Two such episodes can be observed that look at extreme cases of gridlock during the height of political ineffectiveness in Obama’s rule. Each case study takes the attention off of partisanship, and refocuses the critique onto the structure of American government. On March 23, 2010, President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law. Surrounding its passing was much political opposition and heated disapproval. A line was drawn in the congressional sand that separated the Democrats from the Republicans. The democrats were unwilling to accept the approach devised by the Republicans, and the Republicans remained strictly opposed to the Democrat’s proposals. A point of contention with this occurrence of gridlock was that the Obama
…show more content…
Following the Iraq War, public dissatisfaction with the Bush administration led to more than two dozen Democrats taking control of seats in the House of Representatives in 2006. This victory elevated Representative Nancy Pelosi, a liberal, to House Speaker. In the Senate, Harry Reid, became majority leader, as the Democrats were able to win a slim majority with 49 seats, plus two independents who joined the caucus. The combination of these victories concluded unified Republican control of Congress. In the two months that followed, presidential elections took place, and Senator Barack Obama was sworn in as President. Democrats continued to expand their control in the House of Representatives, and a nearly filibuster proof majority was established in the Senate, creating what is referred to as a “supermajority”. Despite all of this, the rise of the Tea Party Movement in 2008, caused a rapid shift in public opinion, and this electorate influence was observed once again in Congress. Republicans won 63 new seats, and again took control of the House in 2010, making John Boehner their speaker. These newcomers came in with the intent of fighting Obama’s agenda, and it is here we observe the growth in partisanship. But as thoroughly discussed, it is not solely this partisanship that results in the exhausted forms of gridlock – instead what must be evaluated is the combination of this …show more content…
With the Democrats controlling the White House and the Senate, and the Republicans, with their deeply opposed views of anything on the Democratic agenda, controlling the House of Representatives, the ability to passing bills in 2011 came to a rolling stop. Once again the difficulty of balancing extreme levels of partisanship within bicameral legislatives is revealed. The present climate at the time set the stage for a series of crises that would take place shortly after. The first showdown occurred in April of 2011. The Republicans threated to force a government shutdown if the Democrats didn’t agree to budget cuts. In a dramatic fashion, the government was saved minutes before the deadline with the Democrats agreeing to make cuts. Later inspection by the Republicans revealed that they had been misled, with many of the $38 billion cuts being merely illusions designed to change little in the real world. The Republicans carried this resentment leading into the second showdown in the summer of 2011, where the Republicans threatened to not raise the national debt ceiling until the Democrats agreed to spending cuts. This decision brought the world to the brink of another economic crisis, and Boehner began to lose discipline within his caucus. In this case, it can be how in some aspects greater party partisanship can become a necessity for effective government control.
Following the Iraq War, public dissatisfaction with the Bush administration led to more than two dozen Democrats taking control of seats in the House of Representatives in 2006. This victory elevated Representative Nancy Pelosi, a liberal, to House Speaker. In the Senate, Harry Reid, became majority leader, as the Democrats were able to win a slim majority with 49 seats, plus two independents who joined the caucus. The combination of these victories concluded unified Republican control of Congress. In the two months that followed, presidential elections took place, and Senator Barack Obama was sworn in as President. Democrats continued to expand their control in the House of Representatives, and a nearly filibuster proof majority was established in the Senate, creating what is referred to as a “supermajority”. Despite all of this, the rise of the Tea Party Movement in 2008, caused a rapid shift in public opinion, and this electorate influence was observed once again in Congress. Republicans won 63 new seats, and again took control of the House in 2010, making John Boehner their speaker. These newcomers came in with the intent of fighting Obama’s agenda, and it is here we observe the growth in partisanship. But as thoroughly discussed, it is not solely this partisanship that results in the exhausted forms of gridlock – instead what must be evaluated is the combination of this …show more content…
With the Democrats controlling the White House and the Senate, and the Republicans, with their deeply opposed views of anything on the Democratic agenda, controlling the House of Representatives, the ability to passing bills in 2011 came to a rolling stop. Once again the difficulty of balancing extreme levels of partisanship within bicameral legislatives is revealed. The present climate at the time set the stage for a series of crises that would take place shortly after. The first showdown occurred in April of 2011. The Republicans threated to force a government shutdown if the Democrats didn’t agree to budget cuts. In a dramatic fashion, the government was saved minutes before the deadline with the Democrats agreeing to make cuts. Later inspection by the Republicans revealed that they had been misled, with many of the $38 billion cuts being merely illusions designed to change little in the real world. The Republicans carried this resentment leading into the second showdown in the summer of 2011, where the Republicans threatened to not raise the national debt ceiling until the Democrats agreed to spending cuts. This decision brought the world to the brink of another economic crisis, and Boehner began to lose discipline within his caucus. In this case, it can be how in some aspects greater party partisanship can become a necessity for effective government control.