Volume 34 Issue 6
May  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
LIU Xiao-zhou. Checks and Balances and the “Vetocracy” Dilemma of American Democracy: A Study of American Democratic Efficiency from the Perspective of Institutional Costs[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 34(6): 87-94.
Citation: LIU Xiao-zhou. Checks and Balances and the “Vetocracy” Dilemma of American Democracy: A Study of American Democratic Efficiency from the Perspective of Institutional Costs[J]. Journal of University of Science and Technology Beijing ( Social Sciences Edition), 2018, 34(6): 87-94.

Checks and Balances and the “Vetocracy” Dilemma of American Democracy: A Study of American Democratic Efficiency from the Perspective of Institutional Costs

  • Received Date: 2018-08-07
    Available Online: 2021-05-22
  • A system of checks and balances is the basic institutional arrangement of American democratic politics.It plays an important role in preventing political tyranny,balancing diversified interests and enhancing decision-making prudence.However, this institutional arrangement requires sacrificing decision-making efficiency.In recent years, the views of the two major political parties—the Democrats and the Republicans—have become polarized.The presidency and the two houses of Congress are often controlled by different parties.The antagonism between the political parties has resulted in a “vetocracy.” The benefits of the American government's decentralized system have decreased,while the costs have risen remarkably.This has caused the operation of American democracy and state governance to be negatively impacted.To solve this problem,in theory,we can adopt the idea of reducing the opposition of the political parties without touching the institutional arrangement of checks and balances.We also can adopt the institutional reform paths of adjusting the legislative checks and balances between the U.S.Senate,the House of Representatives and the President, or changing the presidential system to a parliamentary system.In reality, the possibility of changing the institutional arrangement of checks and balances is very unlikely-unless institutional costs rise to a point that American society cannot afford.

     

  • loading
  • [1]
    [美]汉密尔顿,杰伊,麦迪逊.联邦党人文集[M].程逢如,在汉,舒逊译.北京:商务印书馆,1980.
    [2]
    [美]格伦·贝克.常识——反对一个失控的美国[M].徐红燕译.北京:法律出版社,2010.
    [3]
    Partisan Polarization Surges in Bush,Obama Years[EB/OL].(2012-06-04)[2018-07-28].http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/partisan-polarization-surgesin-bush-obama-years/.
    [4]
    [美]弗朗西斯·福山.政治秩序与政治衰败:从工业革命到民主全球化[M].毛俊杰译.桂林:广西师范大学出版社,2015.
    [5]
    [美]弗朗西斯·福山.衰败的美利坚——政治制度失灵的根源[EB/OL].(2014-10-12)[2018-06-18].http://www.guancha.cn/fu-lang-xi-si-fu-shan/2014_10_12_275200.shtml.
    [6]
    [法]邦雅曼·贡斯当.古代人的自由与现代人的自由——贡斯当政治论文选[C].阎克文、刘满贵译.上海:上海人民出版社,2003.
    [7]
    Large Majorities See Checks and Balances,Right to Protest as Essential for Democracy[EB/OL].(2017-03-02)[2018-06-18].http://www.people-press.org/2017/03/02/large-majorities-see-checks-and-balancesright-to-protest-as-essential-for-democracy/.
    [8]
    [美]列奥·施特劳斯.古典政治理性主义的重生——施特劳斯思想入门[C].郭振华,叶然译.北京:华夏出版社,2011.
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Article Metrics

    Article views (448) PDF downloads(3) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return