Many people in America, including myself, find the American Party System to be... oh... what's the word... corrupt. Not only are parties unresponsive to the people, but it is ok that they are because no one does anything to stop it. Although I find a lot of things wrong with the system, the fact that they are not responsible to the people is what angers me the most.
In our text, page 220, there is a quote by the APSA from their Article "Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System." This quote says that there must be more than one party because one party will not be responsible to the people. We have two parties, but this does not assure us responsibility! Responsibility can only be achieved through honesty and hard work. Many politcians are seen as "slimmy" individuals who will do anything to get elected. Once in office, the promises for change, for "a new tomorrow" are rarely met. We need politicians who will stand up for what they promise.
We need to look no farther than the Bush administration to understand just exactly how IRresponsible the system is currently. My favorite topic to talk about in this area is presidental signing statements. For those who do not know... signing statements are where the president can interpret a bill passed by Congress (after he has already signed it into law), comment on its constitutionality, or simply write how he feels about the bill. President Bush has used more than any president in history, and more than many of them combined. Instead of using his veto power, Bush signs popular legislation into law-such as the McCain torture ban-and then says something to the effect of "The executive branch does not have to follow this." HOW MUCH MORE IRRESPONSIBLE CAN YOU GET?
Another reason I think the American Party System is corrupt is the number of Americans who do not feel represented by our government. In other democracies around the world, many more parties are represented in their government because of their system of proportional representation. This allows voices to be heard beyond two parties; it represents more of the public. Instead of having to choose between the 'lesser of two evils', people can support politicians that have the same ideals and same policy prefernces. In our winner take all system, you are either on the winning side or the losing side; nearly half of our population is unsatisfied with its representatives.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20060113.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
::Comments are fun::
This form of corruption, I think is the only one that is an accepted form. Cronyism, patronage and Nepotism have fed a foul medicine to the people and we are looking to anything as a solution. The problem I see is not switching to a new form (ie parliamentary or Prop. Rep), the problem is the problem with all the systems. What inevitably happens is lineage. Your school, your dad, your money, and your disadvantage. All can be played up or down to get you where you want. We could try Proportional representation, but it would still be filled with elites who got in on account of some predetermined reason.
If you speak with other people from other countries, they have the same problems as us. Yes "the little guy" gets through from time to time, but those are anomolies and they are up against HUGE odds. We rarely recognize those who work hard and want to work for us. Why? Because we don't look hard enough and we see them all with a broken pair of glasses. I doubt we can switch to a new system and I strongly doubt we can switch to a different system from another country without the same frustrations in relation to our power in government.
.edua zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well as speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for preeminence of power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and opress each other than to co-operate for their common good.
Federalist 10
To me this states that the founding fathers wanted anything but a party system filled with factions. Because when you have that, you get what we have now, and what you say is corrupt.
I believe that the integrity of the candidates is left at the door, when they step into politics. Sure they want to be responsive to the public but you know it’s not for all the right reasons. This is obvious in their failed follow through once an incumbent. It is just a competition of who can appeal to the most groups. I think that it is just a matter of time before candidates flip on the music, do a little "two step" and walk it out at the campaign rallies.
Hey Shannon,
I think you make some very good and important points, yet I think the two major Parties have become too responsive to public sentiment. Pollsters and consultants are always tracking opinion trends and both candidates and thier parties use this advise to form policy and strategy.
Hey nothing to do with your post but study group at Vitucci's Tonight at 7pm call me for details 608-215-4768
Post a Comment