“Tonight the independent voice of Massachusetts has spoken,” Mr. Brown told his cheering supporters in a victory speech, standing in front of a backdrop that said “The People’s Seat.”
The election left Democrats in Congress scrambling to salvage a bill overhauling the nation’s health care system, which the late Mr. Kennedy had called “the cause of my life.” Mr. Brown has vowed to oppose the bill, and once he takes office the Democrats will no longer control the 60 votes in the Senate needed to overcome filibusters.
There were immediate signs that the bill had become imperiled. House members indicated they would not quickly pass the bill the Senate approved last month."
NY Times: G.O.P. Senate Victory Stuns Democrats, January 19,20092010
So essentially, the structural setting of the US Congress allows for a minority to block any policy? That seems highly ineffectual and potentially dangerous, especially when this power is actually used to block every policy. Here is a chart of how the usage of the filibuster has risen over the course of the last years (until 2008, as the Democrats already has a majority in Congress before the last elections).
The result: paralysis in the face of crisis, as it is ridiculous to rely on the responsibility of the minority party to accept their defeat, and the fact that the electorate put the other party (as there is only two in this case) into power. (vaguely related: if you google "paralysis", "legislative branch" and "minority rights", Taiwan comes up immediately. I'll look into that)
No comments:
Post a Comment