The Checks and Balances of American Democracy: How One Individual Can Paralyze National Decisions

The intricate system of checks and balances in American democracy is designed to ensure a decentralized distribution of power. This system, envisioned by the Founding Fathers, is meant to prevent any one person from amassing too much authority. However, in recent years, this system has been tested, particularly in the context of geopolitics and national decision-making.

Historical Context: Mike Johnson and Blocked US Aid to Ukraine

One pertinent example is the case of Mike Johnson, a Representative from Louisiana, who blocked US aid to Ukraine for seven months. Putin's influence in undermining the American decision-making system can be seen through his strategy of bribing a single individual within the government.

Some might argue that this situation is a fault of the current political system, where representatives are not necessarily men of honor but serve their party's interests. This highlights a significant shift in how our democracy functions, particularly in times of political division and opposition.

Trust and Honor in American Politics

Our Founding Fathers assumed that representatives would be men of honor, dedicated to serving the nation. However, today, we elect wealthy individuals who lack honor, and their primary allegiance is to their political party rather than the electorate. Politicians have become accustomed to making promises and taking no action, counting on re-election regardless of their performance.

Former president Donald Trump made a unique attempt to pit agencies against each other, a move that was highly controversial and largely unsuccessful. Yet, his methods, involving relentless legal battles and misdirection, significantly delayed the resolution of key disputes, including his potential impeachment.

The Evolving System of Checks and Balances

Though checks and balances were designed to prevent any one individual from exerting total control, the current system is not immune to corruption. Massive corruption, as seen with the Democratic Party, has undermined the original intentions of the Founding Fathers. The lack of accountability and the weakened effectiveness of impeachments and prosecutions have led to a more centralized and potentially more vulnerable system.

The House's rules are also a matter of concern. While the House possesses the power to make its own rules, these rules often give the Speaker of the House vast powers to determine which bills are voted on. This concentration of power in the hands of a single individual is not only unbalanced but also a departure from the original design of checks and balances.

The Bipartisan Nature of Gridlock

It is important to note that the system of checks and balances is not limited to Democratic or Republican governance. If more Republicans were genuinely concerned about Ukraine, they could have easily bypassed or removed Mike Johnson through a discharge petition or a vote of no confidence. However, inaction on both sides has led to a prolonged and troubling period of inaction, with Putin utilizing the system's weaknesses to his advantage.

The current political landscape in the United States is marked by an electoral year, further exacerbating partisan divisions. In such an environment, important legislation is often bogged down by the adversarial nature of the two-party system, making progress slow and difficult.

Conclusion: The Perils and Promise of American Democracy

While the system of checks and balances is a fundamental aspect of American democracy, it is not infallible. The recent events highlighting the paralysis caused by a single individual, such as Mike Johnson, underscore the need for continuous vigilance and reform. Maintaining the original intentions of the Founding Fathers to prevent totalitarianism and ensure a decentralized distribution of power is crucial for the ongoing health of our democracy.