I am endlessly fascinated by UK politics, especially the extent to which they manage to keep poking along without what we Americans consider sine qua non -- an extremely-difficult-to-amend Constitution that lays out both governmental structure and guarantees of key rights. The Brits seem to depend on tradition, common sense, and majority rule, which, to my mind, makes them even more of an anomoly in the world than us Yanks.

As an example, here's a story about some sweeping governmental and electoral reform being proposed in the UK -- which, as far as I can tell, only requires either the PM to assert it or the Commons to give it a nod (and since the PM runs the majority party in the Commons, the two aren't all that different a proposition). Whereas in the US system, half the items would require constitutional amendments (supermajorities in Congress and approval by two-thirds of the states) and the other half would be considered the prerogative of the states not the federal government in the first place. It's both intriguing ("if only we could reform things that basic that easily") and a bit scary ("what if Dubya could reform things that basic that easily?").

Interesting. I think I prefer our system (being a big believer in the general merit of govermental friction), but there are times ...

Filed under :: Politics & Law
Link · Print · Edit · TR/G