The American government: Deliberate will of the people
Most countries give their citizens the ultimate right to decide what is good for their country; however, the American government practices a different type of rule where the majority views do not necessarily overrule the minority. Consensus takes most of the decisions made by the American government (Sandoz 109). In the consensus system of democracy, the people in leadership discuss on the decisions that face them and review the possible courses of action viable for the prevailing situations. A decision on what suits the situation best comes from the agreement among the leaders without consulting the elected members or conducting a majority check. The American traditions do not provide for the full use of people’s freedom and views in the decisions that the government takes. In most cases, the government makes decisions based on the common good of the nation. The will of the people should however, drive the decisions of any government and all steps taken must reflect what the people desire. The paper evaluates some of the American laws that do not pressure the American government to sort the will of the people in its decisions with the view of bringing them to light for possible review and betterment.
The American government derives the consensus system of leadership from the constitution, which shows bias in operation and decision-making processes. In most of the parts in the constitution, the government gets many checks, balances and provisions that grant it overriding powers enabling it make some crisis and consensus decisions. Consensus democracy requires that the law should permit some necessary delays and prolonged debates with the aim of promoting deliberation, negotiation, and broad based compromise of the decisions tabled by any party. However, the American constitution calls for prompt decision-making and any delays will likely put the executive under pressure and scrutiny. This makes the executive seek measures of avoiding delays; thus, resort to the snapshot decisions.
According to Anderson et al. (68), the America government has three independent organs involved in policy making that include the senate, the presidency, and the House of Representatives. In the design of American laws, separation of powers among the organs rules the minds of most of the policy and legal matters. In this respect, little consideration goes to the processes, which should come into force when the laws and other decision-making processes deem necessary. Citizens do not feature anywhere in the decisions of the government hence the anthropological will of the people does not surface in most of the decisions. Most of the decisions made by the central government operate authoritatively and in most cases, the will of the people does not reflect in them. On the demand of rule by the will of the people highlights the base upon which anthropology and democracy lean. The government should permit the consensus democracy and participative democracy so that the people participate in decision-making.
The structure of the American government, as stipulated in the constitution, provides that the three organs of government must protect the rights of the minority; thus, preconditioned acceptance rules most of the decisions taken by the government. Simple majority does not take the decisions all the time unless the conditions set for acceptance come into full force. According to Sandoz (109), the rigidity of the constitution gives the base of all the brutality from the policy makers. Implementation of policies, which appear controversial at the face of their structure, deems increasingly unlikely in the American system of government because the simple majority rule does not pass a bill unless the conditions set for acceptance come into force. In order to change the rules to accommodate majority acceptance, the legislators have to go through tougher scrutiny and in rare circumstances, the integrity of the legislators can face scrutiny. All the arms of the government thus find it relevant to stick to the consensus decision-making that may not be pleasing to the simple majority. The will of the people does not reflect in most of the decisions unlike in other democracies that permit simple majority operation.
The American constitution provides that the minority party in both the senate and the House of Representatives protect the rights of the minority. In this case, the majority must consult them in order to have major decisions passed. In as much as some of the decisions may be good for the majority of the citizens promulgated through their representatives, any flaw noticed by the minority invalidates all of them. Nielsen (26) argues that the consultative legislation system provides that the majority must consult the minority to get the consensus before passing the laws (Sandoz 109). However, some legislation requires immediate action hence they should be adopted with haste. In most of the urgent legislations, the government does not have enough time to go into consultations, which may render the country problematic. The consensus system of democracy fails because the will of the majority may be standing for the good of the whole country, yet it cannot be passed fast and there are some delays in the process of coming up with a compromised decision. Such flaws expose the government hence the will of people never rules in the right times like in an emergency where it should rule.
According to Stanton (140), the presidential veto slows down the decision making process among the different arms of the central government. All the laws made in the United States have to get approval from the president in order for them to be valid and enforceable. The president has the choice to reject any piece of decision as long as he/she have the backing of some law of the country. Any basis upon which the president draws precedence to reject a piece of legislation becomes the ultimate defence to his/her actions. Some decisions and legislations pass by an absolute majority and very few people may oppose them. However, if the president finds any legal reason to reject them, the will of the majority subsides at the decision of an individual.
The government system in the United States functions on consensus with the view of blocking quick decisions and policies by the majority. All policies and decisions in the United States must come because of consensus and explicit discussions among the parties concerned by the law. The party that wins elections in America gets the majority in most of the houses if not all of them. If this dominance does not get the relevant checks and balances, some legislation may come into force that does not reflect the views of all the people. Consensus democracy in America ensures that the decisions arrived at bind to all the people whether the majority or the minority through exclusive and inclusive discussions (Anderson et al. 68). In many dimensions, the legislative system in America ranks among the best, especially in its quest to protect the minority. Many nations’ legal systems do not provide for the minority hence the views passed reflect the majority decisions. However, review seems necessary for some parts of the legislative process in order to deal with unique cases. In some cases like emergency cases, the law must provide for some way of arriving at a solution faster than the prolonged discussions involved in the consensus democracy. Under such cases, majority rule could apply. In essence, the consensus democracy deems best for the minority but delays most of the decisions and the will of the people face the wrath of ignorance in the name of minority protection.
Works cited
Anderson, Christopher J., and Christine A. Guillory. "Political Institutions and Satisfaction with Democracy: A Cross-National Analysis of Consensus and Majoritarian Systems." The American Political Science Review 91.1 (1997): 66-81. ProQuest. Web. 29 Apr. 2013.
Nielsen, Annika Porsborg, Jesper Lassen, and Peter Sandøe. "Democracy at its Best? the Consensus Conference in a Cross-National Perspective." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 20.1 (2007): 13-35. ProQuest. Web. 29 Apr. 2013.
Sandoz, Ellis. A Government of Laws: Political Theory, Religion, and the American Founding. Columbia, Mo: University of Missouri Press, 2001. Print.
Stanton, Evans. The Theme Is Freedom: Religion, Politics, and the American Tradition. Regnery Publishing, 1996. Print
