Reforming the Senate (Pols 204)

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 14
  • Published : January 31, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
Reforming the Senate

Intro
The Senate’s purpose is to be a second thought on legislative proposals after the House of Commons.[1] Members of the Senate are supposed to be a check and balance on the House of Commons. The Father of Confederacy designed the Senate for that reason. They are to be always checking on the other chamber and making sure legislation is going as it should be. Bicameral legislatures are common throughout the world and date back to early as the seventeen hundreds. Such countries as the United States of America (1787), German Confederation (1871), Australia (1901), Germany (1949), and India (1950).[2] Having a “…second chamber promotes democracy and protects democracy and protects minority rights by curbing high-handedness and arrogance in Cabinet and Commons.”[3] The Senate is a second chamber that the founder’s of this country envisioned and it serves as a check on the House and is apart of the bicameralism system. Fathers of Confederacy

When Canada’s founders were thinking of Canada’s legislature system they valued accountability.[4] Unicameralism is a single legislative house or chamber and their just isn’t the same accountability as the bicameralism legislatures.[5] They did not want one “high-handed Cabinet” because this could pose a threat and to the founders this was “classic forms of autocracy.”[6] This is why bicameralism was introduced to the legislature. They were concentrated on checks on balances in the form of The Cabinet, the Commons, and the Senate, which were like the three branches of government.[7] What is funny is that the word “democracy” was used differently back in those days and they used mixed or balanced.[8] The Founders were viewed as being Liberal democrats because of them picking the bicameralism legislature over the unicamerlism legislature.[9] Also the Father’s visions were never for a “fusion of powers” in the legislature, but that the three branches are constitutionally independent.[10] The Father’s were exceptionally concentrated on accountability and with an elected Senate this might not be possible White suggests.[11] The members of the Senate will be elected and government-controlled and they would be no different then the House of Commons.[12] Bicameralism

To be bicameral is having or consisting of two legislative branches.[13] Bicameralism is supposed to be for checks and balances of a government.[14] 178 Parliamentary democracies of the Parliamentary Union database in May 1999 had sixty-seven bicameral.[15] There are two main reasons for having a bicameral system and they have to do with the second chamber and representation of regional reviews.[16] Legislative review is essential in the second chambers duties on checks and balances.[17] When the Senate takes time to review bills this gives the media a chance to publicize and gives public awareness; which in turn puts the heat on politicians to reconsider legislation.[18] The second chamber is good for imposing constraints on the other chamber, especially with a majority in the House.[19] We are a democracy and with the Senate we can incorporate this. The Senate makes the process of legislation a process of political decision-making rather than a quick passing of what a majority government wants in the best interest of that party.[20] Representation is so important in the bicameral system at either the federal or national level because the House of Commons is based on this.[21] So the Senate must represent the regional interests of the provinces and give the less populous states a voice.[22] Also representation helps with minority interests and protection of proportional representation.[23] Senate vs. House of Commons

When the Fathers of Confederacy discussed the House of Commons they were unsure of the elected House of Commons respecting rights of property and poor judgment of majority to despoil the rich...
tracking img