彩61-彩61
彩612023-08-26

彩61

中新网评:美国众议长选举“连续剧”暴露美式民主痼疾******

  中新网北京1月9日电(蒋鲤)在15轮投票表决后,美国众议院议长选举这场“连续剧”终于落下帷幕,众议院共和党领袖凯文•麦卡锡最终成功当选第55任美国众议院议长。这是美国国会过去164年来耗时最久的一次议长选举记录,将美国“对抗式民主”的弊端暴露无遗。

资料图:美国众议院共和党领袖麦卡锡。中新社记者 沙晗汀 摄

  由于两党对立加剧、党派内斗、利益分配不均等因素,众议长选举陷入一场拉锯战。在此次众议长竞选中,美国民主党议员继续抱团,多轮投票中,一票不投麦卡锡,共和党右翼“强硬派”领头的约20人小团体也拒绝投票麦卡锡。

  麦卡锡的当选之路一波三折,除了本人的“政治投机派”角色在国会不受欢迎外,与共和党内部政治分歧关系密切。

  一方面,共和党党内反对者认为,麦卡锡对民主党态度过于软弱,无力对抗民主党控制的参议院和拜登政府,另一方面,因为共和党的多数优势微弱,党内一些影响力较小的派系的政治力量则被放大,有利于他们巩固自己的选票。

  此外,党内反对者也认为,自己的选票没有换取更多利益,希望以此作为筹码换取麦卡锡更大的让步,比如让他们获得众议院重要委员会中的职务。

  作为仅次于美国总统、副总统的政坛三号人物,众议院议长通常由众议院多数党领袖担任,选举几乎没有悬念。然而,麦卡锡此次为当选,不得不做出多个关键让步,其中可能包括恢复一项罢黜议长动议机制,使得众议长的权力被削弱,难以掌控众议院。

  美国有线电视新闻网CNN称,麦卡锡在这场不合时宜的政治勒索中作出让步,这种绥靖政策只会让极端主义势力更加强大。

  这场引发全世界围观的尴尬选举暴露出美国政治存在严重的对立和分化。在权力博弈思维的裹挟下,党派利益凌驾于国家和人民利益之上,美国两党相互拆台,陷入“为反对而反对”的无脑对垒。而即便是一党内,也会因为利益分配问题产生不同的小派系,相互对抗,选票变成了谋利益的工具。

  从国会山骚乱到打破记历史记录的15轮众议长选举,“对抗式民主”让美国政治陷入瓶颈,长期对抗势必会让政客们丧失客观公正的判断能力,其政治阶层是否有能力治理国家也会引发质疑。

  两党之争和党派内斗进一步放大了美国政治体制弊病,美国所谓的“民主”形象,让全世界大跌眼镜。鼓吹以选民利益为先的美式选举,变成了政客们利益置换的游戏,进一步彰显出美国“民主政治”日渐失能,不断极化的党争已使美国政治制度陷入死循环。

  House speaker election reveals deep-rooted problems in U.S. democracy

  (ECNS) -- The Republican leader Kevin McCarthy was elected as the 55th speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives after 15 ballots. As the most grueling House speaker election in the past 164 years, the election has highlighted the defects of the country’s "confrontational democracy".

  The election once reached a stalemate due to intense partisan strife, inner-party struggle among the Republicans, uneven distribution of interests, and more. Democratic Party members forged a close alliance, refusing to vote for McCarthy, while about 20 Republicans also declined to cast ballots for the GOP leader.

  Except for his unpopular role as a "political speculator" in Congress, McCarthy’s hard-won election can be attributed to turmoil within the Republican Party.

  On the one hand, opponents in the Republican Party believe that the GOP leader's attitude toward the Democrats is too weak to confront the Senate controlled by Democrats and the Biden administration.

  On the other hand, the political power of some less influential factions in the Republican Party has been amplified due to the Party’s weak majority advantage in the House of Representatives, which is conducive to consolidating their ticket warehouses.

