Aligning the elections of the House, Senate, and Presidency of the United States government appears the most suitable choice in any radical amendment to the structure of our government. The aligning of elections enables our government to (eventually) change drastically, without creating drastic repercussions; the first baby step to a unicameral-parliamentary government. By aligning these elections, access points of power are not changed, but more clearly identified, gridlock should be significantly reduced, so our traditional bicameral legislature will remain, only much more efficiently. Through this slight fusion of power the institution will not necessarily change so much as shift, thus the status quo is able to be maintained without worrying American citizens that their traditional static government has been crushed in place of a foreign government. A complete change to a parliamentary government would simply be too radical and perhaps too grand an attempt at fixing something that is not necessarily bro The current system of the United states government allows the majority party to win an election, but not necessarily obtain the majority in the senate for example. This split government scenario produces, amongst other obstacles, debilitating gridlock within our legislative process. “Persistent divided government over time will likely produce a fundamental change in in the relationship between Presidents and the congress. Presidents are unable to bargain effectively with hostile congress... appeals over the heads of congress directly, and hence undermine the legitimacy of the legislative branch.”(Allen, p.136). Our government is unable to achieve anything in an efficient manner; aligning the elections will begin a process of...
... middle of paper ...
... easily met, laws will be more rationally inputed, and the achievement of the government will mean the achievement of the majority. For the current state of our government, this is not only the best course of action for change, but it is most realistic. It does not the alter the form of government to the point that Americans cannot recognize it, however it is a drastic enough alteration, that it will yield results that may not be seen in our current state.
A significant change in our electoral process will be a journey on its own, and it will take adapting and compromise. However, as this country evolves, is foundations need replacing, and its traditions need tweaking in order to maintain the staggering growth and power it has maintained since the beginning of its existence. This change is just enough to make an impact, without harming our country’s core values.
Madison speaks of the problems of the present attempts at a new government saying “our governments are too unstable, that the public good is disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties, and that measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice, and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and over-bearing majority”.
The first recommendation is the reform of the Senate. I agree with Sabato statement “The United States is still a federation of semi-independent entities,”(Sabato, 23) as others I am proud to be an Utahn. In 1787 with the writing of the United States Constitution there were thirteen states represent approximately 2.5 million people. Today, the United States population is over 320 million
In today 's government political parties are a large part of government operations and how decisions are made in the government. In Madison 's The Federalist, No.10 Madison talked about how factions can control and cause harm to the government. A solution to this control was the use of a republic in order to limit the power of factions and keep them from having complete control. In our government however, factions have become a major part of the government system with political parties having complete control over the different branches of government. The use of this two political party system creates many problems within our government as the two parties fight for control over legislature and control over the government. Despite using a republic system as Madison mentions in his paper, factions continue to control and affect our government today. Madison 's views on government branches also affects our government today. Our government being in branches does help our government from being affected by corruption by each branch being independent from each other. These independent branches help prevent corruption by each branch having independent leadership and control and not being affected by the views of each other. At the same time these branches having unique views and control can lead to problems as the branches of government may not be able to interact properly with
Society cannot let factions become disenfranchised and lose their self determination. The United States, a country founded upon the ideals of freedom and individual prosperity, cannot hold unjust elections brought upon by the current dominant political party. President Johnson created a bipartisan effort to pass the Voting Rights Act of 1965, enriching democracy and continuing the American spirit of democratic values. Johnson united Congress with the simple message, “Our mission is at once the oldest and the most basic of this country: to right wrong, to do justice, to serve man.” (Johnson) Today, the citizens of the United States must push Congress formulate an oversight measure to fix voter
Political gridlock and dysfunction is a central aspect of studying Congress because it determines a huge part about how they function and their general effectiveness. When it comes to the political landscape in the United States, law-making and legislation ultimately comes down to what the Senate and the House of Representatives vote on and how they vote. Gridlock has been studied for years because of how it has changed the political landscape essentially from the beginning. The Jacksonian Era in the mid 1800’s shifted the way that political parties operated and from then on a two party system has been a critical part of American politics. The winner-take-all format of elections in the United States, along with the increasing importance of
...eft our own system to fester and decay. Unfortunately for Canadians, the only way that we can actually change our electoral system is if the party in power lets us. The problem with that is the ruling party generally has been granted a phony majority from the antiquated SMP system, and so changing the electoral system is the last thing that they want to do, unless they one day find themselves on the outside looking in. In 1984 when he was campaigning for the Liberal leadership, Chretien told reporters in Brandon that if elected he would introduce proportional representation “right after the next election”6. In 1993, two elections later, Chretien would win a majority with only 41% of the popular vote, and interestingly enough noble plans for reform were soon scuttled. In 1997 the Liberals won only 39% of the vote, and in 2000 only 42%, and then in 2003 Chretien retired after ten years as our unjustly elected dictator without ever raising the issue of electoral reform. With the current minority government, we have an unprecedented chance to create real change, and we can only hope that the voice of the majority gets through and our government does what the people actually want.
