content warning: U.S. party politics
Oct. 22nd, 2015 10:02 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
transposable_elementI rarely (okay, never) post about politics, but I find this so fascinating that I have to mention it.
Currently the U.S. House of Representatives, where there is a clear Republican majority, is having trouble electing a new Speaker. (For those not familiar with our crazy system, the Speaker is essentially the head of the party within the House, sets the legislative agenda, and is next in line for the presidency after the Vice President.) Because of in-fighting within the party, Paul Ryan, who is already horrifyingly right wing, is struggling to obtain the support of the loony fringe of his own party.
It looks almost exactly like what happens in a parliamentary system when no party has a clear majority and the party with the most seats goes courting tiny extremist parties in order to be able to form a government.
I happen to think that the parliamentary system is overall superior to the system that we have in the U.S.; but now we've managed to incorporate one of the most serious drawbacks of the parliamentary system as well!!!!
And, as a friend pointed out, this illustrates that we don't actually have a two-party system in the U.S.; we have a multiparty system in which certain minor parties are semi-permanently attached to one of the two major parties, but not so firmly attached that they can't throw a major monkey wrench into the workings of the government if they care to. And the "Freedom Caucus" is overtly anti-government, so they are overjoyed by the opportunity to bring things to a halt if they can manage it.
Meanwhile, Ryan has a list of demands that must be met if he's to agree to run for Speaker. The whole thing looks more and more like a hostage negotiation.
Currently the U.S. House of Representatives, where there is a clear Republican majority, is having trouble electing a new Speaker. (For those not familiar with our crazy system, the Speaker is essentially the head of the party within the House, sets the legislative agenda, and is next in line for the presidency after the Vice President.) Because of in-fighting within the party, Paul Ryan, who is already horrifyingly right wing, is struggling to obtain the support of the loony fringe of his own party.
It looks almost exactly like what happens in a parliamentary system when no party has a clear majority and the party with the most seats goes courting tiny extremist parties in order to be able to form a government.
I happen to think that the parliamentary system is overall superior to the system that we have in the U.S.; but now we've managed to incorporate one of the most serious drawbacks of the parliamentary system as well!!!!
And, as a friend pointed out, this illustrates that we don't actually have a two-party system in the U.S.; we have a multiparty system in which certain minor parties are semi-permanently attached to one of the two major parties, but not so firmly attached that they can't throw a major monkey wrench into the workings of the government if they care to. And the "Freedom Caucus" is overtly anti-government, so they are overjoyed by the opportunity to bring things to a halt if they can manage it.
Meanwhile, Ryan has a list of demands that must be met if he's to agree to run for Speaker. The whole thing looks more and more like a hostage negotiation.
no subject
Date: 2015-10-22 11:27 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-10-23 12:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-10-23 12:38 am (UTC)I'm not sure if listening to this is worse than watching Hilary at another hearing so they can rehash the Benghazi issue again.
no subject
Date: 2015-10-23 12:59 am (UTC)I generally pay little attention to political news, for the same reasons as you do, but I was just struck this time by the whole analogy to the parliamentary system.
no subject
Date: 2015-10-23 02:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2015-10-23 06:11 am (UTC)