Skip to main content

View Diary: Wow Jerry Brown. Wow. (207 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  True, but: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    codairem, trumpeter, Scientician

    In a sense, the executive and legislative branches were deliberately set up to keep an eye on each other.  That's why the democratically elected legislature's laws need the democratically elected executive's consent.  To be quite honest, the fact that the two branches are often at loggerheads reflects the reality that the voting population has self-contradicting priorities.  

    I should add that the original Articles of Confederation did not have an executive veto, and this was found to be a problem (one among many).

    Hamilton himself argues (F 73) that a president's use of veto powers would be tempered by his eventual need to be re-elected; that is, if the people are upset with his decision, out he goes.  So if his priorities go against those of his electors, he'll learn soon enough.  

    As for the Roman Republic... ancient Rome, like all societies of any wealth before 1950 or so, was marked by high income and wealth inequality; the availability of a veto is not a factor.  That said, the veto power of the tribunes was matched with their ability to propose legislature (to the Plebeian Assembly).  Given that this assembly represented only the Roman 99%, tribunes did try to address social issues, though they were often stymied by the Senate or the Army.  A very famous tribune was Tiberius Gracchus, whose land redistribution reform led to his eventual assassination.  

    Conservatives need to realize that their Silent Moral Majority is neither silent, nor moral, nor a majority.

    by nominalize on Mon Oct 01, 2012 at 11:30:04 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site