Congress does seem to function like that, in a way that the HoC doesn't (at least not to that extent). Odd, I wonder why one and not the other - surely there is something beyond televising that has done this.
The argument for cameras in court has always struck me as weak nowadays given how easily you can access opinions online and eventually get the audio.
It probably has to do with the superiority of the parliamentary system. The House of Commons is essentially where all power is centralized. The Prime Minister and Cabinet are all members and are all accountable. The system here in the US has resorted to pointing fingers. In this current political paradigm, all fingers are pointed at the Senate. We have too many veto points. The Founders intended for periodic change, but too many believe the Constitution arrived on stone tablets from Jesus Christ himself.
1. Hasn't the UK replaced the law lords with a separate supreme court that is outside the power of parliament?
2. I have read the UK has an unwritten constitution. How much "teeth" that has as a practical I don't know, but whatever its degree of relevance, perhaps with a supreme court now operating, the unwritten constitution might become more written perhaps over time.
3. Do you know why the UK was the sole place on earth (passed on to its colonies of course) that developed a common law system where cases have precedential value?
Poll
