It turns out, there are many pros to logrolling. (https://ivypanda.com/essays/logrolling-in-politics-and-its-impact-on-government-budget/) For starters, it allows the minority party a chance at being able to pass bills. They may not be able to get enough support on their own simply because of the small size of the party, but rather than years for the numbers to change through reelections, the minority party can trade for the votes of some of the more indifferent members on the majority party. Also, it allows bills that are necessary but unpleasant to be passed. While not many people would be happy about bills to protect the environment, they are necessary, especially in the modern age. Logrolling allows senators that think about the future benefit of a bill to further their ideas.
Despite all this, logrolling has an obvious negative: it allows for the growth of corruptness in our government if congressmen vote against their own opinions in hope of later help. So why is logrolling still allowed? Well, while congressmen could use logrolling on any bill, a lot of congressmen are aware that the people in their states' are the ones to reelect them. A senator from California is not likely to accept a logrolling deal if it means he has to vote against abortion rights, given that the people who elect him would become very unhappy. Such a decision may cost him his office in the next election.
So should we worry about logrolling? Not really. While it may seem like a problem on the surface, the democratic system of government keeps checks to make sure logrolling does not get out of hand. Instead, the public should focus on holding congressmen responsible for their decisions and electing well qualified and moral people.
I agree with the possible positives and negatives you have written concerning logrolling. However, I think that logrolling can still negatively impact Congress because designating the people as a check on Congress does not take into account that not everyone is informed about their representatives' actions in Congress. In fact, only about 34% of people can even name the three branches of government according to the article https://www.forbes.com/sites/jaredmeyer/2016/06/27/american-voters-are-ignorant-but-not-stupid/#439e3dc97ff1, displaying how uninformed many voters are. Thus, I do not think that voters can be used as a check against possible corruption in Congress since many voters do not even know the three branches of government and would therefore not be aware of the proposed legislation in Congress and how their representatives vote on this proposed legislation.
ReplyDeleteThese are all interesting points to make, but I think Aaron is correct in the fact that there is definitely a negative because of how uneducated the majority of people are about their government. This makes it harder to trust the people to be an effective check on the government.
ReplyDelete