Checks and balances at its best, or partisan obstructionism of the worst kind?

In my recent introductory lessons on the US Constitution, we touched on the various powers held by the different branches of government, in particular the numerous checks the Senate has over the President. As this article in today’s New York Times shows, it is not always such a good thing.

21 of Obama’s nominees are still awating Senate confirmation, in a move by Republicans which can only be described as, quite frankly, petty. As the article points out of holds on nominations, “Used legitimately, they can buy time to clear up unanswered questions about a nominee’s qualifications”, but in this case there no such issues- only partisan differences and non-issues.

Whilst students usually appreciate that at least superficially America avoids our ‘elective dictatorship’ scenario, gridlock is also a similarl problem for an efficient democracy.

Comments