Why does our republican movement insist on trying to do the impossible?
This is its hopeless attempts to graft a politicians’ republic onto a crowned republic.
There is after all a perfectly good model of a politicians’ republic which, except for its civil war and long dependence on slavery, has worked reasonably well.
The rejection by the House of the President’s bailout of those delinquent bankers may or may not be a good thing economically, but it certainly demonstrates the checks and balances in the US constitution.
The legislature is not beholden to the President. Otherwise he would have close to dictatorial powers.
And power does tend to corrupt, as we know.
Now I don’t think the US system is a patch on our Westminster Crowned republic.
That is because it’s a politicians’ republic – a good one, but still a politicians’ republic.
After the Bay of Pigs fiasco in Cuba for which he was responsible , President Kennedy told the CIA deputy head:
“ If this were the UK, you as the civil servant would continue and I would resign. But it’s not.
“ In the United States, I continue and you resign.”
In addition the US system is too rigid. If the congress decides to impeach the President, it can paralyse the government for long periods, as happened under Richard Nixon.
And the now two year one billion dollar presidential election campaigns would be worth it if they produced better government.
But they manifestly don’t. They will probably soon extend over three years.
I am with Cardinal Moran, who at the time of Federation observed that in Australia, we have the most perfect form of republican government.
We do indeed.