Americans at first also considered a parliamentary system—they simply knew no other alternative. The presidential model might never have come about if George Washington had agreed to become king of the United States. The second reason for inventing the presidency was that the American Revolution grew out of a conflict with the British Parliament.
The essence of this model is that executive power is elected separately from legislative power. The president forms his own cabinet; Parliament cannot interfere with this process or force anyone to resign. This is the sole reason the American president is elected by the entire population of the country. He alone forms and heads the executive branch, so his legitimacy must be equivalent to that of Parliament. Accordingly, it is the president who bears responsibility for his cabinet’s performance at the next election.
This system is notable for its effective system of “checks and balances,” which prevents the dilution of political accountability. For example, the president has no legislative initiative. On legislative matters, he must work through his party’s faction, which makes him dependent on it—an important element of control. Another crucial point is budget formation, which lies almost entirely with Parliament.
The American model proved to be quite distinctive. The United States originally emerged as a union of states, each with its own governing bodies. This imposes serious restrictions on the federal government’s capabilities. British law imposes exactly the same kind of restrictions—liberal principles of personal inviolability and the like already existed at the time the United States was founded. Therefore, it is believed that successfully reproducing the presidential model is difficult, and practice confirms this.
As we can see, both models adopted in democratic countries implement the principle of electability of government, and they do so simply and accessibly.