That's what the TV newsies are saying this morning. And it happens not to be the case. When I hear a pol or a newsie moaning about gridlock, I hear a guy who doesn't have the votes to pass his pet project. He lacks the votes 'cause he didn't campaign hard enough, or there are a lot of voters who dislike his pet policy, or it's a bad policy to start with. That's what democracy is all about. Laws passed by a razor thin majority are undoubtedly bad laws. A good law will attract a solid majority.
And, we have a lot of gimmicks built into our system designed to prevent "the tyranny of the majority". For serious issues, like amending the Constitution, we require a supermajority, just to make sure that the minority can stop things it dislikes. It is not right to allow a 51% of the voters to pass a law that 49% see as anathema. The Senate rules allow the minority to demand a supermajority to pass anything. Harry Reid managed to trim that back a little bit and there was a nation wide outcry.
Remember that politicians always vote their district. If the voters back in the district have an issue they care about, the politician has to vote that way, otherwise he won't be their pol for long. A number of Democrats who voted for Obamacare found that out last election. "We will remember in November."
So, when you hear a pol whining about gridlock, remember that you can reduce gridlock by voting for his opponent.