Gridlock is good

One of the best things about our U.S. Constitution is the separation of powers. Many will contend all this does is cause gridlock that prevents progress from being made, yet the founding fathers would say this is good.

Very few countries have a bicameral legislature and a separate executive. Most have an executive branch that is of the same party as the legislature, and there is rarely any gridlock. Laws that are written rarely have a problem getting passed.

That's not the case in the U.S. It's very difficult for a law to be passed by both house and the executive branch. The founders wanted this because they wanted to make sure minorities had protection. They wanted to make sure legislatures couldn't pass laws that were to the disadvantage of minorities. They wanted to make sure the majority could not easily vote away the rights of the minority.

If at the last minute someone thinks a law is a bad idea, it's not too hard to throw a wrench into it in the U.S. In other countries -- in most countries -- it's hard to stop bad laws from getting passed.

The founders made it this way because they wanted to make sure no bad laws got passed. They wanted to make sure laws made were good and benefited the masses for all time, as opposed to one group of people right now.

The 2014 midterm election results were a good example of how, while the media chants otherwise, most people in this country want gridlock.  Obama was handed an opportunity to make changes, and all he did was force legislature people didn't want, such as Obamacare.  So they voted republicans into office to create gridlock to stop him.

So, while you'll often hear people talking about how gridlock is bad, how it impedes progress, the truth is that gridlock can be a necessary good,  As the old saying goes, sometimes it's better to do nothing than to do something stupid.  It is better to play it safe than to risk the future.