My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Ricochet, please permit me to introduce you to my dear friend Mert, a new member of Ricochet and a student of constitutional law here in Istanbul. He's about to embark on the writing of his dissertation. He wants to write about the American presidential system. He's particularly interested in the idea of checks and balances in the US political system and the limits placed by our Constitution on the president's power.
There's an important reason for his interest. In Turkey, the ruling AKP is considering the introduction of a presidential system to replace Turkey's traditional parliamentary mode of governance.
The multifaceted momentum triggered by [last September's] heady referendum victory has turned new attention to an old idea of Turkey’s ruling party: a U.S.-style “presidential system” to replace the current European-style parliamentary mode of governance.
Just where American icons like “states’ rights,” “limited” central government and the supremacy of “local authority” will come in... those appear to be ideas for later.
At first brush, the afterglow of victory has apparently wetted Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s appetite for a different governmental architecture. The first president in the new system would, of course, be Erdoğan.
That possibility is anathema to the country’s opposition parties.
“The presidential system, according to [the ruling party’s] understanding, will bring an uncontrollable single-man administration. Judicial freedom will become even less protected,” Atilla Kart, a member of the Constitutional Commission and a Konya representative of the main opposition Republican People’s Party, or CHP, told the Hürriyet Daily News & Economic Review on Tuesday.
Mert is eager better to understand better why, in America, a presidential system does not result in dictatorship. He'd like to get thoughts from members of Ricochet about fruitful ways to explore this topic--suggestions, for example, about important case studies he might examine, pointers to critical moments in American history that defined the limits of the power of the president, general thoughts about what is required, constitutionally, to ensure that such a system does not devolve into despotism.
I know many members of Ricochet have given these questions a great deal of thought. It would make me very proud to see Ricochet engaging directly with people in Turkey who are concerned to safeguard Turkish democracy. I hope you'll be generous in helping Mert to understand how America works and what lessons Turkey might profitably draw from the American experience.
Ricochet, welcome to your first adventure in foreign policy. Do good work. The stakes for Turkey are very high.
Oh, and by the way--Mert is also a terrific martial artist. If you have any martial arts questions, he's our new in-house expert.
- Comment (30)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (6)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Hi, Mert!
It might be interesting to research Andrew Jackson's presidency. Andrew Jackson issued twelve presidential vetoes, while his six presidential predecessors only issued ten vetoes combined. Jackson's policies also led to the forced eviction of over 100,000 Native Americans from their ancestral land. The Supreme Court of the United States upheld the rights of the Native Americans three times, but Jackson ignored those rulings. John Marshall was on the Supreme Court at the time. Look into John Marshall's various rulings (Marbury v. Madison, etc.).
Feb '11
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Let me a little bit explain what i got in mind first of all as we all know President is being elected by the citizens just like legislative body. In presidential system it is quite normal procedure but in Turkey which had historical backround on parliamentry system with some contitutional changes now republic president will be elected by the citizens which is unacceptable for the pure parliamentry system. Thats why we are naming our system as parliamentry system with a president...
In pure parliamentry system presidents does only have sample authority, and be respected as head of the state. Thats why most of the time they are mediators in conflicts between the executive organ and legislature.
But when system allows presidents to be elected from citizens then presidents would directly be in a political stance. They would go in election battles and eventually when they would be presidents, they would have right to declare they were elected just like the legislative organ from citizens... Which would come to double legitimacy problem!
In Turkey at the moment President has quite huge power........
Feb '11
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
System is working right now (Working doesnt mean it is democratic by the way) because both legislative and executive power are in same ideological hand. Our President GUL was elected by the parliament which AKP holds the majority. (The last from parliament elected president, after his period presidents would be elected by the citizens)
What if next President would be from a different Idealogy and will use his power against the lagislative body and block the lagislation ? He would definately be legitimate...
Feb '11
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Patrick Higgins: Hi, Mert!
It might be interesting to research Andrew Jackson's presidency. Andrew Jackson issued twelve presidential vetoes, while his six presidential predecessors only issued ten vetoes combined. Jackson's policies also led to the forced eviction of over 100,000 Native Americans from their ancestral land. The Supreme Court of the United States upheld the rights of the Native Americans three times, but Jackson ignored those rulings. John Marshall was on the Supreme Court at the time. Look into John Marshall's various rulings (Marbury v. Madison, etc.). · Mar 3 at 12:00pm
Thanks a lot Patrick, ill be checking that.
Jan '11
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Claire/Mert,
"Checks and balances" is this, roughly:
The government keeps writing checks and the budget never balances.
Dec '10
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
I too echo Bob Forester.
"I remain in awe of George Washington."
Washington invented the role of president. He established the traditions followed even today. Except for his character, this might be a very different country. Mert, I suggest you read Chernov's 'Hamilton' and 'Washington' in that order to understand how exceptionally difficult it is to create a nation and how easily chance, circumstance, and human nature might ruin the best intentions of the wisest men.
The fundamental arguments between Federalist and Democrat of the late eighteenth century remain unsettled. Creating a new nation is a very dangerous proposition. As Ben Franklin said, they gave us "A republic if you can keep it." Whether we can do that also remains unsettled.
May your difficult endeavor be fruitful.
Oct '10
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Michael Labeit: Tell Mert that if he's looking for that political configuration that has succeeded best in hedging against tyranny, he should examine Switzerland. Its a non-EU member, its an uber decentralized confederacy (yes!), its probably the freest place in Europe, its super clean and riff-raffless, and its gun ownership rate makes the U.S. look like a bunch of [expletive - plural]. · Mar 3 at 6:36am
Edited on Mar 03 at 06:59 am
Switzerland also has an extremely weak Executive.
One of the strengths of the American system is that there is fluidity in the distribution of power between the three branches. Throughout most of our history, the primary locus of power has been the Legislative branch. In times of crisis, the Executive comes to the foreground and tends to receed in times of peace. This was true at least until the time of the FDR, when the construction of the welfare state during the Great Depression followed by WWII, resulted in the growth of a massive bureaucracy in the Executive Branch, aided and abetted by the Congress, who, by default, facilitated a shift from governing by statutory law (Legislative) to administrative law (Executive).
Jul '10
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
Mert, here's how it works:
One side, the Democrats, marshals a coalition of voters based upon identity politics - minorities, feminists, gays, single mothers, communists and other parasites.
The other side, the Republicans, summons up voters who simply want to be left alone and to not be taxed to death.
Whichever side is more successful in any given election cycle wins.
The problem is that the Democrat side's voters are more highly motivated, because they stand to directly benefit from the redistribution policies of the Democratic party.
Oct '10
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
What matters most is a society's unwritten constitutional order. What do citizens expect of their government? Which expectations trump even democratic legitimacy?
Constitutional orders are evolved over time, from people acting in their self-interest. English democracy evolved from the monarch lacking power to compel taxation. Successful societies try to align interests, where everyone has a stake in the rule of law, and no group can benefit from destroying that rule.
Feb '11
Re: My Turkish Friend Has A Few Questions About How America Works
He's particularly interested in the idea of checks and balances in the US political system and the limits placed by our Constitution on the president's power.
There's an important reason for his interest. In Turkey, the ruling AKP is considering the introduction of a presidential system to replace Turkey's traditional parliamentary mode of governance.
I hate to say it, but our Federal Presidential system was a result of 13 separate States, or Countries, forming a Federation. And previously a Confederation. My guess is that Turkey cannot successfully implement our Presidential system. They are not a union of separate, sovereign, states. There'd be no separation of powers, no multiple chambers in the legislature, no Electoral College, etc.
The result? A dictatorship. An Islamic dictatorship.