The Pros And Cons Of Congressional Dysfunction

Is the U.S. Congress, as some would claim, “dysfunctional?” Or does it continue to operate, generally speaking, in ways that the framers would approve of? Be sure to provide appropriate congressional literature to support your answers.

Contemporary discussions of “Congressional dysfunction” are nothing new. In fact, Congress has historically endured degrees of perceived dysfunction throughout its tenure – and the fundamental systems of the United States Constitutional design remain relevant. Yet, the public’s evaluation of Congress appears to suggest that that Congress is definitively dysfunctional. As a recent example, the shutdown of the American government in 2013 crystallized voter sentiments that divided Congressional chambers had

A central question that encapsulates this debate is, “Why is Congress dysfunctional?” An implied corollary to this question also seeks to investigate if this perception is harmful to American democracy and if damaged beyond repair. This essay seeks to contribute to the debate of Congressional dysfunction. A critical element of this debate is ascertaining who is responsible for determining if Congress is dysfunctional. In the scope of this essay, I will argue the American electorate is final adjudicator of Congressional dysfunction. Recent polling shows that the American public overwhelming disapproves of the Congressional performance.

I will address these considerations in four sections. First, I will discuss the original intent of the Constitutional framers and their vision for the American government. Second, I will define dysfunction and expand this lexicon to include political, institutional, and civic characteristics as applied to the body of Congress. Third, I will explore if the electorate is complicit in Congressional dysfunction. I will conclude this essay by arguing that public evaluation of Congress as dysfunctional is

Therefore, they created the legislative branch to draft and pass policy, the executive branch to approve (or disapprove) and implement said legislation, and a judicial branch to guarantee compliance with the Constitution. Additionally, the Framers understood that democracy was a fragile enterprise, with success and stability hinging on requirements of compromise and deliberation (Roche, 1961). Furthermore, the Framers envisioned that the United States political system punctuated by ‘balance’, where each branch of government appropriately asserts its authority and does not acquiesce to the whims of another (Lane and Oreskes,