I'm getting tired of the heavy criticism being leveled at the American political system. It's fashionable to label our government as broken and outdated; many are suggesting that we adopt European-style reforms. At least one author thinks we're fine (read below). What do you think?
It's good news that government is stalled
I agree with the author that our system of government is not broken. I like how the author sees the stalling of the government as something positive while others see is as something negative. From this stalling out on certain issues, it becomes a topic of national attention on these issues, which as the author of this article stated is the design of the Founder's design. It is quite important that crucial issues are not passed so easily such as health care and entitlement reform. These issues should take time and be thoroughly thought out. I personally would not like it if the pros and cons were not thought out carefully through and would make me feel that the government is not very competent. I would rather have a government that causes debates since it helps make conversation and find any potential consequences that make come from bad design. Also the government is not going to stall out on every issue. We are all American and are likely to have some similarities in our views. Only on major issues are we going to have these stalling outs by filibusters.
ReplyDelete-Ethan Groenow
Period 3
I believe that the author of this article has a good point: without the debate over the issues we have in this country, no type of progress would be made. However, there are still many problems that the government seems to be unable to compromise on, despite all of the debate that is going on. To me, it seems as though we have learned very little about the mistakes that we have made in the past, because it some cases it looks like we make the same mistake again. Our government, when dealing with certain issues, doesn't seem like it is willing to look passed their difference of opinion and belief and think about what may be best for the country as a whole. I would say that we have gotten better in some areas, but there will always be areas that we can improve on as a nation, such as the way we communicate with each other.
ReplyDelete-Sonya Sexton p.3
I agree with the author when he says that our country is still experiencing growing pains. i think that we as a people have to step up and decide what we really want for our country. The gov't is often to undecided in the course of action.
ReplyDeleteEric Yang- Per.3
I do agree with the author that our government is not broken therefore we should not switch to a European style government. Of course there will be kinks and problems but our government as a whole is not a broken system. The way things have been going as of late, arguments will always occur but it is pretty extreme to say that our national government is broken.
ReplyDeleteMichael Sewell
Period 3
The author of this article does bring up a good point when he states that our government is not broken it is just slow and maybe being slow is a good thing so that the decision same that the government makes will be thorough and what is best for the people. But what has that accomplished we have made very little progress from our past mistakes. So as a government we have come far in some ways but we still have far to go. Yes we should make things difficult to pass that we way when they do it is the right decision but we should not make it impossible for things to get done.
ReplyDeleteMaddison Cannon
P.3
I am content with our government taking the time to make thoughtful decision on certain issues and think them careful threw and consider the pros and cons of that decision can have on the American people such as healthcare just like the author said in the article, again these pains and groins he recalls to is saying that there some areas were we need to improve on.
ReplyDeleteChristian Gonzales P.2
Before reading this article I thought that our government was flawed and never got anything done due to the reason that the two major party's opinions keep getting in the way. Now I realize that the framers intended to create a slow government.A government that is thoughtful and careful with every move made. With the two major party's opinion in the middle it causes debates creating conversations that give a better understanding of the subjects at hand. So i agree with the author that our government is not broken but its intentionally slow.
ReplyDeleteAnani Sandoval
period 2
I share the same opinion as the author, that our government is not broken because it's working how it was intended to. Though some feel that Washington being stalled is a bad sign, but I feel as though it is reassuring because it means that they are taking their time to think about topics that could affect the people of the United States. But it is tragic that on some, or most, topics, both parties are not willing to look past their differences and think about the nation as a whole and how it would affect us. Though that is just another one of the obstacles that the country will have to jump over in order to continue to develop as the years progress.
ReplyDelete-Alyssa Gutierrez P.3
The author is certainly right when he says that our government is not broken. It is actually a good thing that things move more slowly so major decisions are not rushed or made by a government dominated by one party. Division in government is not something to be worried about. It is expected and planned for by the Framers. Major issues will never get solved quickly as there are too many different viewpoints to try and please. Washington is not broken but only slow which can be a good thing at times.
