Is there a type of government where only a congress exists, without one specific leader?

Question

For example: If the US only had the Government of Legislature without a president.

Answer 1

Isn't that called Italy.

Really though, theoretically parliamentary government is set up that way with even the prime minister just a member of Parliament. However, as another person on here said there must be a leader for direction so the P.M. always must have slightly more power on some level. the only difference is that in the U.K. for instance and most other parliamentary democracies, the P.M. can be removed if enough of his own party lose confidence in him. Oh, how Republicans would love that option right now in the U.S.

Answer 2

There was. The Articles of Confederation in the early US. It did not work out very well because it gave too much power to the states. It consisted of a Congress only and there was no executive branch. There were courts at the state level that could not settle national or interstate disputes. It was replaced by the constitution.

Answer 3

I have NEVER found a more wisely constructed governmental form that that delivered to us by our founding fathers.
Some examples:
The Mayflower Compact set up a socialistic form and structure for its members to live by. Remember, they were a religious group.
It failed miserably, many starved and died. For their survuval they reformed their governmental structure to become more of a free enterprise structure.
Then they started to flourish.
Thanks to Benjamin Franklyn. we have freedom of religion without any governmental ability to "establish" an official religion.
That was NOT and atheistic view, it was a wise look at reality. When a group, be it a race, an occupation, an economic class, political leaders, you name it... becomes too powerful, the power is abused.
Our wise founding fathers had the forsight to set up guidelines and laws they new would change. They must have hoped we would not step outside of those basic guidelines because they understood human nature and were able to, as a group, suppress the desire to grab all the power for themselves.
That is why we have a limited form of governmental power.
They also kney SOMEONE had to be in charge and that someone had to assume the ultimate responsibility for decisions.
They also saw fit to limit the power of that individual.
We ended up with the structure we have because it works.
Admitedly it suffers from unwise but entheusiastic politicians that keep wanting to re-argue those limitations on power.
Don't denounce the wisdom exibited by our founding fathers without first examining all aspects of the situation in question.
Living in many societies has constantly reminded me of how wise our founding fathers were.

Answer 4

I am unfamiliar with any workable government set up that way. In theory, the Soviet Party was supposed to work that way. In application, a single leader is required to provide direction, break ties and serve as the final signature. Remember, no committee of itself has ever produced anything useful.

Answer 5

then that would be a type of anarchy. just a bunch of people squabbling over everything.

Answer 6

it could work because even in our democracy our pres isnt accountable

Answer 7

Then such system will never achieve anything.