U.S. Government - Research Paper Example

? U.S. Government U.S Government Introduction Since the declaration of America as independent from Great Britain through the Second Continental Congress, the government of the United States has worked towards realizing the fundamental principle regarding the founding of the nation. The U.S. government emphasizes that all American citizens have the right to liberty, life, as well as the pursuit of happiness. This paper seeks to explore the benefits of a two-party system in the politics of the United States; this will also include the benefits that can emanate from including a third party in such a system. The paper also examines three reasons for continuing federalism and its current form in the United States. In addition, the paper looks into the controversy of appointing people in the federal bureaucracy. Lastly, the paper will discuss the reasons why the U.S. has representative democracy over federal democracy on the federal level. What are the benefits of a two-party system in U.S. politics? What are the benefits of third parties in this system, if any? The political system in the United States entails two parties dominating during voting in elections and each level of government. The two-party system in the United States politics has several benefits, which forms the basis for the advantages accrued from such a system. One of the benefits of the two-party system in the United States is that it encourages and leads to political stability. The two political parties strive towards finding a common position that would be of benefit to the whole country. The system of two-party system leads to widespread agreements between the legislators, which eventually leads to political stability (Bertlastsky, 2010). According to Bertlastsky (2010), another benefit derived from the two-party system in the United States includes ease of governance. This emanates from the fact that such a system leads to a lot of harmonious existence between the two parties. As a result, legislators have the opportunity to participate in issues of governance and activities of the government. The two-party system is also beneficial as it leads to simplicity in the voting process; through such a system, voting becomes an easy affair in the United States. This is because there exist no complexities when the voter wants to make a choice between the parties. As opposed to a multi-party system, voting in a two-party system takes place fast since voters choose from a list of few candidates. The two-party system also lowers the rate of corruption in the United States. This emanates from the belief that leaders should think about the people who they represent. Failure to represent the will of the majority can make the electorate vote for the rival party in the next elections. Apart from the benefits of a two-party system, some benefits can also be derived from the inclusion of third parties in this system. Third parties give the electorate a variety of choices from where they can choose especially if the voters have expressed dissatisfaction with the parties in a two party system. Third parties also encourage sound governance since they promote transparency through regular critique of the government (Bertlastsky, 2010). Reasons for the Continuing Federalism and its Current form in the United States According to Holdstedt (2006), politics in the United States is based on Federalism, which gives both the executive and the states some powers. The constitution of America expresses significant belief in Federalism as a way of governing the United States. Under Federalism, the American constitution divides power between regional government and the Central government. Changes in the constitution have to be agreed upon by these two factions of the government. There are several factors that have contributed to continuing federalism, and they explain why federalism is deeply rooted in the U.S. system. One of the reasons that explain continuing federalism encompasses the practice of pragmatism. Federalism has proved to be highly effective in governing the United States. Because of its diverse population, the United States can be possible to run when there is delegation of power to local officials. Federalism avails local and state officials who govern their respective areas and address the problems faced by the locals. As a result, Federalism has become dominant in the U.S. since governance by local authorities allows people to air their views. Continuing federalism has also emanated from the benefits derived from the separation of powers and prevention of tyranny. Through federalism, it has become easier to ensure that state governments function independent of each other. This has ensured that liberty prevails, thus the continuing federalism (Holdstedt, 2006). Another reason for continuing federalism emanates from the role played by federalism in contributing to political stability. Federalism ensures that the national government does not engage in some areas with contentious issues. As a result, the United States has attained and maintained stability through federalism, thus explaining the reason for continuing federalism. Today, the United States enjoys political stability a result of federalism. This reflects why the American government has always held on to federalism (Holdstedt, 2006). Why is the power to appoint people to the federal bureaucracy so Controversial? The federal bureaucracy is mandated with organizing employees with the aim of achieving certain goals. The federal bureaucracy carries out its functions effectively and efficiently. This happens amidst the fact that their procedures and goals result from the struggle for power, thus leading to behavior that may be termed as both inefficient and ineffective. Appointment in the federal bureaucracy is done by the President who has powers to appoint people, known as political appointees in the federal bureaucracy. The president's power to appoint people to the federal bureaucracy is viewed as controversial for a number of reasons (Staff, 2010). In choosing the political appointees, the president receives suggestions as well as nominations from political allies, party officials, academics, close advisers and business leaders. This leads to biases in the appointment of people into bureaucratic offices. The controversy arises from the fact that the president may appoint political leaders loyal to him to key positions. This has received a lot of criticism as it leads to favoritism in the appointment of leaders in the federal bureaucracy. Controversy also arises from the control that the president has over the federal bureaucracy. The powers of the president coupled with those of the federal courts and the congress limit the federal bureaucracy (Staff, 2010). Staff (2010) argues that controversy rages over the powers of the president to remove people from the federal bureaucracy. In addition, powers to appoint people to the federal bureaucracy are viewed as controversial since the president can change the structure of the executive branch at will. Moreover, powers to appoint people to the federal bureaucracy are regarded as controversial since the president guides how the federal bureaucracy will perform its functions. This interferes with the operations of the bureaucrats and limits the independence of the institution. Discuss the reasons why we have a representative democracy over direct democracy on the federal level and explain whether you believe that we should move toward direct democracy in the 21st century According to Wilson (2008), representative democracy is a form of democracy whereby citizens allow elected officials to represent them in the processes of the government without any direct involvement in the lawmaking and legislation process. In the U.S., there is a representative democracy at the federal level due to a number of reasons. First, the large population of the United States calls for representative democracy. Thus, representative democracy reduces complications that would emanate from direct representation. Another reason behind representative democracy is that elected officials tend to be people with high education levels; thus, they understand people’s needs. As a result, they can come up with solutions to the problems faced by the people. Representative democracy has also prevailed in the United States because the representatives are chosen by the people through direct elections. Therefore, the representatives portray the choice of the people when it comes to the law making process. In the 21st Century, it is ideal for the United States to move towards direct democracy. This is because representative democracy has some weakness, which can only be overcome through direct democracy. For example, in most cases, representatives tend to be based on shared opinions and beliefs with certain segments of the society. This may lead to the representatives serving their own needs rather than representing the will of the majority. Direct democracy may also be beneficial as it would get rid of the unnecessary separation between the laws made as well as the people. The U.S. should also move towards direct democracy in order to allow people to be involved directly in issues that affect them significantly (Wilson, 2008). Conclusion In conclusion, a two-party system is beneficial since it leads to political stability and makes the voting process less complex. A third party in the system could also be beneficial as it would enhance transparency within the governing bodies. Continuing federalism has been witnessed in the United States since it leads to pragmatism as well as efficiency and effectiveness in the governing process. Appointments to the federal bureaucracy are controversial since the president may abuse his powers by appointing the people who show loyalty to him. Representative democracy has become dominant in the United States due to the high population, which necessitates the use of this method in governance. In the 21st century, the United States should move towards direct democracy in order to enhance the direct participation of people in governance. References Bertlastsky, N. (2010). Does the U.S. Two-Party System Still Work? New York: Greenhaven Press. Holdstedt, M. V. (2006). Federalism: History and Current Issues. New York: Nova Publishers. Staff, S. S. (2010). Federal Bureaucracy: Shmoop Civics Guide. Los Altos: Shmoop University Inc. Wilson, J. Q. (2008). American Government. London: Cengage Learning. Read More