|
|
|
|
|
|
by rchaud
753 days ago
|
|
|
"Democracy" is not a silver bullet to solving public policy problems, especially in republic-style systems such as the US. Voting in a new government doesn't change the fact that a lot of the ultimate legislative power rests with the Supreme Court. It was the court that decided that election funding can be ultra-opaque, a decision that in effect removed all restrictions to political contributions by allowing them to be funneled through PACs rather than individual donations that do have limits. This creates a system where career politicians have an enormous financial advantage over anyone else attempting to run for office. Politicians have term limits, but SC judges get lifetime tenure and are appointed by presidents on the basis of ideological fealty. That's why topics like the legality of abortion can keep coming up, whereas in other countries, this has long been a settled issue. And that is just at the federal (nationwide) level. Individual states have significant autonomy on how they operate as well, and usually resist any legislation giving federal government more say on state matters. |
|
|
As to abortion, the original SC decision on Roe v Wade was probably incorrect from a US Constitution level, the more recent decision kicked it back to the States. The States are no reeling from laws that haven't been addressed in at least half a century as well as a US Congress that is ill inclined to actually act. It's something that could have been codified for years. The Democrats have had a majority in both houses of Congress and the White House a few times, Obama even promised as much his first term and didn't deliver.
The issue, is that most would agree there should be some limit to how late an a voluntary abortion should be generally allowed. The vocal minorities on both sides push the extremes.