ReplyDelete-Daniel Salib
Period 2 :)
The author has a valid viewpoint, so much that some of the reasons given that prove why government is stalled rather than broken has swayed me to partly change the way I viewed our system. The government is indeed slow at making progress with certain issues, but as the article mentioned, this system relies on the peoples' action as well. Many people have disagreements and criticize some aspects of government, however if they do decide to take initiative and move issues along, eventually their voices will be heard and the government will move accordingly. If the government simply rushed into decisions and acted as it pleased, the people would still be discontent. The government wasn't built for speed, it was built to deliver quality solutions.
ReplyDeleteAnnelise Lee
Period 2
I agree with the author's opinion that our government is not broken it is just stalled. This process was purposely created by the founders and is accomplishing what it was intended to do: slowly try to understand and obtain the needs of the American citizens. However, our government has accomplished little and there is still much to overcome. The stalling of our government regulates quick decisions on policies like healthcare and ensures all Americans will be taken into account.
ReplyDelete-Katelynn DeVille p.2
The title says it all. "Stalled, not broken." Too many people have the mentality that it is bad for something to take long in Washington. What ever happened to the saying "slow and steady wins the race?" Americans are to accustomed to things being handed to them in little or no time at all. Washington isn't a drive-through, things don't just happen in a matter of minutes. If anything, being slow is a good thing because it means legislators and government officials are being thorough in their work. However, There will be obstacles along the way due to difference in opinion between democrats and republicans. Both parties will continue to have different views on various issues and therefore it will take longer for the government to be able to function.
ReplyDeleteJustin Acuna P.2.
DeleteI think our government is somewhat find the way it is currently. By ensuring that there is always a side opposing the other it makes it harder to pass important bills and laws that would have otherwise simply been passed without thinking if there was one ruling party. It also allows us to see problems we other wise would not have noticed and our flaws with some systems. Of course having every issue end in a stalemate or unresolved will eventually have its consequences. It's important to remember the mistakes and problems of the past in order to move onto and create a better future.
ReplyDeleteJett Colot Period.3
Calling the government "broken" may seem a little extreme because after all it has been, for a majority, successful it its endeavors. People may jump to conclusions and call the government broken because it is harder for average citizens to see the government's point of view. It is also because people's lives nowadays are very fast-paced so when people are expecting a change, and it doesn’t happen immediately they become upset. The author made a good point that the government is indeed "stalled" meaning that it does get things done, but are just slower at it. This reduced speed is due to debates, disagreements, and discussions. Personally I am content with this these debates because they bring up possible mishaps that could happen with that idea and the downfalls of it. Since it is are taking more time government can be sure that what they are doing is truly what they people are asking for. As the author said their job is to work together not to be individually successful but for the greater good of the people. The truth of the matter is government is always going to be criticized whether they are fast or slow. Compare government to a student. Would you want one that does their work in 5 minutes sloppily with multiple mistakes or one that takes time on their assignment checking back for errors? Therefore whether government is fast or slow it is the aftermath of their actions that really matter.
ReplyDeleteChristina Dang
Period 3
I believe the our government, the way it is, helps most people's point of views to be expressed and taken into account. Even though the process by which bills are passed is slow, and I personally feel frustrated with this, this is the best way to have all types of people give their position on an issue and hope that everyone giving their opinion has the interest of the people in mind, not there own. The Framers wanted to keep the majority from dominating the minorities and federalism is one of the ways to limit the majority's power.
ReplyDelete-Alejandro Martinez Per. 2
I do not think that our government is broken and do believe that we are just going through a time of growth, not deterioration. In some ways it is better there are not rash decisions that happen without some kind of timely debate, but I agree with the author that they take more time than needed at certain points. Republicans and Democrats will hardly ever agree on something but in order to get issues resolved and keep the general public happy they're going to have to find a happy medium. More than likely these things will not happen though, so at this point it’s probably best to not make a big deal about something that has never been any different.
