I'm sure most of you have heard about the government shutdown by now. When I came home today and glanced at the San Jose Mercury News, I saw a quote from President Barack Obama in which several connections to 19th century America stood out to me.
First, some context. The government's budget must originate in the House of Representatives. There is a GOP majority in the House. The GOP is trying, yet again, to strangle Obama's healthcare bill, "Obamacare," by refusing to pass the budget unless the start of the implementation of Obamacare is postponed. Without an approved budget, no government organizations are funded, and the government therefore has shut down.
President Barack Obama said, "One faction, of one party, in one house of Congress, in one branch of government doesn't get to shut down the entire government just to re-fight the results of an election."
Obama's quote replicates a sentiment that elected leaders in the 19th century also had - the idea that when the people elect a president, they are implying that they are in support of the president's complete platform as well. Obama's healthcare bill made up a huge part of his running platform, and he is now saying that the GOP is attempting to "re-fight" the approval the people gave to Obamacare by electing him as president. This idea is strikingly similar to the idea the Democrats had in 1844.
In the election of 1844, Democrat James K. Polk ran against Whig Henry Clay. Polk won the election on an expansionist platform, and Democrats took his victory as a "mandate" from the people to take Texas. Of course, the result of a presidential election relies on many factors, and just because a person wins the presidency does not necessarily mean they have received a popular "mandate" to do anything. Any thoughts on this?
Obama also accused the GOP of abusing its power as the House majority when he said that "one branch of government doesn't get to shut down the entire government." Thinking back to the 18th century and James Madison's Federalist Papers #10 and #51, in which Madison discussed parties, factions and the balance of power, do you think Madison would have agreed or disagreed with Obama's statement?
Perhaps Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said it best: "They've lost their minds. They keep trying to do the same thing over and over again." Perhaps the GOP should just accept the fact that their repeated attempts to kill Obamacare are futile, so that the government can move on from this.
Excellent points Maya!
ReplyDeleteI do think that Madison probably would have been in agreement with Obama. This seems like the exact sort of overstepping of power that Madison wanted to prevent through the balance of powers. Balance of power was implemented so that each branch would be held accountable for its actions to make sure it was within its limits, and it appears that the representatives in the House have stepped outside them.
I think Madison would have completely agreed with President Obama's Statement. In Federalist Essay Number 51, Madison states, "The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself." He is essentially stating that each branch of government will be in control of its own affairs, however, they also have the right and the ability to "check" the power of other branches of government. Though the GOP is not a branch of the government, they are a faction within Congress, and by refusing to pass the Budget until the beginning of the implementation of the Affordable Health Act is postponed, they are abusing their power. They are in a breach of power, they are shutting down the whole government simply because they cannot accept one of Obama's biggest campaign "Goals"/promises, like Maya stated. I think Madison would have believed that the GOP is in violation of their power, and it is not right for them to use the influence they have in Congress to hurt the whole nation, simply to protect their own self interests. They are in dire need of being "checked" by the other factions in the U.S. government.
ReplyDeleteAwesome post, Maya! Something I saw that was interesting; when you said, "Obama's quote replicates a sentiment that elected leaders in the 19th century also had - the idea that when the people elect a president, they are implying that they are in support of the president's complete platform as well," it made me think of a passage in the textbook where the for the Election of 1852, northern Whigs despised the platform that their respective candidate was running under while admiring the person; vise versa for the South. It's sort of strange how a similar sentiment is echoed in modern times, where some modern day democrats admire Obama as a person but despise his platform, because it has accomplished very litter. Just some random thoughts, really. Again, great job!
ReplyDelete@Maya Acharya
ReplyDeleteThis is a really unique and interpretive post, Maya. I liked how you incorporated today's problems with that of 19th Century American Politics; your example of 'Obama-care' stood out to me. I also think that when a president is elected, his ideals and principles are "elected" with him; the people who vote should be aware of the different aspects of each president's platform. In regards to your question, I do believe that Madison would have agreed with Obama's statement that no branch of government can shut-down another; it goes along with Madison's idea of having equal power within each branch. From the Federalists papers #10 and #51, Madison argued for a system much like the Checks and Balances system to day which would augment Obama's claim today.
Along with the comments above, I agree that Madison would have sided with President Obama on this issue. Madison's Federalist Paper #51 focuses on checks and balances, which is Madison's solution to potential usurpations of power. The very topic of Federalist Paper #10 is how the government proposed by the Constitution would be effective in preventing factions from taking over the country in a flurry of action. Clearly, he abhorred the idea of one faction seizing control of the Union. As President Obama mentioned in his quote, the government shutdown was an example of one faction holding up the entire country for its own purposes. The people showed their willingness to at least tolerate "Obamacare" by getting the President elected, so its opponents should respect that. Madison would therefore certainly have agreed that "One faction, of one party, in one house of Congress, in one branch of government doesn't get to shut down the entire government just to re-fight the results of an election."
ReplyDeleteSources:
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.htm
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa51.htm