top of page

The House Should Form a Bi-partisan Coalition

Updated: May 1, 2024

 

The US House of Representatives is dysfunctional because a small minority of Republicans can prevent legislation by threatening the speaker with loss of his job. Because the Republican majority is so slim, the defection from the speaker of a handful of his party’s members results in the loss of the speakership.

 

Democratic minority leader Hakeem Jeffries suggested that if the current speaker, Mike Johnson, were to bring to the floor of the House a measure to fund aid to Ukraine, Jeffries would find enough House Democrats to vote to retain him as speaker so he would keep his job regardless of some Republican defections. I suggest going farther, forming an interparty coalition, as is common in many parliamentary systems.

 

Democratic governments come in three general types. The US federal government has a president who is not a member of the legislative branch. In parliamentary systems, the prime minister is a member of the legislature and, like the speaker of the US House, loses his post if a majority opposes him. But there are two types of parliamentary systems: ones which, like the US, are dominated by two parties; and ones like Germany where there are many parties and no one party gains a governing majority.

 

In general, ministers in parliamentary systems are bound to follow the program established at the party convention. The leadership rarely allows individual members vote as they wish. American presidents, by contrast, often “reach across the aisle” to find bi-partisan support for legislation, because even if they have a majority in the House and a super-majority in the Senate, they often can’t count on all party members voting with the administration.

 

The UK is like the US in its voting system. People become members of Parliament by winning more votes than any competing candidate in their constituency, just as in the US people become members of the House or Senate by winning the most votes in their congressional district or state. This system favors dominance by two parties, as many voters think they are wasting their vote if they vote for any candidate who doesn’t represent one of these two parties (although coalitions with a third party have occurred in the UK).

 

Unlike the UK and US, in many parliamentary systems people vote for a party, not for individual candidates. A numbers of candidates from that party will become MPs in proportion to the vote for that party, once the party passes a threshold, which could be as low as 5% of the vote total. Exactly which members of the party who are running for a place in Parliament become MPs is determined by their place on the party list. If the Parliament had 100 members and the party won 15% of the popular vote, the 15 candidates on the top of the party’s list would win a seat.

 

In this voting system, several or many parties are typically represented in Parliament with no party commanding a majority. Because legislation requires a majority, no single party can govern alone. Two or more parties must form a coalition. Such coalitions prevail in Germany where governments are always formed by a coalition, usually including three or more parties.

 

Coalitions are achieved by party leaders agreeing on a joint program concerning the major issues of the day. This usually requires each party to relinquish or postpone advancing some of its own priorities. Members of all parties in the coalition are usually bound to vote according to the coalition agreement. Such coalitions may fall apart because new issues arise on which the parties cannot agree, or a party loses popularity due to its participation in the coalition and wants to regain the support of its base.

 

Currently, the US House has two parties, but four major factions, making each party like a coalition of moderates and less-moderates. Former Speaker McCarthy was done in by less-moderates within his party. I’m suggesting an interparty coalition of moderates. If Minority Leader Jeffries can come to an agreement with Speaker Johnson on a number of issues a coalition could be formed. If not, the interparty coalition of moderates could vote to oust him and replace him with some Republican amenable to a moderate agenda.

 

Jeffries would need the support of enough moderate Democrats in the House to outnumber non-moderate Republicans who threaten to remove the speaker (Johnson or his replacement) if he advances legislation that they oppose. The coalition could probably agree on a program to support military aid to allies, greater border security, and possibly more.

 

Moderates in both parties would gain the prestige that comes with accomplishment, and non-moderates of both parties would lose popular support, thereby weakening polarization and strengthening the political center, which is preferred by most Americans. Dysfunction is not inevitable; it’s a choice. A coalition is a better choice.

Comments


  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Linkedin

© 2023 by Peter S. Wenz.  All rights reserved.  Proudly created with Wix.com

bottom of page