ReplyDeletePr. 2
The government is working as it is intended to work. people will always disagree in a democracy and they will argue and arguments take time and things will be stalled. If people don't like the fact that our government is so slow to act then they should take action to change the government but until then everything is working just as its intended to. The federal government is made up of people and people are extremely fallible and they will argue, bicker and try to stop the other side from passing a bill even if it's reasonable just because they want things to be there way. The government is not broken it's just weak as it is intended to be.
ReplyDeleteChloe Ennis P.3
I agree with the author when he says that this government is not broken, because it isn't. It is stalled. Many are so quick to call the government "broken" when in reality, many are just most likely upset that maybe things aren't getting done as fast as they would like. They see this as a bad thing. Personally, I think it's good that our government is "stalled' and slow. The reasons it is is because we take time to debate and discuss something before we act, preventing any mishaps or passing any unthought laws or regulations. Like what the author said, "Without this debate...we wouldn't be having a national discussion about the long-term sustainability of ballooning entitlements. We wouldn't recognize the crisis of our exploding federal deficit. And we wouldn't acknowledge the need for fiscal restraint and responsibility...In the end, a slow, restrained government is a more thoughtful, careful, and hopefully good, government". This makes a good point, I think. It is good that our government takes the time to think things out to ensure, or at least try to ensure, the best for our country.
ReplyDelete-Alexis Jimenez
Deleteperiod 3
I agree and disagree with the author. i do see the importance of making it nearly impossible for a faction to gain power and tyrannize America, but which is more important, avoiding tyranny or gridlock? The author quotes two pieces of legislature that were passed with our previous/ present congress but is that enough to accomplish the true reform America needs? i dont think two major changes per congressional class is enough to really make a difference.
ReplyDelete-julian narvaez
I agree with the author that our system of government is not broken. A government that stalls on issues brings more attention to it which causes policy makers to make decisions that are best for the nation. Stalling also prevents government officials from making decisions that would only benefit them.
ReplyDeleteMostofa Ahmed
Period 2
The government is working fine on many issues, especially those that the public does not see. However, on the issues that the media focus their attention on--lgbtq+ rights, immigration, abortion, policy brutality, gun laws, etc.-- it becomes stalled. Many factions take strong stances on a specific issue and the media focuses on those ideals. They are inhibiting the process of government, making it almost impossible to make a change without offending a just as equally publicized faction on the other side of the issue. To an average citizen who is moderate, the government does seem broken. They will find it impossible to take a stance on any issues because factions have cause parties to take extreme views on issues the media deems important. This, in a way, makes the government broken.
ReplyDeleteSophia Landaverde
Period 3
I have to agree with the author, that slow and thoughtful government is not "broken" government. Stalling important policies like health care and taxes is important, as it allows the politicians to think and not act out of impulse, but out of morality. This slow, government system also makes sure that not one faction can sweep over the other party and get what it wants (as it did 2008-2010), and the people already lashed out against a fast, impulsive form of government with another divided government. Allowing the government to think and gain thoughts about different issues and policies is what the framers intended the government to be like; the government isn't and never has been broken.
ReplyDeleteBlake Perchez
Period 3
Even before I read this article I had learned, and believed that the goverment, as intended by the Framers is a very slow gruesome progress. The way this author flipped it from the way the people see it as "broken" to a "more thoughtful, careful, and hopefully good, government.".Which in my opinion is very true and i completly agree with the author on his postion. Just because the majority of the people dont get what they want based on each individual views and because it is a long process it doesnt mean it is broken. BUT it does mean that the rules, which many do not even know about, and benefits for the citizens that are passed are thorough, and carefully thought over.
ReplyDeleteMelissa Cabrera
P.3
I had been frustrated at the rate at which our government accomplishes things, but after reading this article I do agree with the author that our system of government is not broken and that being stalled can be a positive thing. Our government is working as it was intended to- slowly. It is a good thing that we are slow to pass legislature because it means that we are taking the time to thoroughly debate and discuss an issue from all perspectives in order to make the best decision, as opposed to a rash, biased one.
