What James Madison said about Hope and Change

What would the Founding Fathers say about our handling of the country if they were able to comment on the current state of affairs? It is easy to put words in their mouths but fortunately, we have for posterity recorded their words and intents to refer to for clarity in times of need. Some may say that this is a new day and age, therefore what the Founding Fathers had to say is simply not relevant to our current circumstances. Those who say this do so in ignorance of human nature and for self-serving reasons. Humans over the past 5000 years of recorded history may have advanced in terms of knowledge; however, their motivations and emotions are still no different now then they were in the past. It is motivation and emotion that govern human character, not knowledge and the Founding Fathers knew well the passions that influence those in power.

We were warned 200+ years ago against fickle governments. In fact, we were warned that the point of fickleness in government was for the few to gain an advantage at the expense of the many. Here is what James Madison had to say about Hope and Change as espoused by Barack Obama when he said he wanted to remake our society:

James Madison, a Christian founding father, knows big government is the problem. Most don’t. And the solution is to elect conservatives to represent our conservative values. Republicans spend to much money and are addicted to spend like democrats. I am glad that they are not communists like the democrats however and will vote for conservatives but not rinos. It is up to the republicans to run conservatives or we will get 4 more years of destruction.
The time has come for a conservative third party who will do that which is good and right for the party. Lower taxes, states over federal powers, state shool systems without unions, immigration limitations as their once was, etc.
Glenn Beck knows what we need now.

The solution on the other hand is clear:

Unleash the oil and gas companies to drill domestically, thousands upon thousands of high paying jobs would be created without one red cent of taxpayer funds. Indeed, government coffers would swell from royalties and taxes on new domestic energy production off setting foreign imports.

Squash all talk of future tax increases, making permanent the Bush Tax cuts, dispense with the CO2 foolishness and so called healthcare reform – or rather screw up.

Lower the tax on businesses if not eliminate them on capital gains and others. All taxes on business are passed on to consumers and the poor who bear that tax burden disproportionately.

Repeal the CRA and every agreement that had anything to do with social responsibility based lending, i.e. no more bad loans to people who can’t pay them back.

The effects would be immediate starting with the price of gasoline as shown by just talking about repealing the drilling ban when then President George W Bush signed an executive order to rescind the previous executive orders against drilling off shore. The whole current downward spiral started by meddling in the economy by yours truly then Senator Obama, Pelosi and Reid when they broke their 2006 campaign promises, EVERY LAST ONE OF THEM but especially the one about lowering the price of gas.

Federalist 62 is an essay explaining the Senate as described in the Constitution. In this section on "stability", he is defending the long terms for Senators (6 years), and he is defending the lack of term limits or rotation of office. In the old Article of Confederation, there was a constant rotation of office holders. Senators could be recalled by their state at any time.

He speaks of "the respect and confidence of other nations, and all the advantages connected with national character." This was the argument for the supreme consolidated national government the federalists had created. They felt a loose confederation was embarassing. They wanted the countries of Europe to respect them, and wanted "the advantages" of strong nationalism. In the old confederacy, where power was decentralized, they couldn't attain these things.

So, it seems to me, Madison is arguing for a strong central government, robust enough to exert its will in a consistent manner. He is arguing for a strong Senate, with long terms and no term limits, as a check on the House. In that sense, we can see how, for example, Health Care passed the house but stalled in the Senate.

It's a classic case of Madison trying to thread the needle. On the one hand, he wants good, prudent government. On the other hand, he wants to supply it with the sufficient amount of power to embody a unified national state.

Here are a few others.

What doesn’t make sense is people collecting unemployment checks for doing nothing while the businesses that laid them off could be allowed to get back on their feet if the worker continued to work during that time. Those workers of businesses that permanently closed could be used by government entities in order to avoid cutting services because of a decline in revenues.

Payment of Government workers and pensions must not exceed the average amount in the private sector for that position.

Unions of government workers must allow wages to be adjusted or workers to be laid off in the case of revenue shortfalls. No taxpayer should be forced to have taxes increased in order to fund demands from unions of government workers.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.