08.22.2014  |   | Subscribe  | Contact us

All News & Blogs

E-mail Alerts

Checks and balances are working too well

Date published: 5/8/2014

This is regarding Bob Curtis' May 4 letter ["Checks and balances seem to be missing"].

Why would you print such a ridiculous letter devoid of any logical conclusions? You might as well print "Our country is being run by aliens because I said so."

In what way is our country being run like a banana republic, as Mr. Curtis states?

Are we metaphorically a dictatorship that operates purely for the profit of private corporations? Many conservatives would beg to differ with that, saying that we have too many laws and taxes that hinder private enterprise, effectively making us not a banana republic but more like a socialist collective (I am not saying we are that either, but some would claim that).

Are we literally like Honduras or Guatemala in the early 20th century, whose economies were dependent on the export of bananas and where national politics were manipulated by a powerful company all with the goal of maximizing profit with no regard for the local population?

I would like clarification because I just want to know what kind of banana republic I'm living in.

As far as his assertion that we have no more checks and balances in this country, I am wondering when the Constitution was amended, because I missed it.

As far as I know, we still have an executive, a legislative and a judicial branch of the federal government. From what I can see, those branches are alive and kicking and still separate and able to limit the power of each other, as the framers of our federal government intended.

In fact, the checks and balances, which Mr. Curtis laments we have lost, are working so well that nothing gets done. The legislative logjam that has come from two different branches of government controlled by opposing parties that can't seem to compromise is of epic proportions.

So, which checks and balances are missing?

Brett Anderson