ReplyDeleteDarian Kuhn
Period 3
I don't entirely agree with the author. The reason why is because i agree that some parts of government are stalled, but some are just broken and we need to accept that. The author seems to be getting his information for big interests and lobbyists and not quite everyone's opinion of course. The author uses the word improve as if there is something that needs to be fixed or that needs to be at the next level. This to me comes off as something that is already broken not stalled. I think the author should have just stayed with the argument of reform, which is a much better word. The examples they give from Obama Care to the tea party make sense for what they are saying, but they didn't address other parts of the government that might actually need help. In conclusion, the author brings up a valid point, but if there were more examples it may have sold for me.
ReplyDelete~Emma Kuhn
Period 3
The author of this article makes a good point when he states that the government is not broken but just slow as it was intended to be. The purpose of this is to make sure everything is well thought out especially when it comes to big decisions allowing for the two major parties to discuss what is best for our nation. The issue with this though is that the two major parties have very different views and may lead this long and slow process to become even slower. This effects our nation in certain situations when action is necessary and needed immediately but can also be beneficial at times.
ReplyDelete-Joey Verdugo P.3
I agree with the author in saying that we shouldn't conclude our slow government as one that is broken. The fact that our government is able to realize how crucial certain issues are and are willing to meditate and debate on them in order to come up with a conclusion that is the best for the people serves as a good indicator that our government is doing its job. I think the people should be more bothered by a government that makes impulsive and quick decisions than a slow and thoughtful one.
ReplyDeleteJoanne Park
Period 2
It almost feels like a natural instinct to get things done in your own way, and in a quick and efficient manner. However, I agree with the author of the article that it only seems right that the opposite should be done in regards to our political system. Our political system is dominated by the two major parties who have different views on both social and economic issues. Because of this reason, we have a slow and restrained divided government that will rarely come in agreement. Because of this divided government, national policy is pushed and centered to where practical and logical solutions to problems are to be found, which in turn produces a sustainable bipartisanship where laws are made for the general welfare of the people.
ReplyDeleteDavid Lee
Per. 3
Before reading this article, my answer to the Do-Now was that I was frustrated with the government being slow with passing legislatures. Now that I have read this, I am aware that it serves as a purpose because it allows a thorough process and, hopefully, takes all aspects into account. I agree with the author that the government is not broken and I find more comfort in the idea that the government is discussing and debating the important issues instead of deciding as quick as possible just to show that they got something done.
ReplyDelete-Andrea Marella
Period 2
I do agree that the government is not broken, but stalled. The government is making a change, but at a "slow, painful process and has been throughout the history." Americans like change fast, and ready to go, but it cannot always be fast as there are debates, disagreement, and division in the government that it will be hard o be on the same page. the government does know the crisis we are since they are using debates to either fix our problems or not, they do not look the other way in our crisis. In other words, it is not all that bad for a slow and a thoughtful government as there are trying to fix things by understanding it and discussing what should they do.
ReplyDeleteAdriana Napitupulu
per. 3
I agree with the author. The American government is not broken but rather slow. He gives valid points and evidence to explain why the government may appear broken but is rather slow in process. The founding fathers created this government to reflect the thought of the people. And to do so takes time. Many different views and rivalries in congress slow down the process of bill making. It takes time to perfect a process. America just needs to endure the growing pains of a democracy.
