Why isn't there a house of commons type scenario in America?```?

Question

What I mean is, why doesn't the President of the United States go to wherever the American Government meets every Wednesday and answer questions about the country, like in the UK? Are they afraid they'll mess up? Because the whole point of the Prime Minister's Question Time is to test how skilled the Prime Minister is at dealing with queries and issues. Why doesn't the President do the same?? To be honest, I can't see George Bush coping with it. But I'd like to know! Thank you!

Answer 1

In a parliamentary system, the Prime Minister is a Member of Parliament. The PM is answering to his fellow MP's. In a way there is no distinct and separate executive branch as in the US.

In the US the president is responsible for reporting to congress (from time to time) the state of the union. This has evolved into an annual speech.


Our current president would likely not do well at "question time". But many in the past would relish it.

Answer 2

Our government is not like the U.K.'s. You have to remember, we broke off from the U.K. ages ago, in a time where we really didn't want to be like Great Britain. Britain had a king, and that was something our Constitution forbids.

As for a House of commons, we have a Senate and Congress. Bush, a President, makes up a different branch of the government. He is not responsible to answer to The Legislative Branch like a Prime Minister does in a Parlimentary government.

Here we have three branches of Government, each sharing equal power. The Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. Each shares equal power. Each answers to the people.

Answer 3

Well there's the state of the union speech but apart from that, in Britain, the prime minister is elected from parliament, and in the end answerable to it. In our system The President is a separate branch of government, fully equal to and not answerable to congress.

But in any case top senators and congressmen from both parties meet with the president on an almost daily basis anyway, so it's not like they're out of touch all the time.

Answer 4

What I would like to know is why so many liberals want to turn America into Europe. People fled Europe to escape their ways and made a BETTER nation.

In answer to this question...that is a parlimentary government. We do not want or need that govt. We already have the second worst form of government on the planet...all other govts in the world are the worst. (For those of you who do not get this, it simply means that the American govt. has a lot of faults, but it is better than anything else out there)

Answer 5

We don't have a Parliament or a Prime Minister.

But I do agree with your point. Reagan and Clinton would have been all over it. Bush would have looked like a buffoon.

Answer 6

Well, considering we've had this form of government for over 200 years, I HIGHLY doubt Bush is the reason we don't do it.

Answer 7

Good idea. I'll write my representative and suggest it to him. It would take an amendment to the Constitution, which requires ratification by three fourths of the state legislatures.

Answer 8

They'd eat him up, and spit him out in about 1 hour.

He has NO experience dealing with domestic issues. (Or foreign issues for that matter).

But other than that, I like that form of govt - it shows accountability - oh wait - that can't apply to Bush (he's above the law).

Answer 9

Because we don't have a parliamentary form of government.

Answer 10

congressmen don't have time for this...they are too busy getting corporate contributions.