Why is British Parliament So Rowdy?

Last week in the British Parliament, Prime Minister Theresa May barely finished introducing her wildly unpopular Brexit proposal before she was drowned out by a chorus of boos and jeers from the opposite side of the room. Chief among her antagonists was Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, who quieted the room in order to  brutally berate May for the ineffectiveness of her Conservative government and the unpalatability of her Brexit deal. Corbyn's side erupted in cheers, and the Speaker of Parliament, a cantankerous gray-haired Brit in a colorful tie banged his gavel shouting "Order!"

I found myself thinking that if only America's Congress was this way, C-SPAN would have as many viewers as the Super Bowl. Last week, Iowa Representative Steve King, a self-proclaimed white supremacist, couldn't get a fraction of the jeers and taunts that PM May's good faith efforts to follow through on a promise made to her people receive on a daily basis.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn mutters to himself that PM Theresa May is a "stupid woman."

Wondering how our legislative branch ended up so radically different from our mother country, I did a little research into the history and layout of the British Parliament. I discovered that the House of Commons, where British policy is debated, is only 70 feet long, and the front benches were built exactly two swords lengths apart to keep duels from breaking out. In addition, the rowdy, brutal, and frankly awesome insult-laden debates I was witnessing were a part of Britain's Question Time, a weekly occurrence in which the Prime Minister goes in front of Parliament to have her policy decisions lauded by her own party or excoriated by the opposition. By contrast, America's separation of powers means our president rarely speaks to our Congress outside of the annual State of the Union address, a polished and orderly opportunity to reassure America that the state of our country is strong.

Beyond the fact that the British approach to government is significantly more fun to watch than our lackadaisical Congressional meetings and debates, I also believe it holds serious benefits in the legislative process. In America, impeachment and the 25th amendment are the only ways to remove a president from office; in the UK, the opposition party can trigger a vote of no confidence to replace the ruling government. In the midst of the longest government shutdown in American history, with the president hopelessly out of touch with the Speaker of the House and Congress divided starkly along party lines, I think the original accountability mechanisms—some good old yelling—could go a long way.