AP Comparative Government Practice Test

Democracies are defined by the presence of free and fair elections that allow citizens to choose their leaders. This process ensures political accountability and legitimacy.

Federalism distributes power between a central government and regional entities, allowing for shared governance responsibilities. This system contrasts with a unitary state, where power is centralized.

Authoritarian regimes centralize power in a single entity or a small group, limiting political pluralism and opposition. This contrasts with democratic systems that encourage diverse viewpoints.

A constitution establishes the framework for government and outlines the rights of citizens. It sets the rules by which the government operates, ensuring accountability and rule of law.

In a parliamentary system, the executive branch is drawn from the legislative body, creating a fusion of powers. This arrangement contrasts with systems that have a strict separation between branches.

Proportional representation systems aim to mirror the percentage of votes each party receives in the allocation of seats. This method contrasts with winner-takes-all systems which can overrepresent the majority.

Majoritarian systems often favor larger parties, which can result in underrepresentation of smaller groups. This distortion in electoral outcomes is a key criticism of the system.

Presidential systems separate the executive from the legislature, with the executive typically elected directly by the people. This separation contrasts with parliamentary systems where the executive emerges from the legislative majority.

Effective political institutions depend on a robust design that includes checks and balances. Such institutional arrangements help ensure that no single branch gains excessive power.

Electoral systems shape how votes are transformed into seats, affecting representation and policy outcomes. This element is critical in understanding the differences in governance across countries.

Comparative politics relies on both case studies and quantitative methods to analyze differences and similarities among governments. This dual approach provides a comprehensive understanding of political systems.

State capacity refers to a government's ability to formulate and execute policies effectively. A higher capacity allows for more reliable public service delivery and policy enforcement.

A constitution introduces mechanisms such as checks and balances to restrict the power of the executive. This ensures that no single branch can dominate the governmental process.

Political culture influences how citizens interpret and interact with political institutions. It helps explain differences in political behavior and the legitimacy of governmental authority.

Federal systems operate at multiple levels of government, necessitating close coordination between national and regional authorities. This overlapping jurisdiction creates inherent complexity compared to unitary systems.

Institutional drift refers to the slow and subtle changes in how institutions operate, often without official reform. This gradual evolution can have significant long-term impacts on governance.

Electoral rules shape the incentives for political parties, affecting both their number and organizational strength. Different systems reward either large, dominant parties or encourage a multiparty environment.

Mixed electoral systems integrate the strengths of both proportional and majoritarian approaches. This design aims to enhance fairness in representation while maintaining government stability.

Corruption weakens the effectiveness of governmental institutions and impedes policy implementation. This erosion of state capacity can severely hinder development and public trust.

Regime durability reflects the long-term stability of a government, which is crucial for effective policy implementation. Stability in governance promotes investor confidence and predictable political behavior.