Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

A year of broken standards for America’s democracy

State of the Union Address 2019

During his State of the Union address this year, President Trump said he would stonewall the legislative process if members of Congress don't play ball, writes Neal.

Zach Gibson/Getty Images

Neal is federal government affairs manager at R Street Institute, a nonpartisan and pro-free-market public policy research organization.

The term "democratic norms" has become a misnomer over the last year. America's governing institutions are undermined by elected officials who dishonor their offices and each other. Standards of behavior and "normal" processes of governance seem to be relics of a simpler time. Our democracy has survived thus far, but the wounds are many.

Free speech and free press have been the White House's two consistent whipping posts. Comments such as "I think it is embarrassing for the country to allow protestors" and constant attacks on press credibility showcase President Trump's disdain for the pillars of democracy. Traditional interactions between the administration and the press are no longer taken for granted. Demeaning, toxic criticisms have become so common that they're being ignored. As the administration revokes critics' press passes and daily briefings are canceled, normalcy in this arena is sorely missed.


Meanwhile, the president spouts daily outrages over Twitter and legislators race to the bottom with their own pronouncements. Most notably, the president recently suggested that several congresswomen — all American citizens — "go back and fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came." That the president's tweets count as Official White House Statements demonstrates that this is becoming "acceptable" language from a public official, only underscoring how far civility in political discourse has declined.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Equally concerning is the deterioration of America's institutional balance of powers. In February, Trump made clear in his State of the Union address that he would stonewall the legislative process if members of Congress don't play ball. "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation. It just doesn't work that way," he said.

That threat materialized in February, when the president declared a national emergency to fund construction of his border wall, making good on his promise to "do it if I want." Congress attempted to respond to Trump's abuse of emergency powers, but gridlock prevented any success, signaling the first branch's own institutional decay.

While the White House continually breaks precedents, Congress fails to maintain its own institutional processes. The 116th Congress began with the longest government shutdown in history and has yet to pass a budget for fiscal 2020, essentially abdicating its power of the purse. Recently, the American Institutions Network noted with concern that 64 percent of our representatives and senators have never participated in a regular-order budget process, which hasn't been completed successfully since 1996.

In terms of other "normal" responsibilities, the Senate struggles to maintain even regular floor procedure. In July, the Senate set a record for the least number of amendment votes taken before August recess — only four roll call votes had been recorded since January.

All this dysfunction has had collateral effects on the third branch of our government. The judiciary has been saddled with divisive issues, from gun control to detention of immigrants, giving the appearance that the court is picking sides in a political war.

Public perception of the judiciary is the most politicized in decades, and talk of "fixing" (read: packing) the court has become fashionable. The notion that jurists rise above the political fray is being discarded, leaving room for an image of the court as a political weapon for majorities.

The late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan once warned of "defining deviancy down" by dismissing the abnormal as typical. This idea resonates here. Recent changes to America's political fabric are substantial. Congress' legislative accomplishments seem paltry in the face of the administration's actions. Democratic norms have been broken across all three branches of government, and our system of checks and balances has lost its teeth.

As 2020 approaches, concerned citizens should use their votes to encourage candidates to restore normalcy in governance. In the meantime, we should continue to call out violations of democratic norms and fight for their reinstatement.

Read More

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Podcast: How do police feel about gun control?

Jesus "Eddie" Campa, former Chief Deputy of the El Paso County Sheriff's Department and former Chief of Police for Marshall Texas, discusses the recent school shooting in Uvalde and how loose restrictions on gun ownership complicate the lives of law enforcement on this episode of YDHTY.

Listen now

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

Podcast: Why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies

There's something natural and organic about perceiving that the people in power are out to advance their own interests. It's in part because it’s often true. Governments actually do keep secrets from the public. Politicians engage in scandals. There often is corruption at high levels. So, we don't want citizens in a democracy to be too trusting of their politicians. It's healthy to be skeptical of the state and its real abuses and tendencies towards secrecy. The danger is when this distrust gets redirected, not toward the state, but targets innocent people who are not actually responsible for people's problems.

On this episode of "Democracy Paradox" Scott Radnitz explains why conspiracy theories thrive in both democracies and autocracies.

Your Take:  The Price of Freedom

Your Take: The Price of Freedom

Our question about the price of freedom received a light response. We asked:

What price have you, your friends or your family paid for the freedom we enjoy? And what price would you willingly pay?

It was a question born out of the horror of images from Ukraine. We hope that the news about the Jan. 6 commission and Ketanji Brown Jackson’s Supreme Court nomination was so riveting that this question was overlooked. We considered another possibility that the images were so traumatic, that our readers didn’t want to consider the question for themselves. We saw the price Ukrainians paid.

One response came from a veteran who noted that being willing to pay the ultimate price for one’s country and surviving was a gift that was repaid over and over throughout his life. “I know exactly what it is like to accept that you are a dead man,” he said. What most closely mirrored my own experience was a respondent who noted her lack of payment in blood, sweat or tears, yet chose to volunteer in helping others exercise their freedom.

Personally, my price includes service to our nation, too. The price I paid was the loss of my former life, which included a husband, a home and a seemingly secure job to enter the political fray with a message of partisan healing and hope for the future. This work isn’t risking my life, but it’s the price I’ve paid.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Given the earnest question we asked, and the meager responses, I am also left wondering if we think at all about the price of freedom? Or have we all become so entitled to our freedom that we fail to defend freedom for others? Or was the question poorly timed?

I read another respondent’s words as an indicator of his pacifism. And another veteran who simply stated his years of service. And that was it. Four responses to a question that lives in my heart every day. We look forward to hearing Your Take on other topics. Feel free to share questions to which you’d like to respond.

Keep ReadingShow less
No, autocracies don't make economies great

libre de droit/Getty Images

No, autocracies don't make economies great

Tom G. Palmer has been involved in the advance of democratic free-market policies and reforms around the globe for more than three decades. He is executive vice president for international programs at Atlas Network and a senior fellow at the Cato Institute.

One argument frequently advanced for abandoning the messy business of democratic deliberation is that all those checks and balances, hearings and debates, judicial review and individual rights get in the way of development. What’s needed is action, not more empty debate or selfish individualism!

In the words of European autocrat Viktor Orbán, “No policy-specific debates are needed now, the alternatives in front of us are obvious…[W]e need to understand that for rebuilding the economy it is not theories that are needed but rather thirty robust lads who start working to implement what we all know needs to be done.” See! Just thirty robust lads and one far-sighted overseer and you’re on the way to a great economy!

Keep ReadingShow less