When Is One Better Than Two?

Bicameralism

A humorous word at best. Does it refer to some sort of sexual preference which includes camels? Or is it possibly some newly discovered type of cannibalism? Neither are true, though with a stretch of the imagination, both could be true.

All seriousness aside, bicameralism, simply put is two chambers of the government, like the UK with its House of Commons and the House of Lords, the US has its adaptation, know as the Senate and the House of Representatives. This is all pretty straightforward and was learned in Civics 101. Hopefully, all will recall their indoctrination into the two party system of the US.

This is a fairly universal practice in most states, with the exception of Nebraska, which has one chamber or it is unicameral. Now that we have established what the terms mean, we shall further explore this phenom. Each one of these chambers has committees within it, like education, national security, intelligence, etc.

Now we have the fundamentals, let's look at it in operation. Take an idea, it is submitted to its respective committee, it is considered, talked about, debated and somethimes even joked about, once the guys have it all in line it is sent for a vote on the respective chamber. Once it passes there it is sent on to the second chamber and the whole process begins again. Once this chamber has their version hammered out and it is not the same as the first chamber, then it sent back and forth, to and fro until a compromise that both houses will agree on and then it final is sent to the pres who can play with it, either sign it into law or veto. If it is per chance it is vetoed it then is sent back to the chambers and they bat it back and forth until they can get an override.

That all sounds pretty democratic, don't it? In one aspect it is, but then on the other hand it could be seen as not so much.

IMO, it is time for the US to stop wasting time, money and resources on the delaying game. I think that a unicameral system would be more efficient and less expense. Time would be saved by not having to play ping pong with bills trying to get them passed. One chamber would take the idea into the respective committee, they will bang out the compromise and then send to pres for action. The money would be saved by elimating a bunch of dead weight from the Congress. This would eliminate support people, office expenses, etc.

The bicameral system does work in favor of the American people; the unicameral would not be perfect but it could be a start to giving the American people their shot at help to govern themselves. The two chamber work in concert to keep the political process bogged down in fecal matter so that as little as possible can be accmplished, thus securing the elites hold on power and control over the people.

Of course I am a realist and for that reason I understand this will never happen, becuase it would have to be proposed to the Congress and those guys are not about to eliminate themselves from the power equation. Unfortunately, it is only wishful thinking on my part and a concern to return the reigns of control to the American people. I'm a realist there too, they do not want it; they prefer someone else do their thinking for them and all they have to do is bitch and vote.


CHUQ

28/03/07