ReplyDeleteChris Martin
P.3
To argue with the author, the American system of government caters toward much slower and much more drawn out decision making. To an extent, this is exactly what the nation needs to prevent itself from making rash decisions, but also serves its intended purpose of not allowing any one majority power to take over a portion of the government and change the laws so as to tyrannize the minorities. He mentions that a government with a slow decision making process "is a more thoughtful, careful, and hopefully good, government", by which he means that a government where one side of an argument wins over another, only to have the latter retaliate and win against the former, would lead to insufficient change and instability. The alternative to a difficult government will not lead to a decision for the people any faster than the system we have now, and our current organization comes with the added benefit of checks and balances. However, to agree with the general public, decision making often takes too long and the decision of a social issue is often unrelated to the issue at all, given a long enough amount of time for it to mutate into a different problem. The main problem, as stated in the article, is the discrepancy between opinions: some black and white, some shades of gray, some apathy, some confusion, etc. Getting an entire nation to agree on a solution is next to impossible and, frankly, half of the social issues that affect one part of the nation may have little to no affect on another part. So, one is led to believe that the government is, indeed, working at par with expectations, but is lead to question the direction it is taking for future decision making.
ReplyDelete-Christopher Hamilton, P.2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAt first I believed the government was slow and biased in it's decisions, but after reading this article I realized that there is a reason why certain aspects are the way they are. If the government were to simply pass laws without consideration, our country would be full of chaos and laws would be full of loopholes! I concur with the author in terms that the government is not broken but is slow because they take each and every matter into deep consideration, deliberating possible outcomes to avoid disorder and maintain peace in our country.
ReplyDeleteFor a government to be broken, there is to be chaos and a complete lack of order. Therefore the American government is not broken per se, but it's not absurd to think that there is some troubles within the system.
ReplyDeleteIf the system moves slowly, then so be it; at least the system moves at all. Granted, it is not ideal nor optimal for it to move as slowly on some instances than others, but that's more or less attributed to the fact that human beings run government. Thus, since our government is comprised of human beings (who are elected by other humans, whose views can differ drastically with other humans) there will undoubtedly be discord within the system.
So no, the government isn't really broken; but it was never built to be perfect either.
Gavin Deguzman
Period 2
I agree with the author, the American government is not necessarily broken. I understand why many people believe that the government is inefficient, but we should not confuse inefficiency with the slow work process of the government. It is often suggested that we should change the way our government operates, but would that actually solve anything? If it were to be changed there would still be flaws in the government, a group of people would still not be satisfied, and there is always going to be issues where the population is divided. The government is not broken, but is not perfect, nor will it ever please everyone.
ReplyDelete-Alejandra C.
p.2
As the author claims that the government is broken which is agreeable but also I believe it's a bit out dated. Mainly, because the super long process of pleasing and representing the majority liberties which one desires. I feel they should a small, tiny change on how the process of again representing the society. And when we want it pretty obvious of change to our natural rights. But then I do understand where to Framers come from of not mirror the popular views the government should mediate because it does see from different viewpoints. Yes its broken for a good way, slow but for a purpose. Yes I'm contradicting to myself because I see if mostly one side then the other
ReplyDeleteHilary Velasquez P.2
Before reading this, most people had the mentality that our government is broken, when in fact they're just taking precautions in order to benefit the people. I do believe that sometimes the outcome of this wait is not sufficient, but it gives them time to think about certain situations thoroughly because in the end, the people may not know what is best for the people as a whole (hint my opinion on their outcomes for the people). I also believe that the people are very impatient and react on their first impulse without thinking it through. Therefore, I believe our government is not broken, but just simply slow operated.
ReplyDeleteKourtney
Period 3
I think our country is entering a crossroads where there are important decisions that need to be made and people of all ideologies are frustrated with the lack of decision making ability of the government. I agree with the author on his point that a slow government allows for more well thought out decisions that will be beneficial to America to be made. If decisions are made too quickly, we may be getting ahead of ourselves when we could've waited just slightly longer to see the issue develop and get a sense of public opinion. Knowing the variety of everyone's opinions, it is important to move slowly to allow those who do not agree with the general consensus to slowly adjust themselves and get used to it. So yes, a stalled government is in most cases, a good thing.
