Both of these statements stand in need
of qualification. Some presidents gain officewith a smaller proportion
of the popular vote than many premiers who head minorit? cabinets,
although voters may see the
heterogeneous coalition—certainly put him in a position very differentfrom that in which Adolfo Suárez of Spain found himself in 1979 when
he became prime minister after receiving 35.1 percent of the vote. As we
will see, Allende received a six-year mandate forcontrolling the
government even with much less than a majorit) of the popular vote,
while Suárez, with a plurality of roughly the same size, found it
necessary to work with other parties to sustain aminority government.
Following British political thinker Walter Bagehot, we might say that a
presidential system endows the incumbent with both the “ceremonial’
functions of a head of state and the“effective” functions of a chief
executive, thus creating an aura, a self-image, and a set of popular
expectations which are all quite different from those associated ith a
prime minister, no matter howpopular he may be.
But what is most striking is that in a presidential system, the
legislators, especially when they represent cohesive, disciplined parties
that offer clear ideological andpolitical alternatives, can also claim
democratic legitimacy. This claim is thrown into high relief when a
majority of the legislature represents a political option opposed to the
one the presidentrepresents. Under such circumstances, who has the
stronger claim to speak on behalf of the people: the president or the
legislative majority that opposes his policies? Since both derive their
power fromthe votes of the people in a free competition among
well-defined alternatives, a conflict is always possible and at times may
erupt dramatically. Theme is no democratic principle on the basis of...