While legislative logjam is causing major domestic issues, the consequences of Washington's gridlock are increasingly globalized. The result is a poorer, more dangerous world.
I've often joked with my US friends (disclosure - I'm a Brit) that the rest of the world deserves a vote in US elections. The reality is not so funny.
The fact is the lives of citizens in other countries, including major powers like France and the UK, are impacted as much, and sometimes more, by the conduct of US administrations than by their own governments.
It's said that when the US sneezes the world catches a cold. You need only look at the performance of G20 economies in the aftermath of the recession. The US tripped the world into recession due to a bursting housing bubble followed by a banking blow up. After a nasty dip look how the US has now powered away, leaving other economies still picking up the pieces, not least my own, the UK, which only this week reported GDP surpassing '08 levels.
Now indecision and inaction across a range of conflicts is creating a power vacuum that's endangering global security.
Around the world terrorist groups, rogue states and, perhaps most concerning, China and Russia, are emboldened. Most recently Russia has been testing the fence in Ukraine.
Every time an act of aggression goes unchallenged the confidence of these groups and countries grows. And of course the longer it continues the harder it is to contain.
I've grown up in a period of US hegemony. And while there's limitless scope for criticising this situation, the alternatives are looking much worse.
The trouble is, the government of the World's policeman is elected on hyper-local, often ephemeral issues. Of course that's the case in most national elections and I won't kid you that Tina in Tallahassee, FL is any less worldly than Mandy in Manchester, UK. The difference is Tina's vote has a direct impact on the global economy and global security, where Mandy's does not. Indeed, sometimes Tina's vote can have more impact on the lives Mandy and her mates in Manchester than it does on herself and her buddies in Florida.
So what to do? Well, what if all non-US citizens get a vote? Not a full vote, perhaps 1% of a vote. So 100 non-Americans = 1 American.
Since the end of the cold war the US has been the unchallenged world leader. I'm happy with that, and long may it continue (I'm a self confessed yankophile), but if there's to be a world leader how come only one country gets to choose it's representatives? Right now those voters seem to be doing a pretty lousy job.