Lame duck (politics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A lame duck is an elected official who loses political power or is no longer responsive to the electorate as a result of

• a term limit which keeps the official from running for that particular office again,
• losing an election, or
• the elimination of the official's office, but who continues to hold office until the end of the official's term.^[1]

Lame duck officials are in the peculiar position of not facing the consequences of their actions in the next election, meaning they are generally considered not accountable for their actions. They also tend to have less political power as other elected officials see less advantage in cooperating with them. On the other hand, lame duck executives, particularly Presidents of the United States, are notorious for issuing a series of executive orders or making appointments during their last days that they would not otherwise have made if it would have influenced the vote against them.^{[citation needed]}

Contents 1 Examples 1.1 Australia 1.2 United States 2 Origins of the term 3 Notes 4 External links

[edit] Examples

[edit] Australia

In Australia, regardless of when the election is held, the Senate (or upper house) sits from the 1st of July following the election to the 30th of June three years later, while the newly elected members of the House of Representatives (or Lower House, of which the leader of the party (or coalition of parties) with a majority of members forms Government) take their seats immediately after an election. A Senate that is destined to lose its majority as a result of such a change is called a lame-duck Senate and often attracts criticism if it blocks Government measures introduced in the House of Representatives.

For example, after the 2004 Election, it became clear that the governing Liberal Party/National Party coalition would gain a majority in the new Senate, which was due to sit the following July. In May, some months after the elections but before the new Senate came to power, the old Senate refused to pass new tax laws that had been passed by the House, which served to merely delay the passage of those laws until the new Senate assembled.

This behaviour would usually not attract the same level of criticism if the election has not significantly altered Senate composition.

[edit] United States

Any President of the United States elected to a second term is, by the above definition, a lame duck for their entire second term. The 22nd Amendment introduced term limits to the office, and it prevents the President from seeking a second re-election. However, Presidents are not usually considered to be lame ducks until the election of their successor, possibly because Presidents may be influenced by doing what the electorate or party wants to help their party retain the White House.^{[citation needed]} Before 1933, each congress would usually have two sessions, the second of which, being held usually from December to March, occurring after the election of their successors. This session was normally called the "Lame duck session." Criticism of this process led to the passage of the 20th Amendment in 1933, which changed the date when the new congress took over from March 4 to January 3, and eliminated the lame duck session.

[edit] Origins of the term

The phrase lame duck was coined in the 18th century at the London Stock Exchange, to refer to a broker who defaulted on his debts. ^{[2] [3]} The first known mention of the term in writing was made by Horace Walpole, in a letter of 1761 to Sir Horace Mann: "Do you know what a Bull and a Bear and Lame Duck are?" ^[4] In the literal sense, it refers to a duck who is unable to keep up with its flock, making it a target for predators.

It was transferred to politicians in the 1860s, first being used to describe US President James Buchanan and his lack of action upon the secession of the confederate states.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Notes

[edit] External links

• WikiAnswers - What is the lame duck amendment?