After learning about different aspects of German politics, what are the main differences between the U.S. and German systems? Which system is better?

After studying the German system of politics for almost four weeks now, there are some similarities and many differences between the United States system of government and the German system. These similarities and differences are seen at all three major levels of government. There are also differences in accountability in government and voter turnout.

There are some similarities and differences in the legislative processes between the two countries. Both of these countries have a bicameral legislature, but what each of these chambers does is very different. The main goal for the House of Representatives in the United States is to write and pass law to the Senate. This is not the case for the lower house in Germany, or Bundestag. The main goal of the Bundestag is to appoint the main executive or chancellor of Germany. They do not write legislation, but vote, debate and amend it. Both of these lower houses are voted into office by the people.

There are some similarities and differences between the upper houses of the legislature for each country as well. One similarity is that each of the upper houses is not a proportional representation, but an equal representation; one state or Lander one vote or in the case of the Senate two votes. One of the major differences is that upper house, or Bundesrat, in Germany is not directly elected by the people, but appointed.

Accountability is very different between these two governments. The United States runs on a single member district system. This is very different from the hybrid proportional representation system that is used in Germany. It is similar that in each district there is going to be one person that is an outright winner, but on the German ballot you cast a second vote for the party of your choice and they also send members to the Bundestag based on proportion. This is much different from the United States because the percentage of the vote that you receive in Germany for a party is the percentage of seats in the Bundestag. The number of people in the House of Representatives will always be 435. This is not the case in the Bundestag with the hybrid proportional representation system and the number of seats changes almost every election.

Germany has much higher voter turnout than the United States because of this hybrid proportional representation system. People in Germany feel that they have more of a voice in government because if they know that their vote for their representative is in vain. At least they can cast a vote for there party and hopefully bolster seats in the Bundestag that way. This is one of the main reasons for me, why Germany was a better system than the United States. It does not feel like you are wasting your vote in Germany. In the United States if you candidate does not win in your district, sorry it will be another two or four years before you get another crack at it. In some districts in Wisconsin and across the United States they have always voted a Republican or Democrat into office and it is almost impossible for the opposition. This system feels like it would give voters more of a say in these areas. The only thing that I do not like about the German system is the upper house is appointed and not elected. For having one of the most democratic systems in the world, this seems like it should be changed in Germany.

Blog #4 Favorite part of the trip and language barrier?

Berlin Germany was a great city, and it is hard to pick just one part of this leg of the trip that was my favorite. But if I had to pick one day that was my favorite part of the trip it would probably be the bike trip to Potsdam. I guess since we saw such a wide variety of historical sites, there was a very relaxed atmosphere and the combination of a brewery and bikes led to fun for all.

One of the reasons why I picked this day as my favorite was the stop and tour of the palace where the Potsdam conference was held. The Potsdam Conference was the meeting place of the big three allies after the surrender of the Germans to decide what was going to be done with Germany. One of the things that I liked about the tour was the fact that it showed you how each of the main three had their own areas and entrances into the building and each of the rooms was set up in a way to make that leader as comfortable as possible. At one point in history, some of the greatest leaders walked the halls and rooms of this building and some of them met their political demise there as well; like Churchill.

The language barrier n the Potsdam bike tour day was not really an issue. Our guide from Fat Tire, which was the name of the bike rental shop, was from Texas and had just stayed in Germany after coming over for a foreign exchange. This was nice because you could understand the guided tour completely, which wasn’t always the case when we had a few other guides and their English was not as polished. Because the guide was American, I think that it really lightened the atmosphere and allowed for the group to feel comfortable and relax with the guide. I think this led the group to having a great time and an enjoyable day.

Language was not an issue at the Potsdam Conference location either. The tour had a guided audio headset that allowed you to take the museum at your own pace and just punch in the numbers of the displays as you walked from room to room. This was nice because if there was something that you really wanted to take your time and look at you didn’t slow down the rest of the group and it was like everyone had their own personal tour guide. There was also guides/security in every room that if you had a question that was not answered on the audio track they would do their best to answer the question for you and their levels of fluent English varied with each one.

Blog #3 How does the position of German Chancellor compare to the British Prime Minister and the US President?

The most comparable and obvious concept about these three positions is that they are all the heads of state for government in each of their respective countries. A difference between these three is that the United States President is the only one of the three that is the sole head of state. In the United Kingdom you have the Queen who is the ceremonial head of state with very limited powers. In Germany there is a President that is supposed to be above politics and the face of the nation. The German President does have small governmental powers in which he or she must sign all legislation that is passed. Very rarely does a President in Germany not sign legislation if it already has the signature of the Chancellor and the Bundestag; this has only happened a handful of times in German history.

