Analysis Of Divided We Now Stand Essay

The structure of our government is complex. With local, state, and federal levels of government, it can be confusing to understand how the government works. Luckily, Morris Fiorina wrote a document about the structure of the government called The Rise of the Washington Establishment. The Washington establishment simply refers to big government workers such as, included but not limited to, house representatives, senators, congressmen, and party leaders. These legislators and bureaucrats are the ones who run the government and establish laws. In his document, Fiorina argued that these people are in office only for personal gains. He strongly focused on congress, in which he believes they act in favor of their reelection. Power, money, and insurance benefits are the main influences that motivate congressmen to hold their position. Governmental representatives are supposed to reflect the values of the people, but they ultimately act in a selfish manor. The Rise of the Washington Establishment analyzes how congressmen act for their own self-interest.

The growing ideological gap between the United States’ two major political parties, in other words, rising levels of political polarization, has had a negative impact on American politics as it results in Congressional inefficient, public apathy, and economic inequality.

The Founding Fathers created the United States government believing in permanent liberty and democracy for America’s citizens. The Framers were highly opposed of political parties because it threatens unity among the country. Political parties develop people’s political opinions, resulting in polarization of government. Polarization is a large and defined division between parties. Congress’ polarization is growing, while American citizens’ polarization is less pronounced in most of the United States.

In the book, Culture War?, by Morris Fiorina, the myth of a polarized America is exposed. Fiorina covers issues such as why Americans believe that America is polarized, that Red and Blue State people aren’t as different as they are made out to be, and that the United States is not polarized along traditional cleavage lines. This book even covers perspectives on abortion, homosexuality, and whether or not electoral cleavages have shifted. A large point of Fiorina’s is his take on the 2004 election. He ends the book with, how did our great nation get to this position of proclaimed polarization, and how do we improve from here?

There is a disease running rampant on the streets of Washington DC. It is a disease that cripples the economy, destroys jobs and leaves Americans living on the streets. Inordinate spending perpetuates the sickness and corrupt politicians keep the cure at bay. Federal expansion is ruining the lives of American citizens and creating a society of impecunious and pusillanimous citizens, unable and unwilling to speak out against the higher power which controls every aspect of their lives. “Where are our (sic) Men of abilities? Why do they not come forth to save their Country?” George Washington once inquired to his fellow man, now, many Americans may find themselves asking this same question as the country continues its spiral downwards

In her article, Page first demonstrates how American citizens believe they are the last people to blame for America’s separation and division of people. She then outlines how American citizens are truly the ones to blame for polarization due to their

The polarization of the political parties is a reflection of a country, not simply a government divided, but the country’s populous in growing further apart. Alan Abramowitz indicates the polarization of the Democrats and Republicans causes them to be on opposing sides on almost all issues and Washington reflects the growing division within Americans (714). Thus the major problem with Polarization and gridlock is not the simply the inability to pass the legislation when gridlock occurs but what it does to the morale of American citizens. D.J. Flynn and Laurel Harbridge completed two surveys in order to study how partisan congress affects public opinion. A result from the study indicated most people will accept legislation in favor of the opposing party than they will gridlock (885) and while more research is needed the result of their survey is gridlock does cause a decrease in the populist confidence in Congress (Flynn, Harbridge 890). It is clear something needs to be done to improve the mindset of the American people. One of the best ways to improve the mindset of the American populace is for them to become more educated. When the country was first established, people were not privy to every action the congress was taking as it happened, and therefore the quibbles within congress were not in the forefront of people’s minds. Even Melnick illuminated the fact that the populist is now bombarded with opinions about what is happing in Washington. He indicated when the constitutional convention took place the meeting was behind closed doors miles from constituents allowing them

Dysfunction can be found within the U.S. government. For the purpose of this paper I will argue that the dysfunction is largely rooted and caused by U.S. culture and also caused by the political system. Furthermore, I will conclude that through the culmination of a dysfunctional culture the dysfunctions found within the political system has resulted in a dysfunctional government.