ReplyDelete-Nick Knowles P. 2
I agree with the author and I believe that our government is not broken, but is definitely slow with the process of passing legislatures. Although this may be frustrating at times, there is actually a good reason as to why our government takes so long to pass legislatures. The fact that the government is very slow is actually a good indication in the sense that they thoroughly think through their decisions and think about what's best for the people. I believe that if the government made quick decisions without thoroughly thinking them through, the people would not be pleased.
ReplyDeleteMadhumitha Pudukottai
P.2
I approach this author's claim with a high level of doubt. The author seems to be writing under the assumption that Congress is slowing down in order to discuss the topics at hand. Nevermind that this article was written in 2011, before we knew what we do know now. First just entertain this idea.
ReplyDeleteJust like in any human relationship, taking it nice and slow is a good sign! Maybe Congress is taking it slow to work out their differences and try to come to a consensus. However, taking it slow can also be a bad sign. If it gets to the point where the 2 parties are not talking to each other, this is no longer taking it slow, but setting up for a divorce. What we do know now that this article is 4 years old is that Congress taking it slow was not a sign of cooperation. We know this from the October 2013 government shutdown brought about by a Conservative effort led in part by the boy himself, Senator Ted Cruz. Decide for yourself if you can honestly say that shutting the government down because of a refusal to find common ground is not symptomatic of a broken government.
Period 3
Wait no 2
DeleteYes, while debate is necessary in order to have a democratic system in our nation and while our goverment is stalled and not broken, it is way too slow. Things need to get done quicker and more efficiently. While our government does give us time to think about decisions, at what point is too much? Laws and acts are slow to pass and social issues are not being dealt with. While other countries are dealing with multiple issues and solving many of them, we're still stuck many and have yet to talk about others.
ReplyDelete-Annette Campos period 2
I feel that the author is right. It is a good thing that the government moves slowly and like some of my peers said t is supposed to. That is how our framers intended it to be. It a good thing that the government takes a while to go through the process of making laws and decisions. We are all human make ing quick rash decision could turn out badly in the end
ReplyDeleteTazari p. 3
I completely agree with the author when he states “In the end, a slow, restrained government is a more thoughtful, careful, and hopefully good, government.” This statement says it all. Our governmental system is slow, but at the same time this long slow process has reason and the framers made our governmental system like this for a reason. That reason being to mediate not mirror the ideals of the citizens of the United States of America. If this process was not long and slow than laws would be passed without deep thought, which might mean that poor laws would be passed or maybe these laws would not reflect America as a whole. Government is slow because people need time to figure out what is truly best for this country as a whole.
ReplyDeleteCristian Zuniga Period 2
The author of this articles considers the repercussions of a slow government and shows the readers that this is not to be something that should be seen in such a negative light. As stated in the article, some may disapprove of the governments delayed responses and argue that the legislature is counterproductive as it is incredibly slow in transforming the will of the people into public policy, but the fact of the matter is that this is the way the Framers wanted it to be. The Framers of our government formed a legislature which would model a very slow, stable, and unchanging republic. This feature allows our government to discourage factious majorities and rid the public's fear of a tyranny of the majority. It continues to do so today, but to the extent of which this is still true is not so definite. The reason why it seems that neither the House of Representatives nor the Senate in Washington DC are not responding quickly enough to amend policy is due to the slow process that galvanizes discussion and differences to be heard by all sides of political parties. This process best reflects the will of the people and is crucial to the sustenance of American legislature, therefore I agree in saying that our legislature is "not broken but stalled".
ReplyDeleteJordana Cruz
Period 3
Shoutout to the author for not being such a hard-headed individual.
ReplyDeleteWe, as a nation, should understand that no form of government tries to be perfect, for such a feat is impossible, rather the goal at hand is to have the most effect government as possible.
In accordance with the many historical events and legislation that have structured out government, such as the Constitution,we must be analytical and observant in understanding why our government functions in the way that it does. Ignoring this rational concept is to to peg unrealistic and irrational processes on a government that was never formed to function in such a manner. It is easy to go on and on about what sounds "right", while it is necessary and sometimes difficult to admit that extreme and over the top revamping of our current system are not probable to happen any time soon.
