|
|
|
|
|
|
by bllguo
1789 days ago
|
|
|
nobody disputes if it was (broadly) by design, it's whether the design is outdated and needs modernization. by the way, i actually really disdain founding fathers veneration, but two-party deadlock was infamously _not_ intentional. neither was our increasingly corporatocratic government. |
|
|
It absolutely was.
Canada, where the majority party can pass whatever they want (their majority practically guarantees it), the unelected Senate almost always rubber stamps it and the head of state is one and the same as the ruling party, it's clear that the US design is intentional.
Nothing gets passed in the US unless: 1) House approves it, 2) Senate approves it, 3) President signs it. All three bodies are independently elected.
It was clearly intentional to be much more challenging to pass legislation in the US. What you call gridlock, I call the system operating as designed.