California testing limits of the American form of government

Sacramento Bee ^ | 1/24/5 | Dan Walters

[SmithL]

Those who created the American system of government, and encased it in the U.S. Constitution, were attempting to balance two equally insidious forces - tyranny and chaos.

They had fought a revolution to escape the former, but had experienced the latter in the years following the war under the too-weak Articles of Confederation. The Constitution, therefore, embodied what were called "checks and balances," creating a stronger central government but diffusing its authority among two legislative branches, a separately elected presidency and an independent judiciary.

The structure reflected the belief, as James Madison states it in the Federalist Papers, that "The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny."

Despite our example, other democracies that emerged during the 19th and 20th centuries, including those in Europe and in neighboring Canada, tended toward the parliamentary system, in which the party or coalition controlling the legislative branch also names the executive.

There are crucial differences between the two, the most important being the parliamentary system's concentration of power and responsibility - the antithesis of the decentralized American system. In a parliamentary government, such as Tony Blair's administration in Great Britain, the governing party has an absolute mandate to act and cannot pass the buck.

[SierraWasp]

"The Sacramento Bee is a distant third in influence."

For a fraction of a second, I thought you had left the "h" out of "third!"

[SierraWasp]

Well... I was certainly before Jesse Unruh decided that CA needed a "full-time" legislature, don'tcha think???

(I know... I know... That answer was way too flip!!!)

(But your question was way too rhetorical!!!)(grin)

[hedgetrimmer]

This writer continually advocates regional government and is now asking to have our constitutional government replaced by a parlimentary system. I am appalled that the editor publishes his columns without a disclaimer that the man's suggestions are unconsititutional.

By not disclaiming this man, the newspaper is tacitly agreeing to overthrow our constitutional government.

[snopercod]

Speaking of rhetorical questions, can Ahhhnold declare a state of emergency due to the stupidity of the voters in California?

[SierraWasp]

I'm still not sure if either Gray Devious or A. Schwarzenrenegger have rescinded the emergency Davis issued during the energy crisis!!!

[dalereed]

"Would a parliamentary system count?"

Hell No!

[SierraWasp]

I just knew you'd clear things up!!! (grin)

[forester]

I agree.

[eldoradude]

Didn't you mean fecestrocracy?

[SierraWasp]

Well, that's for the REALLY feckless and reckless!!!

[snopercod]

I'm pretty sure the emergency powers lapsed. As of March 28, 2002, they were still in effect, but they had to be renewed month-by-month, and Ahhnold simply let them lapse. I think.

[SierraWasp]

Hey! What is that cryptic name attributed at the end of your tagline? Are you quoting someone from the Bagavavita, or what ever ya calls that ancient south-asian Hindoo scripture???

Dave Letterman says his heart surgeon, Dr. Vinne Boom Botts, trained at the Bagavavita University School of Mejahcine! (just kidding)

[mrsmith]

Thank you.

Just some helpful threads and many that were "classic" IMHO.

[SierraWasp]

I don't know if you've ever gone to Washington, and I hope you don't take offense, but if you look at you screen name, at first it looks like mrs mith, then mr smith, then back the other way again... just one of them optickle illusions. (grin)