The Question:
Is the federal government effective if separate parties
control the Executive (President/Rep.) and Legislative: Senate (Rep), House of
Reps (Dem), supreme and lower court branches; congress) branches. Why or why
not? (In 600-800 words)
My Essay
“Political parties
are inevitable, and they are effective and convenient when principles divide
people. But popular representation is older than a party system of government,
and when it becomes utterly subordinate to the welfare of parties it is time
for a democratic people to realize the possible loss of their instrument of
liberty.” The Rise of the Democracy, by Joseph Clayton 1911
Define effective
Is ineffective for your own cause unjust, while
effectiveness for your cause just? In Political Ideals 1916, Bertrand Russell stated
“If a nation is divided into two…democracy theoretically insures that the
majority shall have their way.” This is an important concept. In the Political
landscape of today, this is effective for the majority Republican Senate, in the
political climate of the day, isn’t that it is ineffective for the Democratic
House still constitutes ineffectiveness?
In 1905, Professor of Political Science and Constitutional
law John Williams Burgess wrote Reconstruction and the Constitution. In it, he
reminds us that the partisan powers at the time of the adoption of the 13th
amendment, abolishing slavery, were due to a majority power of the legislation.
If the Reconstruction supporters had had their party in power in 1865, the
history of human rights as we know it would have taken an entirely different
course.
Thomas Patterson looks in-depth into legislative workings. “A
divided government can lead to bitter dispute and stalemates.” Would the
alternative be a government that does not discuss issues based on the opinions
of others? That the current government unequally represents minority groups is
a concern, and clearly not irrespective of party differences, which in and of
itself is alarming. As often seen in the Senate, powers that are in majority
would pass bills and motions to further their own political power. That concept
breeds casual wonder do we have a dictatorship disguised as a democracy.
Trump vs. Clinton SOTU speeches
Let us now compare the 42nd President William Clinton with
the 45th President Donald Trump. I will propose that the country’s effectiveness
and foremost its judicial system, is greatly improved by having a political
electorate who, even as they stand for one dedicated platform (Republican or
Democrat) speak regardless of party preference, in an effort unite the nation.
A leader, by words and deeds has an influence of how well
the Senate and House will work together. The approval rating of Williams Clinton’s
first year was 50% (pg 392). President Clinton used the word bipartisan 8 times
in his first two State of the Union Addresses. In comparison, approval rating
of Donald Trump’s first year was 38%. Trump used bipartisan three times in two speeches.
Only two times as the word used to encourage bipartisan efforts, once was
distrusting partisan efforts to cause problems.
That there is a >30% greater approval rating with a >30%
greater usage of the word “bipartisan” is of great value to us; it is a
bipartisan issue benefits our country to have leadership which unites.
Reform
Older, more developed nations do not follow our suit, yet
all of them, according to Brooks Adams, borrow freely from the parliamentary
system of England. America has a unique legislation and for the past 231 years
we have had the same electoral and ruling system. Perhaps we would benefit from
adopting a system which has a longer proven history. In The Theory of Social
Revolutions, says Adams: “Since 1789, every highly civilized Western people
have readjusted their institutions at least once, yet not one has in this
respect imitated us.”
Some scholars suggest a broad reform of the electoral
election method. T.R. Ashworth, in his 1901 Proportional
Representation Applied To Party Government A New Electoral System proposes:
“The system of single-membered electorates was rational in
the fourteenth century, because there was only one party. Is it not on the face
of it absurd to-day, when there are two parties?” That was written when the
25th President, William McKinley was in office.
By that time, America had seen 6 different party
affiliations taking political power for the nation. Democrat and Republican parties.
No Party (1st George Washington and 17th Andrew Johnson),
Whig (last office held 1845 with 10th President John Tyler) , one Federalist
2nd John Adams, and a party called Democratic-Republican, holding
office during the tenure of 3 Presidents in a row, our 3rd through 5th.
Closing
In his farewell speech to 13 states and a population of 3,929,214,
first President George Washington warned future American about the likelihood
of political parties and their hostile intent toward democracy. He spoke fervently
and eloquently on that topic alone for just under 1000 words; imploring the
people not to let powers of parties corrupt democracy, subvert liberty and become
despotism.
United States of 231 years later retains the same legislature
as of 1789. Yet now there are 50 states
and a <90% increase in population to an estimated current amount of 330,656,950.
If the first president of our United States, of whom we often valiantly interpret
their reasoning for the framework of our legislative system as they saw it, tells
us to be wary of an overly powerful political party, shouldn’t we heed that
warning?
Bibliography
Adams, Brooks. The Theory of Social Revolutions.
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, 1913.
<https://www.gutenberg.org/files/10613/10613-h/10613-h.htm>.
Ashworth, T. R. Proportional Representation
Applied To Party Government, A NEW ELECTORAL SYSTEM. 1901. <https://www.gutenberg.org/files/14459/14459-h/14459-h.htm>.
Britannica, Encyclopedia. United States
presidential election of 1789. 17 Aug 2009. 2020 Feb 2020.
<https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1789>.
Burgess, John William. Reconstruction and the
Constitution 1866-1876. CHARLES SCRIBNER'S SONS/, 1902.
<https://www.gutenberg.org/files/50295/50295-h/50295-h.htm>.
Clayton, Joseph. The Rise of the Democracy.
Cassel and Company LTD, 1911. <https://www.gutenberg.org/files/19609/19609-h/19609-h.htm>.
Clinton, William J. State of the Union Addresses
of William J. Clinton. eBook, 2004.
<https://www.gutenberg.org/files/5048/5048-h/5048-h.htm#jan1994>.
Patterson, Thomas. We The People. 13th. New
York: McGraw, 2019. pages 352 & 343.
Russell, Bertrand. Political Ideals. The
National Council for Civil Liberties, 1916.
<https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4776/4776-h/4776-h.htm>.
Trump, Donald J. State of the Union Speech.
2018 2019. <https://time.com/5125174/trump-state-of-the-union-address-transcript/
https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/05/politics/donald-trump-state-of-the-union-2019-transcript/index.html>.
US Government, Census Department. "Population
Characteristics and Migration 1790-1940." PDF and XLS. n.d.
<https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/1949/compendia/hist_stats_1789-1945/hist_stats_1789-1945-chB.pdf?
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/tables/2010-2019/national/totals/na-est2019-01.xlsx>.
795 words (irrespective of question restatements, opening
quote and Works Cited).
Mendocino College, POL200, Spring 2020, Professor Liljeblad
Mendocino College, POL200, Spring 2020, Professor Liljeblad
No comments:
Post a Comment