As the world waits with baited breath for results from the British election (well maybe not Americans, us insular bastards), Matthew Yglesias commented on the British political system:

If you think the Electoral College is a screwy way of determining who gets to be President, you should check out the truly fucked-up British political system. I’ve been playing around with the BBC’s election calculator which lets you plug in percentage-wise vote totals for the parties and estimates the parliamentary outcome, and you’ll see that the combination of a huge number (over 600) of tiny electoral districts (the UK has way fewer people than the USA) with a two-and-a-half party system (counting the Lib Dems as a major-minor party) the hypercentralization of power in Westminster (there’s very little in the way of local government and the parliament can selectively abolish or modify the powers of local governments at whim) and ironclad majoritarianism in parliament creates a situation where policy outcomes are only loosely related to election results.

I’m not sure if his understanding of the BBC’s electoral calculator is entirely accurate, but his analysis of the British system of government is fairly spot-on in my mind. With few if any of our structural and proceedural safeguards and seperation of powers the United States has, the United Kingdom seems more like a generally benevolent, popularly elected dictatorship than a true democracy (or Republic). With most everything in the country controlled at the national level, and without independent branches the whole system is scarily centralized.

I took a class in college that looked at the British and French systems of government, and like most of college I don’t remember much from it, but I DO remember one amazing fact. Prime Ministers in the UK have a very firm grasp on power. When Margaret Thatcher was PM, something like 97% of the policies she suggested were passed. Even weaker PMs still get over 85-90% of their policies through.

Can you imagine any American president with that degree of control over an entire nation?

Just imagine if Bush got 97% of his legislation through Congress? Imagine further there were no state governments, so local officials in Vermont, California, Florida, New York, North Dakota, and Alabama would all be appointed by one guy from Texas. 97% of them would be confirmed too. Wow. *shudder*

Of course we have reason for alarm, because while you and I may shudder, this is exactly what Bush would love to see. With his reputation for ramming through controversial legislation with just the slimmest of majorities and a good deal of hammering, and the proposed elimination of the filibuster it seems some folks in power want to do everything they can to hold onto that power and enhance it.

Let the British have their system, no way would I want it here. Despite our failings, the American system looks just fine for me. Maybe tweak it a bit with Instant Runoff Voting, and it’d be perfect.

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 5th, 2005 at 4:15 pm and is filed under Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.