Commonwealth of Nations

[Downunder Kilt]

This website is very instructive:

http://www.royal.gov.uk/monarchandco...da/canada.aspx

Not all commonwealth contries are the same. They have their own parliaments and they have negotiated their relationship to the Monarch in different ways.

Canadians used to recieve British knighthoods and lordships but due to our liberal belief that all people are created equal under the law, Canadians are no longer legally entitled to accept hereditary British Peerage titles and remain Canadian Citizens. Lord Conrad Black famously relinquished his Canadian citizenship to accept Her Majesty's lordship.

Instead, Canadians of such merit are inducted into the Order of Canada, a three leveled program that is similar to modern knighthood but does not confer the title "Sir" etc...

I can't speak for other commonwealth nations and realms regarding peerage.

in a Parliamentary system, the leader of the party with the most seats effectively weilds executive power (power to declare war etc...). In a republican system the President is elected outside of the legislature. There is often conflict betwen the executive branch and legislative branch in republican systems.

In a Parlimentary System, the Prime Minister is like combination of the President and the House Majority Leader in the USA.

There is often a non-elected upper house in Parliamentary systems but this is not universal. Some have no upper house and others elect their upper chamber. In the UK the upper house is called the House of Lords and membership can be hereditary.

In Canada, the Prime Minister appoints Senators to sit in the Canadian Senate.

In Canada, the elected Parliament (the House of Commons) is supreme and the upper house is a chamber for sober second thought.

Australia operates in very much the same way, though our senators are elected by the people. Australia also has a similiar system to bestowing awards, though you will still find a few Lords and Ladies amongst the population who recieved their gongs prior to the new sysyem being introduced

[Eric D Scott]

This part will blow the minds of most Americans, where as in Canada we don't directly elect our Prime Minister as they are the leader of the Party that gets the most seats in a General Election.

But as also mentioned, the official Head of State for Canada is the Governor General, who is the Queen's representative in Canada. But they aren't elected either, they are appointed by the Prime Minister (generally for terms of 5 years at a time but without any time limitations).

So we don't directly elect our leaders at all ... Just something to think about.

[Downunder Kilt]

This part will blow the minds of most Americans, where as in Canada we don't directly elect our Prime Minister as they are the leader of the Party that gets the most seats in a General Election.

But as also mentioned, the official Head of State for Canada is the Governor General, who is the Queen's representative in Canada. But they aren't elected either, they are appointed by the Prime Minister (generally for terms of 5 years at a time but without any time limitations).

So we don't directly elect our leaders at all ... Just something to think about.

Same down here Eric, though the Governor General appointment is for a specific time period

[Carlo]

This part will blow the minds of most Americans, where as in Canada we don't directly elect our Prime Minister as they are the leader of the Party that gets the most seats in a General Election.

As far as I know the President in America isn't elected by the people but by the United States Electoral College.

[Eric D Scott]

As far as I know the President in America isn't elected by the people but by the United States Electoral College.

If I am not mistaken when they hold their Presidential elections, they have a ballot that has their choice for President. And depending on their votes the electoral college breaks down candidate per state and total number of states per candidate, eventually leading to the President. I guess what I am trying to say is Americans actually have a say on the actual individual leader. You could have a local representative from one party, but a leader from another party. Or have I really screwed this up?

[kiltedrennie]

As far as I know the President in America isn't elected by the people but by the United States Electoral College.

True. Like much of our political process in the U.S. (at least historically, 'nuff said) it was a compromise. Many delegates to the constitutional congress wanted a popular vote, others wanted Congress to appoint the President and Vice President, still others wanted representatives selected by each state with the selection process decided by each state.

[McClef]

Many countries do not have a direct election of leader/ head of state.

The Commonwealth is an interesting mixture of systems and those who have Queen Elizabeth II as head of State and those which are Republics but even for Republics the Queen is still Head of the Commonwealth. It is not as contradictory as it might seem because of her wealth of experience and her ability to listen she is able to listen and advise and she is so good at keeping confidences and being a sounding board.

Anything which links people from so many different parts of the world in friendship has to be of value and benefit for it to succeed and attract. It preserves history without domination and brings a unity to diversity.

[McElmurry]

This video provides a five minute primer of various relationships to The Crown.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10

[TheOfficialBren]

If I am not mistaken when they hold their Presidential elections, they have a ballot that has their choice for President. And depending on their votes the electoral college breaks down candidate per state and total number of states per candidate, eventually leading to the President. I guess what I am trying to say is Americans actually have a say on the actual individual leader. You could have a local representative from one party, but a leader from another party. Or have I really screwed this up?

BINGO!

That's right on the money, mate. We cast our votes for individual candidates and then those votes are tabulated by the Electoral College and then their representatives are Supposed to vote in a way that reflects our wishes (a very controversial procedure).

It has its ups and downs.
We have local government (towns, cities), county government, state government, and finaly national government--all of which have elected offices to varying degrees.

Our legislative body at the national level is divided into two houses. The upper house is the Senate; the lower house is the House of Representatives. Together they are called the Congress. At the state level, they are called the Senate and the Assembly.

1/3 of our Senate in Washington, D.C. is always up for re-election. Congressman from both houses are usually out campaigning rather than working. There is no term limit except for the president (two terms of four years, an exception being made if the incumbent president is fulfilling the term of his predecessor, as in the case of Harry S Truman--though he did not seek a second elected term).

In the past the Vice President was the First Runner Up in the election (before the two-party monstrosity that we have now). Now, the presidential candidate feigns to choose his "running mate" (really they are assigned by their party). That running mate is then the Vice Presidential candidate.

It's all very confusing, even for Americans, but the fat cats at the top kind of like it that way.

[kiltedrennie]

If I am not mistaken when they hold their Presidential elections, they have a ballot that has their choice for President. And depending on their votes the electoral college breaks down candidate per state and total number of states per candidate, eventually leading to the President. I guess what I am trying to say is Americans actually have a say on the actual individual leader. You could have a local representative from one party, but a leader from another party. Or have I really screwed this up?

There have been a lot of instances of an elector voting for someone other than their pledged candidate. Sometimes by mistake, and sometimes intentionally.

In 1800 Arron Burr almost became President instead of Jackson but for one vote. The elector petitioned his state for a secret ballot (so he could vote for Burr instead of Jackson anonymously) but they wouldn't allow it.

The most recent "mistake" was someone casting their presidential vote for vice presidential candidate John "Ewards". It was a secret ballot so the elector making the typo and flipping the position remains a mystery.