Americans have themselves to blame for, quite often, voting for a divided Government that make governance more difficult and more contentious.
My candid Advice to them to easily avoid that debacle or Cul de Sac by giving a comfortable majority in both Houses of Congress to their preferred candidate or Party in every Election.
Some might argue that the suggestion is not feasible or advisable in an ideal Democracy but anybody suggesting that is not telling the truth.
The ultimate purpose and goal of Democracy need not be a divided Government where the good intentions of the President can be easily neutralized or held up by divided Government like what obtains right now when the Republican Party holds the majority in the Lower Chamber by a few votes and the Democrats in the Senate by 50 to 49 or 48 at a time the two parties don’t want to work together in the spirit of cooperation and collaboration and at a time when one or both of the leaders of the two dominant Parties want to divide and rule like Donald Trump wants to do as a narcissist who thinks he is wiser and smarter than the leader of the other Party as he likes to take undue advantage of the other Party.
The observation has made it difficult to have important legislations or confirmation by the Senate Chamber done in a timely fashion where such legislations or Bills require no less than 60 out of 100 senators to pass.
Nothing gets done if neither of the two parties has a comfortable majority to carry out its legislative agenda without relying too much or expecting some help from the other party
Gone were those days when senators or legislators in the spirit of collaboration and cooperation would cross party lines to support legislations offered or initiated by the opposing party. It is now every party for itself and God for them all.
Senators like the late John McCain and current President Joe Biden were the last vestiges of senators who would cross party lines to do what is right because they are great patriots and they put their country’s interest above their own unlike Donald Trump who was rightly psycho- analyzed by President Bill Clinton when he counted the number of times Mr. Trump has used the word “I” and the word “me” in every speech he makes.
Donald Trump was saved from impeachment twice not because he did not commit the crimes he was accused of, but only because his Party has used its slim majority in the Senate at the time to help him escape justice and to cover up for him.
The Senate Rule at the time had called for 67 to vote yes but only 57 out of 100 were open and available to vote yes so the motion to remove him had failed and Donald Trump was left off the hook even though they all knew he was as guilty as Hell.
The Democrats simply did not have enough votes in the Senate to remove Trump from office.
If the American voters want their Government to function properly and maximally, they would need the President’s Party to have a comfortable majority in the Senate, if not in the Lower Chamber to remove or discipline the President.
If they don’t have the vote, there is little they can do to get their job done in both Houses but more so in the US Senate Chamber in particular.
There is a very little chance for any President to be able to pass meaningful legislations if his or her Party does not have a workable and comfortable majority in the Congress and if he or she is not able to persuade enough members of the other Party in both Houses to vote for his sponsored legislations.
The British Parliamentary System in the UK has a better appreciation of this conditionality more than the American System.
A simple majority in the House of Commons in Westminster is all that is needed for any Prime Minister to lose or win a vote of no confidence which might compel him or her to resign and to call for another election in a few months after losing the vote of confidence on the floor of the House of Commons.
The British System is viewed as better than the American Presidential System in that sense or context, if you see what I see.
One could even argue that the American System is not strictly speaking an ideal Democracy for that and one other reason I would now address with the remaining paragraphs of this article, if you bear with me.
How for goodness sake can a democratically -elected candidate win the popular vote by 1 to 10 or 12 million votes based on a one-man-one-vote precept which is what Democracy is all about, and still be denied his or her victory, if he loses in the Electoral College Contraption of only 570 handpicked electors.
Donald Trump had lost the popular vote in 2016 to Hillary Clinton by 3 million votes but had managed thru subterfuge to win the Electoral College tally by a narrow margin out of 570 and was proclaimed the winner by fluke.
It makes no sense to me. The whole purpose of conducting the popular vote election is defeated since the Electoral College tally is what ultimately determines who wins or loses the Presidency in America. The Electoral College Collegeis a decoy to permanently keep power in the hands of a particular group on interest in America
I am aware that is what the American Constitution stipulates but my point here is that it is insane and totally wrong in my opinion to set aside the outcome of the popular vote, as if it was an abberation and to settle for the outdated Electoral College Abracadabra which has outlived its usefulness as I have argued repeatedly in all of my past articles challenging the validity of the Electoral College in a full- fledged Democracy like America, the so-called Leader of the Free World.
America ought to settle for the words of wisdom as crafted by the World’s greatest teacher Socrates when he said that “Anything made by man and even things made by God can be infinite ly improved”
The American Constitution is man-made and therefore can be infinitely improved.
Super-imposing the Electoral College over and above the outcome of the popular vote in American Presidential System is a misnomer in my view.
It is a flawed and faulty improvisation by ordinary mortals who were called the Founding Fathers.
The Constitution was not written by God and it ought to have been revisited and amended a long time ago.
That device or provision was probably legit or rational prior to 1776 when the founding fathers had crafted the Constitution but it has since outlived its usefulness at this time and age and it ought to have been amended is what I am suggesting now.
I could be wrong but that is my opinion and I stand by it.
I rest my case.
Share your story or advertise with us: Whatsapp: +2347068606071 Email: info@newspotng.com
