[Contrapunctus]

I'd like to talk about the inefficiencies in the American "three-branch" model of government, and propose the addition of fourth branch to it. This thread should also resonate with anybody else living in a Federal republic that isn't the United States. I've played with this idea since I became interested in the writings of Sun Yat-sen. Today, as I skimmed over a webpage that had some of his writings on it, I came across this line that he had written:

One day I picked up a book entitled Liberty, written by a professor in Columbia University. In this book, the author points out the defects of the existing three-power constitution in America, and proposes a four-power constitution, which shall take away the power of impeachment from the legislature and vest it in a separate department independent of the legislative department. The author contends that when the legislature has the power to impeach, unscrupulous legislators misuse this power to intimidate the executive department. In this way the government has no freedom to do anything, and becomes extremely inefficient.

Source

This line evoked recent memories of news in the US. During the Obama Administration, I can recall multiple times that members of Congress have threatened to impeach the president. Granted, these might be empty threats, but they are threats nevertheless. In addition to that, Congress has held the government hostage with shut downs multiple times. Congress also seems to be in bed with corporate lobbyists, and the house and senate are both filled by elitists from rich and power families. Of course I make these observations while keeping in mind that the executive branch has also made its own breaches in power with its various clandestine branches, but that's another discussion.

I really think Sun struck gold with that line. If anything Congress has been ineffectual at best, leaving the President to strong arm his policies into play (e.g. the recent immigration reform.) How can a modern republic prevent a Congress from 'gumming up' the rest of the government? Sun also prescribed a solution to the perceived problem:

"It is Sun’s belief that only the introduction of a Five-Power Constitution could
eliminate the shortcomings of the three powers within the Western doctrine
of separation of powers. In his view, the separation of executive, judicial and
legislative powers are incomplete in two respects, firstly, the executive
appointment of bureaucrats and mere election of lawmakers lack a serious
and transparent examination system, which limits the possibility of having
the most talented to serve for the state..."

"[Sun Yat-sen] was particularly resisting to the American example where the right to be
elected is often constrained by factors like financial disparity among
candidates, and corruption in election. He argued that the United States
congress was “full of unwise and ignorant people” and the appointment in the executive wing was often determined by connections and personal will of
the serving president. Sun believed that this would result in bribery and bias
in the selection of government officials. He believed that government
ministers should aim at serving the people instead of agreeing with certain
vested political interests. Since state examinations were not independent
from the executive, selections and appointments of the public servants
would be subjected to the arbitrariness of ruling political parties. In his view,
this would lead to the production of unsatisfactory bureaucrats, who would
only serve the party they are loyal to."

"On the other hand, Sun regarded the legislature’s possession of
impeachment powers, that is, the powers to recall government officials, a
cause of legislative hegemony over the executive government. Since the
functions of recalling and supervising state officials were both installed in the
legislature, lawmakers could easily abuse their extensive powers. Both
these shortcomings could severely hamper the quality and efficiency of
public administrative services. The power to adjudicate upon officials should
rest with an institution independent from others, including the legislature.
This led to his formulation of an independent impeachment organ, the
Supervision Council. The Supervision Council should not only check
misconduct and misbehavior in national politics, rectify mistakes, but also
improve the incapacities of the republican polity."

Source: BUILDING CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY ON
ORIENTAL FOUNDATIONS: AN ANATOMY OF
SUN YAT-SEN’S CONSTITUTIONALISM
by Eric Chiyeung Ip

I personally like the idea of having a fourth branch of the government responsible for observing the legislative branch. My only questions is how would the members of this branch be put into the office? The only answer I can think of would be through a vote by the people. Any other form of appointment would compromise the integrity of the branch. It reminds me of that cliched Latin proverb: Who watches the watchers?

In addition to a new branch of government on the three party system, I'd also like to see a complete shift in the culture surrounding the legislative branch. By implementing the observational branch, the congress would have a sense that the floor could be swept out from underneath them at any time. If the politicians cannot be motivated by duty to their constituents, then they should be motivated by respect of the law.

So my fellow Liberals and members of PoFo, how do you feel about this notion? How do you feel it should be implemented? How do you feel about a culture that would seem to put fear in Congressmen?

[SolarCross]

I am not liberal, but my take on this is that adding complexity to a system already jammed up with complexity will only make it more messy and stupid, whatever the good intentions.

The best government is one that just takes care of the military and lends its force to some basic law and otherwise lets civilians take care of their own business. There should only be one branch of gov, the executive, which only concerns itself with military matters and a semi-independent, and essentially civilian, judiciary which concerns itself with civilian law. This would imply an average tax take of around 3-5% of GDP instead of the 40% as is typical with a bloated and sclerotic democratic republic.

[VerminLord]

I think it is a good idea in theory, but it would be very complex and inefficient if implemented in today's American government. It would work if the Founding Fathers added the observational branch from the start instead of just three branches, or we could add one today, but it would require a lot of government reform.

[Contrapunctus]

I am not liberal, but my take on this is that adding complexity to a system already jammed up with complexity will only make it more messy and stupid, whatever the good intentions.

The best government is one that just takes care of the military and lends its force to some basic law and otherwise lets civilians take care of their own business. There should only be one branch of gov, the executive, which only concerns itself with military matters and a semi-independent, and essentially civilian, judiciary which concerns itself with civilian law. This would imply an average tax take of around 3-5% of GDP instead of the 40% as is typical with a bloated and sclerotic democratic republic.

Yeah I have a fear that it would be a messy thing to implement. That's not even taking it into consideration making sure it would operate with minimal corruption. You and I have very different takes on what a government looks like.

I think it is a good idea in theory, but it would be very complex and inefficient if implemented in today's American government. It would work if the Founding Fathers added the observational branch from the start instead of just three branches, or we could add one today, but it would require a lot of government reform.

Adding it today would be a nightmare. It would take years of reforming the current branches and 'purging' it of corruption before an entirely new branch would be added. I don't even think Americans would react well to a new branch.