With the rise in the professional politician many prefer to remain loyal in order to gain power and move up in the hierarchy as opposed to become a rebel who remains in the back benchers. This can be seen after the vote on tuition fees and the liberal democrats. Despite the fact that they had campaigned for this cause endlessly only 26 (including a few Conservatives) chose to vote against the bill. Whips play an important part in removing efficiency from Parliament. By having whips who ensure that MPs behave in accordance to the decisions of the executive both Parliaments ability to scrutinise and hold the executive to account is diminished, but also their role as representatives of their individual constituency is also compromised.
The system arose gradually as states began to feel that the previous method of allowing party officials to decide was undemocratic in a modern society. That the current system is democratic and encourages public participation in politics is a particular strength of primaries. Adjoined to this is that it places no restrictions on who can stand, however, despite its benefits many people have criticised the system and are pressing for its reform. Emphasising the huge costs, frontloading and regionalisation of primaries, critics state that for all its claims to be democratic it prohibits the candidates from competing on an equal level. Equally the low levels of turnout in primaries suggest that many people are not interested in the primaries and raises questions over the legitimacy of any winner.
I feel that if we added a third party we would increase these numbers, that if the people felt that they were actually being heard and that their votes mattered, then there would be more citizens actively participating their right to vote. When a president comes into office based on the electoral votes, and not on majority it taints that person and creates a certain bitterness throughout the entire country. If we did indeed create a third party we would have to completely change the way that we vote, and possibly remove the Electoral College. This suggestion alone causes people to cringe but when people were asked if they wanted a third party candidate and a whopping 46% said yes.
The underlying political structure of this country is being tested with war, economic hardship and a corrupt Congress. The United States is a nation founded upon a demand for representation, and this has become harder to accomplish with of millions of people represent. But that does not mean that we should not hold the government to a high standard. Congressmen today are fueled by their greed, they are misinformed, and most people don’t even like them. The system here is broken; the system of representation in the United States is a failure.
This is very important in their job as they will only look for views to help the country, even if those are unpopular. Whereas if there was an elected second chamber their views would always be held accountable, but more importantly then some of their revisions may not be what is best for the country, but what the populous believe to be important, which removes the whole objectivity of the revising chamber. This issue could have been questioned under many unpopular parliamentary decisions such as with the Iraq War in 2003, where many of the voters would likely be against it as seen by the many demonstrations, whereas an expert in the Military in House of Lords may believe that it is possible to win the war, however at the next vote his skills would likely be lost when he wouldn’t be re-elected. A wholly elected upper chamber would also pose several problems in regards to the Lords’ expertise. As at the moment, the upper chamber is comprised of experts in their fields leading to high quality debates, if not higher than in the Commons.
These politicians justify their actions by saying they are performing the people’s will because the people voted for them, thus the people support everything that politician does. The reality is most people don’t vote and those that do may be single issue voters, ignorant voters or full-fledged party backers. But, it is misleading at best to claim anyone has a political mandate to pass bad legislation. Regardless of the issue or one’s position it would be impossible to say that an apathetic voting populous, largely ignorant on the individual issue at hand took a stand on election day by voting for one party or by not voting at all and thus, providing a
Even though it might seems as a small problem, comparing to all other troubles that the nation has experienced, nonetheless it must be addressed in a timely matter because any delay in making the decision will make the issue even more severe. It might cause people’s choice of government to become much skewed. If some area has a majority of supporters for a certain party and the conditions for them to vote are beneficial, the community will be able to include all their votes, and comparing to a place that has supporters of the opposite party but has no opportunity to vote. The candidate for the election will lose that majority of votes and people will be faced with the government that only minority wanted to see in
Considering this, politicians, “must be bold and dramatic eonugh to get their messaage across- always in competition with millions of others- without plunging to their death” (Pg 187). With that said there are rules between the politicians and the press. These rules include “background”, which means the reporter cannot quote you by name but can still describe you as much as desired, “deep background”, meaning the reporter can’t even vaguely describe you (usually identifying you as “the
Anything that goes against what the corporate powers that be is demonized and twisted into a different form through their media outlets to create something that the ill-informed will swallow it no questions asked. Anyone that speaks out against what is obviously wrong with the system is turned into an enemy, while the one’s violating our rights and freedoms are treated like benevolent kings. Recently there have been many successful efforts to subjugate the poorer voters in this country. These measures have passed and it will become difficult for poorer and elderly people to vote in this country. The reason for this is simple, poor people and minorities are more likely to vote for Obama in the coming election and they have more numbers than those that will not.
Given that most voters are misinformed and political uneducated, a polarized democracy helps voters better understand who they giving their support to. Voters will better relate with a party if they have solid extreme values, opposed to a party that moves towards the middle in attempt to attract new voters. The public becomes more invested in the beliefs of the party. Voters also engage in supporting the campaigns by donating or even putting a yard sign up. Action like those, help promote and increase political awareness in communities.