Display:
When the US has a split government there is slow progress or deadlock quite frequently. With a single party in control we rapidly slide into all sorts of excesses, as the current situation shows.

I can't imagine what it is like to get anything done when a parliament has so many factions. I would be interested in hearing about how progress is made with such a divided electorate.

Policies not Politics
---- Daily Landscape

by rdf (robert.feinman@gmail.com) on Tue May 30th, 2006 at 01:00:39 PM EST
Absolute majorities like the one we have now are basically a "carte blanche".
Even with a split parliament like this, since the biggest party has more deputies then all the opposition together, they do what they want, whithin the confines of the constitution and ideally according to their ellectoral platform. After 4 years, the voters have theor saying, of course.

When you dont have one single party or cohalition in these conditios things become more negotiated.
Minority governments tend to be short lived, though, like happened with Barroso, and his successor, Santana Lopes.

by Torres on Tue May 30th, 2006 at 01:24:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Simple: parties hammer out a coalition agreement or agree on terms of an outside support of a minority government.

It is actually not that different from your situation. Imagine coalition parties as different platforms within the Democratic resp. Republican parties.

On the other hand, it is different, IMO inasmuch that those party platforms in the US are more like power groups, not democratically voted on, and thus the US congress doesn't show the true diversity of opinion in the electorate - which also shows in the low voter turnout.

*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.

by DoDo on Tue May 30th, 2006 at 01:24:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series