Christopher Plascecnia
P.2
I'm in agreement with the author because anything great that has ever happened, has happened over time, with researching and experimenting and follow through. America has proven to be indecisive with what we want and Washington is just trying to "roll with the punches" and give America what we want. We said we wanted a mainly democratic government and when presented with one, elected a bunch of republicans. Our official decision on what we want is not going to happen quickly and until it does Washington will experiment until it find something we want (stall).
ReplyDeleteKameron Valez
P:3
The author is correct to say that the slowness of our government, which many perceive as brokenness, was actually intended to happen. In a government where decisions are made quickly and easily, those decisions would invariably be biased to favor one side of an issue or the other. It takes time to find a balanced solution to an issue, one that will satisfy people on both sides of the issue. If we expect quick decisions, we must also expect biased decisions. Some of the largest complaints about our government is that it is too slow/accomplishes nothing and that its officials don't accurately represent the interests of the people. While both of these as valid complaints, they actually contradict each other; to solve one means to maintain or worsen the other. If all government decisions were made quickly, they would lack they time to form the compromises necessary to benefit the interests of all Americans. If our government included all views of an issue and considered the interests of all people, we would have an extremely slow government, to allow the time to form compromises and come to mutually beneficial agreements. Of course, our current government does not perfectly represent the views of all American people; however, it does represent a wide variety of views, which, as the author suggests, is what causes the slowness of our system. So, to answer whether our government is broken---in this aspect, I would say it isn't broken. In fact, I'd argue that the slowness actually shows that our system is stronger than some others, and more fair. I would personally prefer a well-thought-out solution that takes into account the views of all who is affected by it than a quick solution that favors only one group. Of course it is frustrating now to see our government seemingly accomplishing so little, spending so much time arguing over issues, but in the long run, slowness is an indicator of increasing representation in government for a wide variety of groups rather than an indicator of brokenness.
ReplyDeleteSarah King
Period 2
I agree with the author in the way he states that a a slow government is a more thoughtful government because it helps ensure that the government is not rushed into making important decisions that can affect the lives of many. Just as the author states, the Framers made the government in this way for a purpose. The Framers most likely made this government slow, so that decisions could not be made without some rational thought and debate. I believe the government is better as it is than with quick decisions because quick decisions could lead to bad decisions being made and not what is truly best for the people. With a slow system, the government could rationalize through all parts of their decision to ensure that their decision is the best for the people.
ReplyDeletePeyton Geyser
Period 3
I agree with the author i don't think our government is broken and i like the way he approached this debatable topic. He simply explains that nothing is perfect and that the Framers expected this. I am indifferent about how slow our government is but definitely don't think its broken, when it comes to major life changing issues i would prefer it to be slow so it is not rushed and everyone has a chance to voice their opinion. I Feel people are quick to think that our government is broken just because their pressing issue isn't being handled imminently.
ReplyDeleteadriana albanez p2
Debate is healthy in the way that it allows individuals to push for a higher standard of evaluation and expectation. If we had one major political party with no opponents, certain POVs would indicatively be left out. On the contrary, if we had multiple political parties, but did not adopt a system of proportionality, all but one political party would gain success, and it would be pointless to even hold a discussion against parties that are constantly divided and weaker. However, our dual party system is perfect in following the precautions set forth by our founding fathers, in which discussion can occur through the separate branches of Government AND the 2 chambers of Congress. This discussion demands a higher standard of politics by constantly scrutinizing issues, effectively lowering the probability of mediocrity influencing the American government.