Well, It is clear that a system of delegation such as the Electoral College is needed. However, perhaps the Electoral College isn’t the way to go. Or maybe the Electoral College could be improved upon. It certainly has its problems but ultimately the U.S is better off with it. It allows for the minority interests to be herd. It contributes to the more even cohesiveness of the country by utilizing a distribution of popular support to be elected president. The biggest problem is that Americans think that issues have simple answers such as “Should we keep the electoral college?” When in reality, it is almost never a simple yes or no question. That is one of the reasons the Electoral College exists. It will continue to be needed until the average American can understand these issues, get involved, and make reasonable choices about its
By dismembering the Electoral College and replacing it with popular vote, some Americans believe this would eradicate any further issues on who is placed in office, while others want a system to do the dirty work and select their future leader. But by eliminating the very system created to keep the states at peace, the Electoral College has, in fact, caused turmoil and confusion among the people in regards to American politics; many people have a sense of displacement and lack of care for politics due to the mindset that someone else is in charge and their voice does not matter. Allowing the American people to cast their choice for who takes care of their future and eliminating the middle man ideals of the Electoral College, government can give back to its people in ways they might not have thought about before. They give the people a voice, choice, and a sense of personal expression and
The author argues that without the use of an Electoral College that every vote by an American citizen would still create a big outcome in the election for a candidate. Instead of telling electors who citizens wished to cast their vote for, citizens would be able to really vote for the candidate in which they feel will be most effective for the country. The author believes that the Electoral College has soiled our elections and that we should make a better way in which we can make the elections more efficient and equal for each and every citizen in
Every four years, the century-old debate over the Electoral College rekindles. Currently, as the contest between the Republican candidates intensifies and the remaining four rush toward the finish line for nomination, speculators are turning their attention toward the Presidential Election that is right around the corner. Predictably, the legitimacy of the Electoral College is once again under scrutiny. Although the Electoral College was an ingenious compromise establish by Framers of the Constitution, the development of the two party politics and the “winner-take-all” system has led it to the fail its original purpose.
As the United States of America gets older, so does the presidential election voting system. The argument to change this method of voting has been becoming more and more popular as the years go on. It has been said that the Framers of the Constitution came up with this method because of the bad transportation, communication, and they feared the public’s intelligence was not suitable for choosing the President of the United States. Others say that the Framers made this method because they feared that the public did not receive sufficient information about candidates outside of their state to make such a decision based on direct popular vote. My research on this controversial issue of politics will look into the factors into why the Electoral College exists and if it is possibly outdated for today’s society. It will look into the pros and cons of this voting system, and it will explore the alternative methods of voting such as the Direct Popular vote. Many scholarly authors have gathered research to prove that this voting system is outdated and it does not accurately represent the national popular will. Many U.S. citizens value their vote because they only get one to cast towards the candidate of their choice in the presidential election. Based on the Electoral College system their vote may possibly not be represented. Because of today’s society in the U.S. the Electoral College should be abolished because it is not necessary to use a middle-man to choose our president for us. It is a vote by the people, all of us having one voice, one vote.
...tion has focused attention on the problems of our current system of voting. With the disproportionate amount of minorities being represented in Congress today, a change in the voting system is inevitable unless the two parties make a concerted effort to draw larger minority support and offer up minority candidates.
Linz writes that “Presidentialism is ineluctably problematic because it operates according to the rule of "winner-take-all-arrangement” that tends to make democratic politics a zero-sum game” This causes some people to feel disenfranchised and that the President is not “their President” if the winner is not who they cast their vote for. Linz adds that parliamentary elections are more prone to give representations to a number of parties. Presidential election process leaves little room for consensus building and coalition
Federalism is perhaps the greatest form of government by the people and for the people because of its evolution. Because people and society change, so must the form of government that presides over them. Federalism allows the flexibility to do so.
...ople who are there until they chose otherwise. I would also give less power to the President on the election of members, and instead let the people vote that they feel like represent them to the best of their ability. This will ensure equal voice from various different groups and states of representation. In all honesty I believe the way members should be elected should be the same uniformed process as discussed in the legislative branch.