Idaho conservatives are trying to set the date of life beginning *way* before conception

[Trunkage]

Eh, the current regime in Australia is particularly bad, though, going back to the good old days of competent evil will be a plus. Or even the good old days of when Abbott was in charge.

Imagine Dutton getting in

 

[Hawki]

The level of sheer intransigence in the American system is not inherent to how government works, though. Countless (democratic) governments around the world still manage to achieve legislative progress that makes the American legislature look utterly paralysed.

Let's not pretend this mire is unavoidable. It ain't.

Isn't a key difference though that the US is effectively a two party system?

I mean, lots of democracies usually have a government and opposition, but there's usually a crossbench as well, to use Westminster terminology. With the US, far as I can tell, the Libertarians have some representation, and other groups like the Greens and DemSocs are non-entities.

 

[Silvanus]

Isn't a key difference though that the US is effectively a two party system?

I mean, lots of democracies usually have a government and opposition, but there's usually a crossbench as well, to use Westminster terminology. With the US, far as I can tell, the Libertarians have some representation, and other groups like the Greens and DemSocs are non-entities.

I don't think it's that. I don't see why that would make it easier to pass legislation; the governing party would still need to either have the numbers in the legislature itself, or be able to appeal to sufficient numbers from the opposition. That obstacle is the same.

In the US I think the system is generally gamed in favour of the opposition. The government needs 2/3 in some scenarios in order to pass a bill, meaning a weak opposition can effectively block legislation. But also, the grotesquely unrepresentative nature of of Senate means that the Republicans have an enormous advantage there.

 

[Trunkage]

I don't think it's that. I don't see why that would make it easier to pass legislation; the governing party would still need to either have the numbers in the legislature itself, or be able to appeal to sufficient numbers from the opposition. That obstacle is the same.

In the US I think the system is generally gamed in favour of the opposition. The government needs 2/3 in some scenarios in order to pass a bill, meaning a weak opposition can effectively block legislation. But also, the grotesquely unrepresentative nature of of Senate means that the Republicans have an enormous advantage there.

Just a nit-pick. It's actually 3/5. It used to be 2/3 before '75 I think. I also changed during WW2 and (non-president yet) LBJ restored it to 2/3. So the timeline is all wibbly wobbly

This might be also deemed irrelevant because there was way more cloture votes after '75 than the 200 years before. In fact, most single years after '75 had more filibuster than the whole of the 200 years prior.