ReplyDeleteJason Plascencia
Period 2
In today’s society the fact that we get everything we want in a rather rapid fashion. Our government however does not operate that way, which signals to many that perhaps our government is “broken”. This is not the case as the author argues in this piece. Our government is slow on purpose so that each issue can be broken down and analyzed so that no decision is made with haste, which can lead to harsh consequences. This slow speed also allows the government to produce a result that will hopefully satisfy both sides of the argument, a whole multitude of people. As the author states, this was a clear intention of the framers. An intelligent decision on their part, as they were able to look ahead to the future and take a measure that would benefit us in the long run. It is understandable how this situation can be frustrating but one must look at it in a bigger light. Our government is not broken, it's just taking it’s sweet time.
ReplyDelete-Peter Sandhu P.3
I agree that there is a common knowledge and perception that the government process is aggravatingly slow, and I do understand the frustration of common people that they perceive there is no change or that there is a static interval in the government.
ReplyDeleteBut it is definitely not broken, and I think it is reasonable because of the clashes of debate. Therefore, I think the process is not a democratic deterrent for the nation, but rather a natural reaction for the “thoughtful” process.
Chenney Kang
P. 3
While I do believe the author took a rather safe approach in writing the article, inadvertently gaining most of the support of our class, I still think he does a superb job in analyzing American government for what it is meant to be, and not for what it is commonly mistaken for. In this case, and ln many other professinal installments, slow and steady really does win the race. A slower, and admittedly sometimes more chaotic, debate over issues can yield the necessary thoughtfulness that might be overlooked had the discussion between opposing point-of-views been stifled, It is also worth noting that a frustrated government is a considerate government - without debate there is no urgency for a higher, healthier compromise.
ReplyDeleteJulian Dela Cruz
P3
I actually generally agree with the author of this article. While it is certainly frustrating that washington moves at the pace that it does, the slowness of congress is, in a sense, another way of preventing the majority from tyrannizing the majority.
ReplyDeleteHeath Isley
period 2
*minority
DeleteI agree with the author because, even though it seems like things never get done, they eventually reach a conclusion. I would rather have things well thought out then voted for based off general instinct because it may not end in the right decision. It allows for a good thought process and allows to get a better idea of the thoughts of the general public.
ReplyDeleteAriana Martinez, Period 2
I actually like the way this article is presented a lot. In class, we talked about how one of our biggest frustrations with the government was that nothing seems to ever get done. But I think society would be even more angry if government decisions were just passed with a quickness that allowed hardly any discussion about the right of course action therefore leaving the interests of all Americans out of the picture. I do think that government decisions need to be thoroughly discussed to ensure that the best route is taken when policy is passed. If abrupt decisions are made, they will probably be biased to officials who won't have the time to ponder over how this decision affects the various different demographics of America. In that sense, I would agree that our "stalled" government is not necessarily a bad thing, and that it certainly does not mean that our government is broken. Even though necessary changes seem to take forever to finally be executed in government, maybe it's actually worth the wait in the end.
ReplyDeleteDylan Riggio
Period 2
Indeed, the government is not broken but it is "stalled". It's arguable that it takes forever for bills to be passed, however, would you feel more comfortable that only one committee approved one bill within an hour? I definitely wouldn't. The process we have works because of the amount of barriers it must go through in order to make it to the table. For the most part, it has worked but there is still room for improvement.
ReplyDeleteKayleigh McWilliams p 2
I could clean the bathroom in 5 minutes Mr. C. But do you think my dad would be satisfied with my work? Oh hell no he wouldn't! I will take a slow, hard worker who gets the job done over someone who does a quick, half assed job any day of the week.
ReplyDeleteI tried to post this for about 8 minutes and it wouldn't work so I took a picture of my 11:59 attempt if you would like to see it.
DeleteIt's good the government is "stalled" with certain things because you know there choices will be thought out and a correct choice for the government. I am with agreement that our government is stalled but that's not a bad thing because they go through a process for creating the bills, and multiple officials throughouly look at them to be passed the laws won't be as biased or one sided because there would be more than one view on it. So I agree that the government is slow and stalled with bills rather than quick and one sided with bills. It shows the governments had the citizens views in mind and care how the outcome effects them if the bill were to be authorized.
ReplyDelete