Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Divided Government

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Divided Government

    Recent discussions have led me to think of the way the U.S. government is functioning. I recall the days of Nixon and the accusations of an "Imperial Presidency". I also recall that after Watergate, many said that the balance of power had swung to the Congress.

    My feeling is that the Congress should be (and is) the most powerful branch of government. Here the members are closest to the people and thus more accountable. James Madison felt that the legislative branch was the most important check on the Executive Branch. In an age of highly partisan politics, this divide can lead to gridlock. In my opinion, this is not a bad thing. If the people become to unhappy with those who will not compromise, then they can be replaced. A divided government, as we have, is a great check to ensure the voice of the minority is heard.

    Any way...here is an exerpt from Madison's federalist 51. Read, discuss, enjoy.

    It is equally evident, that the members of each department should be as little dependent as possible on those of the others, for the emoluments annexed to their offices. Were the executive magistrate, or the judges, not independent of the legislature in this particular, their independence in every other would be merely nominal.

    But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

    This policy of supplying, by opposite and rival interests, the defect of better motives, might be traced through the whole system of human affairs, private as well as public. We see it particularly displayed in all the subordinate distributions of power, where the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that each may be a check on the other -- that the private interest of every individual may be a sentinel over the public rights. These inventions of prudence cannot be less requisite in the distribution of the supreme powers of the State.

    But it is not possible to give to each department an equal power of self-defense. In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for this inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches; and to render them, by different modes of election and different principles of action, as little connected with each other as the nature of their common functions and their common dependence on the society will admit. It may even be necessary to guard against dangerous encroachments by still further precautions. As the weight of the legislative authority requires that it should be thus divided, the weakness of the executive may require, on the other hand, that it should be fortified. An absolute negative on the legislature appears, at first view, to be the natural defense with which the executive magistrate should be armed. But perhaps it would be neither altogether safe nor alone sufficient. On ordinary occasions it might not be exerted with the requisite firmness, and on extraordinary occasions it might be perfidiously abused. May not this defect of an absolute negative be supplied by some qualified connection between this weaker department and the weaker branch of the stronger department, by which the latter may be led to support the constitutional rights of the former, without being too much detached from the rights of its own department
    "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

  • #2
    Do you think this includes having the state go bankrupt and not pay what it's leaders agreed to pay for the last 20-30 years?

    JM
    Jon Miller-
    I AM.CANADIAN
    GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

    Comment


    • #3
      Do you think this includes having the state go bankrupt and not pay what it's leaders agreed to pay for the last 20-30 years?

      JM
      Jon Miller-
      I AM.CANADIAN
      GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Jon Miller View Post
        Do you think this includes having the state go bankrupt and not pay what it's leaders agreed to pay for the last 20-30 years?

        JM
        If Congress decides to destroy the nation then obviously it's functioning as intended.
        "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
        'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

        Comment


        • #5
          The inanity of Congress being a check on Presidential power is that in recent memory, congress hasn't checked the powers of the Presidency on civil rights issues because they genuinely DONT CARE, but have been more than PITAs about things like passing budgets. It makes no goddamn sense.
          "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
          'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Jon Miller View Post
            Do you think this includes having the state go bankrupt and not pay what it's leaders agreed to pay for the last 20-30 years?

            JM
            So cutting $85 billion (what will happen March 1st) from a $3+ trillion dollar budget will force the state to go bankrupt or otherwise destroy the nation?
            I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
            For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by MRT144 View Post
              The inanity of Congress being a check on Presidential power is that in recent memory, congress hasn't checked the powers of the Presidency on civil rights issues because they genuinely DONT CARE, but have been more than PITAs about things like passing budgets. It makes no goddamn sense.
              It's like society has somehow changed in the past two centuries or something. Anyway, is there anything quite like the Federalist Papers for reminding us how differently people talked back then?
              1011 1100
              Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

              Comment


              • #8
                Or the Hagel thing. Like, oh wow Congress, you're really doing your ****ing job by picking the low hanging fruit of obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism.
                "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
                'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DinoDoc View Post
                  So cutting $85 billion (what will happen March 1st) from a $3+ trillion dollar budget will force the state to go bankrupt or otherwise destroy the nation?
                  I am referring to the debt ceiling.

                  The rest (including appointments) I agree is 'fair game'.

                  JM
                  Jon Miller-
                  I AM.CANADIAN
                  GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The growth of presidential power combined with very low approval for a dysfunctional Congress is, to put it mildly, rather troubling.
                    1011 1100
                    Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DinoDoc View Post
                      So cutting $85 billion (what will happen March 1st) from a $3+ trillion dollar budget will force the state to go bankrupt or otherwise destroy the nation?
                      I am referring to the debt ceiling.

                      The rest (including appointments) I agree is 'fair game'.

                      JM
                      Jon Miller-
                      I AM.CANADIAN
                      GENERATION 35: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social experiment.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Elok View Post
                        The growth of presidential power combined with very low approval for a dysfunctional Congress is, to put it mildly, rather troubling.
                        It's only troubling because Congress enables the worst of presidential power while quibbling over scraps.
                        "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
                        'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Jon Miller View Post
                          Do you think this includes having the state go bankrupt and not pay what it's leaders agreed to pay for the last 20-30 years?

                          JM
                          The House of Representatives, by its very nature, is the voice of the people. If the people decide to bankrupt the state, then they are the ones that will reap the consequences. These are the people, after all, that the people themselves chose as their voice in government.

                          Personally, I have written my representative and expressed my wishes. It is actually pretty easy to do. I wonder how many Americans raising hell about Congress can say that they have ever tried to communicate their feelings directly to their representative. Equally, I wonder how many of those same people even exercised their right to elect someone to speak for them.

                          For the record...my position is bankrupting the country is a bad idea.
                          "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Elok View Post
                            The growth of presidential power combined with very low approval for a dysfunctional Congress is, to put it mildly, rather troubling.
                            I would propose that Congress is not dysfunctional, but is actually functioning as intended.

                            There is a very deep and clear division in the U.S. right now. Congress is simply mirroring the people. When the people wish for change, they shall have it.
                            "I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration." - Hillary Clinton, 2003

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by MRT144 View Post
                              It's only troubling because Congress enables the worst of presidential power while quibbling over scraps.
                              Yes, but haven't they been doing that for a pretty long time? President invades the hell out of a foreign power on some cockamamie excuse? Yessir, yessir! President gets a blowjob? Impeach that SOB! Part of the problem is that our "small-government" party is scared of every part of government except the ones that are actually dangerous. They'd never question the Executive's prerogative to send armies wherever, detain whoever, snoop on whatever. It's the schools and medicare that terrify them, because by some coincidence(?) they also happen to be the guardians of the American cult of nationalism.
                              1011 1100
                              Pyrebound--a free online serial fantasy novel

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X