In his commentary, What’s Wrong with Washington? Tribalism.,” Norman Ornstein states that he authored a segment about the 112th Congress entitled, “Worst. Congress. Ever.” His title and thesis statement endured a significant amount of criticism. Ornstein suggests that there have been numerous periods of political disarray in The United States. Everything in The United States governing body plays a significant role. If one part of the body fails to follow through, dysfunction will result. For that reason, Ornstein claims that he would adjust the title to make it apply to the 113th Congress. He claims that we are in the most dysfunctional period in history. Ornstein claims that our dysfunction is primarily caused by tribalism. Tribalism is

This creates a paradox for the reader. In a book designed to remove the impression of polarity, why single out specific subjects in this polarizing way? The logical conclusion is that these topics do have a specific effect on refuting the polarization claim. In the opening chapters, Fiorina et al. illustrate the perceived polarization of partisans, the war in Iraq, and a myriad of other factors like gun control (p. 1-75). With partisanship they found the issue to be a problem of “confusing positions with choice” (2011, p. 25) and thus dismissing the polarization of Americans. Analyzing he war in Iraq yielded similar results (p. 51-55). The authors found that when asked to judge broad statements, like Bush’s handling of Iraq, respondents answered in the partisan way, with more republicans supporting and democrats disapproving (p. 54). However, when the same people were asked to rate Bush’s handling of Iraq in terms of individual acts, the polarization faded (p. 52-53). While there were still dissidents and supporters, the divide was not along partisan lines but rather individual lines, evidenced by the near equal support of republicans and democrats for the use of military force overseas. All of this supports the argument that Fiorina et al. make throughout but provides no insight into why some topics are grouped

Abramowitz’s argument that the American electorate have become more polarized and that the moderate center is disappearing is more of a quantitative argument than a qualitative one. Based on election studies and exit polls, Abramowitz’ observations include the correlation between engagement, party identification, religious and social groups, ideological realignment, and education on the idealization and polarization of the public. Contrary to Fiorina, “there is no disconnect between the political elite and the American people. Polarization in Washington reflects polarization within the public, especially within the politically engaged segment of the public” (Abramowitz 2010, x). According to the ANES (American National Election Studies), the

There are many theories as to how or why political polarization was formed, and the impact it has on government in modern day. Polarization has varied significantly over the years ever since the 1970’s. However, what is the true cause and can it be explained? This paper will discuss some theories on how political polarization came about, and analyzes some accounts of polarization overall. Defining political polarization is vital into developing an understanding of how or why it was initially formed.

The author of the book Divided we Fall develops the idea of tolerance in the novel by writing about a Federal Identification Act that the government was trying to pass. “The Federal Identification Card would provide a high-tech replacement for flimsy paper social security cards, saving millions of dollars by streamlining and simplifying access to federal services and providing easy proof of legal eligibility for employment” (Pg 7). Many people disagreed with this act because they suspected that the government was using the cards to spy on people. There were many protest in the U.S. and especially one in Boise. “Overnight violence and vandalism have marred the second day of protests in downtown Boise as police struggle to maintain order.

Some of these systems like “separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, and pluralism, are dysfunctional and obsolete” (Lynn). Most “find America’s political dysfunction sad” and also that America 's “entire political system is” also just as sad and dysfunctional (Nicholas). This political dysfunction makes American politics broken and it doesn’t help that the key systems in use today just do not work. Any work that can be done in the government is stalled or impossible to accomplish from this.

The public’s perspectives on political issues may change as various circumstances happen every day. Nature around us influences the choices that we deliver and the perspectives that we as American nationals hold. In order to obtain those views and concluded on decisions is based on the values that we embrace. These values are originated from our upbringing, friends, family, and our life experiences that we, as individuals, face. Our principles then determine what we deem important or non-important and in a political sense can even tell us what party we identify ourselves.