Yanks, help me with my politics homework!

 
More Than Mortal
| d-d-d-DANK ✡ 🔥🔥🔥 🌈
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam: MetaCognition
ID: Meta Cognition
IP: Logged

15,060 posts
This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang but a whimper.
I need to write an essay on: "To what extent is the constitutional system of checks and balances an obstacle to effective government?"

I just finished about 10 pages of notes on the reign of Nicholas II, so I can't be fucked.

I have:

No they aren't an obstacle;
- They stop the government growing too large, all tyrannies throughout history have seen the erosion of checks and balances.
- They allow the government to punish bad conduct in any other branch of government.

Yes they are an obstacle:
- The polarisation of American politics means the checks and balances system can be exploited for partisan gain.
- They can be cumbersome and result in gridlock.

If anyone wants to offer a revision or call me out on any of those, feel free. Some examples for each would be swell too.


Mad Max | Mythic Invincible!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam: madmax0808
ID: Mad Max
IP: Logged

7,519 posts
 
The way Congress has the ability to hold the country hostage while it throws a tantrum I would consider a big con.


RustingFloor | Heroic Posting Rampage
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Rustingfloor
IP: Logged

1,328 posts
"I've been battling with the struggle of love and anger and the anger has won. It's impossible for me to go back to the way I was. I've tried changing back but it didn't work. I still had it in me and doubt it will ever go away. I have no control over it anymore. It has become part of me."
The way Congress has the ability to hold the country hostage while it throws a tantrum I would consider a big con.
That's what checks and balances are supposed to prevent.


KekKid2001 | Newbie
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: KekKid2001
IP: Logged

8 posts
 
Until the Supreme Court steps in and says "do your jobs or there's gonna be mighty hell to pay"


hence checks and balances


Comet | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Comet
IP: Logged

3,687 posts
 
Quote
- They can be cumbersome and result in gridlock.
/understatement
Spoiler


Mad Max | Mythic Invincible!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam: madmax0808
ID: Mad Max
IP: Logged

7,519 posts
 
The way Congress has the ability to hold the country hostage while it throws a tantrum I would consider a big con.
That's what checks and balances are supposed to prevent.
And clearly both our checks and our balances are entirely ineffectual.


 
challengerX
| custom title
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: challengerX
IP: Logged

41,942 posts
I DONT GIVE A SINGLE -blam!- MOTHER -blam!-ER ITS A MOTHER -blam!-ING FORUM, OH WOW, YOU HAVE THE WORD NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, HOW MOTHER -blam!-ING COOL, NOT, YOUR ARE NOTHING TO ME BUT A BRAINWASHED PIECE OF SHIT BLOGGER, PEOPLE ONLY LIKE YOU BECAUSE YOU HAVE NINJA BELOW YOUR NAME, SO PLEASE PUNCH YOURAELF IN THE FACE AND STAB YOUR EYE BECAUSE YOU ARE NOTHING BUT A PIECE OF SHIT OF SOCIETY
This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.


Naoto | Legendary Invincible!
 
more |
XBL:
PSN:
Steam:
ID: Naoto
IP: Logged

3,753 posts
{zzz}°°°( -_-)>c[_]
You could compare to the chinese system.

Their form of govt is relatively nimble and quick. It can order damns to be built, force people out of homes to turn slums into brand new apts, invest heavily in rail or green energy etc.

The US govt in comparison is very slow and looks almost broken with all the gridlock, but its not designed for speed. Its designed with longevity in mind. Eventually you'll get a shit head in power who fucks everything up. Its pretty easy for us to get rid of them with relatively little damage done. But in a govt without those balances that person/party becomes entrenched and are harder to dislodge.

It could also be argued that some of those checks and balances are ineffective. For example the president technically requires congress' approval to go to war. Yet congress never voted on bombing syria because we're not calling it a war. So, do you really want to work through gridlock in order to combat terrorist threats, or do you trust the executive branch with enough power for them to legally kill American citizens without trial (right now its the latter, which unfortunately is probably the best option.)

Plus looking at net neutrality the FCC is basically run by former lobbyists for the cable providers. So corruption can wear away at some of those checks and balances and you're just stuck with the gridlock. But I guess that all goes back to a democracy only being as good as its voters.
Last Edit: September 25, 2014, 06:08:56 PM by 直斗