  Meanwhile, these opponents believe that their votes failed to win them more benefits, hoping to use this as a bargaining chip for McCarthy's further concessions, such as getting them positions in important House Committees.

  As the third political figure after the President and Vice President of the U.S., the speaker, by tradition, is the head of the majority party in the House of Representatives.

  But McCarthy has made many concessions in order to bring the ultra conservatives along, involving what’s known as the “motion to vacate,” a mechanism by which members can force a vote to depose the speaker. The reported concessions will empower individual members at the expense of McCarthy’s sway as speaker.

  CNN thought the concessions he made during this unseemly political shakedown would only make the extremist faction more powerful.

  This embarrassing election, which has drawn global attention, exposed the serious opposition and polarization in American politics. Both Democrats and Republicans put their interests before that of the country and its people, attacking and opposing each other irrationally.

  Besides, different factions arise within a single party and confront each other because of the distribution of interests. Votes have become a tool to win more benefits.

  From Capitol riots to the House Speaker election with record-breaking ballots, "confrontational democracy" has become a bottleneck of American politics. Long-term confrontation will surely impede politicians to think objectively and fairly while their capacity of governing the country will also raise doubts among the public.

  Both parties’ struggle and infighting among the Republicans have further amplified the defects of the American political system, with its "democratic" image shocking the world.

  The U.S.-style election, which advocates putting voters' interests first, has become a game of interest exchange among politicians. In addition, it further demonstrates the malfunction of American "democratic politics" and the constantly polarized party struggle that has trapped the American political system into an infinite cycle.

  • 献血与评优挂钩,“自愿”还有多少真实成分?******

      据1月10日红星新闻报道,近日,为缓解血液库存下降的压力,不少城市组织起流动献血站点进入街道社区等活动。辽宁大连某中学下发了一则号召教师献血的通知,其中提到“献血者在学校评职、评优、评先中同等条件予以优先考虑”。这种将自愿献血与评优评先挂钩的行为引发舆论关注。目前,校方表示考虑不周,已撤回通知。

      血液库存不足,一直困扰着不少地方。由于疫情影响,各地血液库存告急的问题显得更为突出,急需拓展献血人群和调动社会献血积极性。正因此,很多地方都在组织献血活动,其中不乏一些激励举措,这背后的善意值得肯定。

      然而,不是所有激励措施都值得倡导。将教师献血与评优评先挂钩,表面上看,是一种激励,但如此措施的公平性值得商榷。毕竟,能否献血不只取决于意愿,还受到身体条件等方面因素的影响,如有的人患有不宜献血的疾病等。

      应该明确的是,献血与教师能力素质并无关联,教师评定职称、评优的主要依据应当是其教学能力和水平,与教学活动无关的一些条件不应被包括在内。也就是说,激励人们献血应当避开职业评价。

      根据我国献血法的规定,国家提倡十八周岁至五十五周岁的健康公民自愿献血。这一法律条款向社会传递出的明确信息是:献血是自愿的,不能强制。报道显示,上述学校所在区下发的《关于在全区机关企事业单位开展无偿献血的通知》中明确,“本次献血工作纳入各部门、单位工作实绩考核”“每个单位参与献血人数不低于在岗人数10%,每人献血量不少于200ml”。如此做法显然会折损“自愿”的真实性和成色,也容易导致一些学校在落实相关工作时乱作为。

      激励献血,既要调动公众的积极性、尊重献血者、呵护公益爱心,也要强调自愿、保证公平。比如,要落实好献血者自己及近亲属用血的优惠政策,简化免费用血的手续,充分体现公益互助的特质;单位或行业组织献血可以给予职工一定的营养补贴,适当安排职工休假休息等;政府层面可以给予某些符合条件的献血者一定的礼遇,如授予道德模范称号等。

      鼓励民众定期自愿无偿献血是一项长期工程,切忌用力过猛。(工人日报 木须虫)

    中国网客户端

    国家重点新闻网站,9语种权威发布

    彩61地图