Argument: Divided government places a necessary check on ambition

Welcome to Debatepedia! | About | Help | FAQ | Media Kit

	Views Article Discussion Edit History
Search Navigation Debatepedia Home IDEA Home Recent Changes Debate Digest cue Popular debates Newest pages Categories Internships Facebook group getting started User Guide Create a debate Create an argument Pro/con structure Contact Mailing list Twitter Donate! Other resources Useful links Link exchanges NFL resolution topics Other IDEA projects National Debate Series: Boston In other languages Toolbox What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link	Join Debatepedia's Facebook group! \| News: Next on Debate Digest: War on Drugs See Debatepedia's resources for the Spring 2010 The People Speak Global Debates on climate change adaptation Argument: Divided government places a necessary check on ambition From Debatepedia Jump to: navigation, search [Edit] Parent debate Debate: Divided government vs. one-party rule [Edit] Supporting quotations "Divided We Stand". Ryan Sager, Reason Online. February 2007 - one-party rule, by either party, is the worst of all possible worlds. Just as our three branches of government check each other, so do our two major parties. When that balance is thrown out of whack, all hell is let loose on the Constitution and on the taxpayer’s wallet. Retrieved from "http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Argument:_Divided_government_places_a_necessary_check_on_ambition"

Problem with the site?

Parent debate