parliamentary parties

Jack Balkin, in his blog, balkinization.blogspot.com, has posted a discussion of the problems in our government that touches on several of the issues I am concerned with. It is nice to know that I am not alone with these concerns. The direction of his discussion, however, ends up being rather defeatist in that he basically in the end supports the way things are, the status quo.

Balkin argues that our current problems have their source in his idea that the two parties, and especially the Republicans, have become parliamentary parties, parties that control the government through their control of the legislature. Such parties work well in a parliamentary system, he maintains, but they do not work well in a Presidential system, which is what the US has. Trying to be parliamentary in a presidential system is for him pathological. In particular he maintains that an opposition parliamentary party such as what the Republicans are now, is able to "attempt to force the wheels of government to grind to a halt," in order to embarrass and denigrate the majority party for not doing its job.

I agree that our present government is pathological in his terms. For me it has always been pathological. Balkin claims that our government has not been similarly pathological since the period just before the Civil War but this only ignores other expressions of pathology such as the corruption in the Senate in the late 1800s, the floundering when the Depression came, before FDR took over, the Civil Rights Movement in the 60s, the Vietnam War, and on and on.

Balkin's solution to what he sees as pathology is no more than a stopgap measure while he waits for the world to change more toward his liking. He suggests that the Senate change its rules so that it eliminates the filibuster and holds on appointments. "This would allow government to function passably well until such time as the parties became more ideologically diverse."

To me this is wishful thinking, no more. What if the parties never become "ideologically diverse"? Then what? Successful parties, like any other organization, become successful by being more organized, more disciplined, more focused, not by being less organized, less disciplined, less focused. The future of parties in this country, as has already happened in most other countries, is toward more ideological focus, not less.

If this is true, then the solution to the pathology in the US government will have to be more drastic. If parties are becoming more parliamentary, then the government will have to change to accommodate the parliamentary form. It will not be enough to just change the rules of the Senate and hope for the best. For me the change necessary is to completely subordinate the Senate to the House by changing the rules of the House with regard to its interaction with the Senate.