binary solo said:
Actually in the Westminster parliamentary system this practice is forbidden by the rules of parliament. A you can't stick in extraneous stuff not related to the primary purpose of a bill. The only place you can put in expenditure amendments are in expenditure / appropriations bills. End even then it can't be for any old thing, you can't stick in an appropriation for a new local community hall in a bill that's setting a budget for roading projects; unless a propopsed roading project requires the demolition of a community hall and the local representative wants to have it replaced. The US system isn't the only (or even the best - arguably) law making system in the world. |
In the US presidential system, you get all sorts of weird stuff packed into bills. I forgot the specific name of the law, but it was something along the lines of the US secure ports act, which along with increasing security at the ports at the very end of the bill there was included provisions to ban and criminalize all online gambling.
Like you said, no system is perfect and in many countries (namely Afghanistan and Iraq) where they have no history of democracy, a strong military dictator is preferred for US, European, Chinese, Japanese and other interests. Pakistan right now is a prime example where Musharraf would be preferred over their populous who may elect a Hamas type group to power who would have no qualms about sending nukes toward India.