There are also main differences in the way that each of these three people reaches their respective positions of power. The United States President is the only one of the three that is directly elected by the people. The United States holds separate elections for its executive and this will have complications in legislation that will be discussed later. The British Prime Minister is not elected by the people, but appointed by being the person that is number one on the party list. Whichever party is elected to the majority in The House of Commons takes the top person from their party and appoints them Prime Minister. This is slightly different from the German system which is also an appointed position. The Bundestag, or lower house in the German legislature, is responsible for appointing the Chancellor. This is normally done by coalition in German politics and is more of a give and take situation and not as concrete as the other two positions.

Another main difference between these three heads of states is their impact on legislation within their countries. The British Prime Minister has the most influence on legislation because the position is fused. By being fused, The British Prime Minister controls both the legislative and executive branches. Almost all of the Prime Minister’s legislation in Britain will be passed because he holds a majority in the House of Commons. The accountability in this position is that if you don’t like what a party the party in power is doing, the next election you will be able to vote the party and Prime Minister out of power. The British Prime Minister has the most power out of all three of these positions and their legislation passes about ninety nine percent of the time. The German Chancellor on the other hand gives broad outlines for legislation and it is written by the cabinet staff or heads of departments. This legislation is not always guaranteed to pass because it has to go through both houses and meet the standards of coalition within these houses. Legislation is still passed about eighty percent of the time in this system. The accountability for the Chancellor in power is the fact that if he or she can’t hold the coalition together they will lose their position in office. Because of this fact, there is a lot more compromise in German politics than in the British politics were there is virtually none. In the United States government there is a much stricter separation of powers between the legislative and executive branch. The President can outline his or her policy goals, but without a majority in the Senate and the House of Representatives there is no guarantee that the President will be able to get any of his policies done. This allows for much more of a blame game in United States politics and slower government because the legislature doesn’t have to listen to the President and the President can veto every piece of legislation that comes to his desk. You have a much better chance at deadlock in United States politics that is not seen in British or German politics.

These three positions, Chancellor, Prime Minister and President, have very few similarities besides being the heads of government and outlining broad legislation. There are many more differences in the way that they are elected, their legislative powers and accountability.

Berlin Blog #1 "Memorial"

The question that was posed for the first blog response is “discuss how history is memorialized similarly or differently in Germany than in the United States?” To get to the root of this question, history must first be discussed about each country, because there are similarities and differences in the way that each country has reached the point they are at today and how they memorializes their past. One of these differences has been the way that each country looks at World War Two. The United States view of World War Two is a history of heroism and victory. Examples of the pride for American soldiers in this war can be seen in movies such as “Band of Brothers” and “Saving Private Ryan.” United States memorials like the Arizona at Pearl Harbor commemorate not only the men who died at the start of the war, but also American naval power in the pacific and decisive victory over the Japanese through the use of the atomic bomb. There is also a new World War Two memorial in Washington D.C. that was commissioned in 2004 that consists of 56 pillars for each state and other American regions in 1945. Each one of these pillars memorializes fighting and heroism in the war, or the sacrifices and hardships that were felt at home. The last of the images that is relevant to the way that United States viewed World War Two, but is not a memorial, is the picture of the “Kissing the War Goodbye.” This is a famous picture from 1945, by Victor Jorgensen, of a sailor kissing a nurse in Time Square, in New York City, after the announcement of the end of conflict in the Pacific. I think this is relevant to the point that is made above and a major difference between the ways that these two countries look at their history. Americans have romanticized the last Great War, weather it was in pictures, movies or memorials. The main conclusion that can be drawn from this is the role that victory plays in these different areas of remembrance, and why there is nothing romantic about the way World War Two is remembered in Germany.

Germany’s memorials, and the way that World War Two history is remembered, is a much darker past than the United States. Much of this gloomy and depressing history, not only has to do with Adolf Hitler and the extermination of the Jews, but the fact that Germany had lost two major wars in just over 30 years. The question that should then be posed is does a country that is morally and psychically broken and divided want to remember? Of course there would be memorials to the Jews that were killed in World War Two in the concentration camps, so the past would always be remembered and nothing like this atrocity would happen again. But the Jewish community only represented less than one percent of the population before the war and with the ones that either fled or were killed just a fraction of that after. It is hard to say that these memorials are for Germans, like you would see in the United States. German memorials seem to represent the men that have unified Germany well before the war, like Wilhelm the first and Bismarck; you would never see a statue of Adolf Hitler in Germany. You can’t enter Germany with Nazi propaganda or post it on signs or billboards without receiving a heavy fine. This is one of the main differences between the way that Germans and Americans memorialize their history. There is a feeling here that Germans would rather forget this dark time and look to the future, unlike the American viewpoint. The Washington D.C. memorial of World War Two was rushed into construction because they felt that too many soldiers from the war had already died and would not see their monument. There is stark contrast between these two countries view of history and memorializing World War Two. One is a view of darkness, holocaust and defeat; while another is a view of remembrance, heroism and victory.