American Political Polarization: Deadlock or Status Quo
Does ‘divided government’ in the US facilitate decision-making, or encourage deadlock, and the persistence of the status quo?
In almost all developed democratic countries, such as UK, Japan or Germany, political parties are growingly closer and cooperative together, whereas the US is an exception. As David McKay (2013) claimed, the center of American political world, the capitol, has been continuously characterized by an increasing ideological polarization on a wide scope of non-economic issues ranging from foreign policy and the environment to moral issues such as abortion or homosexual rights, and Republicans are consistently on the right of these issues whereas the Democrats are correspondingly on the left. We all undoubtedly believe that the two-party and bicameral system was initially designed by founding fathers to ensure that diverse constituencies could achieve unanimity before any Acts passed. But recently the criticism that many political scholars have contended that divided government have damaged government’s efficiency in terms of producing important public policies has been explosively popular. However, on the other hand, other political scientists oppose the criticism, such as David Mayhew (2005) announced that divided government has not neither lowered the number of enactments of vital legislations nor decreased legislative productivity, and divided government does not contribute to gridlock.
Based on the mutually opposing propositions, this essay is designed to briefly examine the divided government in America and which is split into three parts.
First comes to arguments against divided government and focuses on issues of deadlock, argue that which system potentially intensifying rivalries among political parties and intriguing politicians chasing after activities beyond public policies. Afterwards comes to standpoints for divided government, which advocates that the constitutional design fundamentally facilitates quality of D.C. decisiveness.
In almost all developed democratic countries, such as UK, Japan or Germany, political parties are growingly closer and cooperative together, whereas the US is an exception. As David McKay (2013) claimed, the center of American political world, the capitol, has been continuously characterized by an increasing ideological polarization on a wide scope of non-economic issues ranging from foreign policy and the environment to moral issues such as abortion or homosexual rights, and Republicans are consistently on the right of these issues whereas the Democrats are correspondingly on the left. We all undoubtedly believe that the two-party and bicameral system was initially designed by founding fathers to ensure that diverse constituencies could achieve unanimity before any Acts passed. But recently the criticism that many political scholars have contended that divided government have damaged government’s efficiency in terms of producing important public policies has been explosively popular. However, on the other hand, other political scientists oppose the criticism, such as David Mayhew (2005) announced that divided government has not neither lowered the number of enactments of vital legislations nor decreased legislative productivity, and divided government does not contribute to gridlock.
Based on the mutually opposing propositions, this essay is designed to briefly examine the divided government in America and which is split into three parts.
First comes to arguments against divided government and focuses on issues of deadlock, argue that which system potentially intensifying rivalries among political parties and intriguing politicians chasing after activities beyond public policies. Afterwards comes to standpoints for divided government, which advocates that the constitutional design fundamentally facilitates quality of D.C. decisiveness.
References: Courtney, K., 1962. America’s Unelected Rulers. New Orleans: A Conservative Society of America Publication. McKay, D., 2013. American Politics and Society.8th ed. West Sussex: Wiley-Black Well. Mayhew, D.R., 2005. Divided We Govern: Party Control, Lawmaking, and Investigations, 1946–2002. 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press. Krehbiel, K., 1998. Pivotal Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Saeki, M., 2009. Gridlock in the Government of the United States: Influence of Divided Government and Veto Players. British Journal of Political Science, 39(3), pp.587-607. John, C., 2011. Divided We Fall: The Case Against Divided Government. International Social Science Review, 86(3/4), pp.166-175. Franklin, D., 2011. Policy Point-Counterpoint: Is Divided Government Good for the United States? International Social Science Review, 86(3/4), pp. 160-163. Edwards, III. and George, C. et el., 1997. The Legislative Impact of Divided Government. American Journal of Political Science, 42(2), PP.545-564.