Posted on 11/09/2009 7:31:34 AM PST by Scythian
(NaturalNews) Given that the massive health care reform bill just passed by the House was one of the largest pieces of legislation in U.S. history, you might wonder why you didn't get to vote on it. When it comes to federal legislation, your vote doesn't count in America, didn't you know? You are dictated to by a small band of the political elite who may or may not represent your interests (or even the interests of your fellow citizens).
Those people are called members of Congress. And as you'll read here, they are essentially obsolete. Society no longer has any need for them. Here's why...
Dumb idea, the majority elected Obama last year.
Where do loopy ideas like this come from?
No. Reform congress but don’t destroy it.
Getting rid of congress is exactly what the far left wants to do. They want a dictator. Just the other day the Google CEO said that the president can’t do what he needs to do because our constitutionally mandated congress just gets in the way.
Horrific idea.
This is a Republic not a Democracy.
I say let’s go back to when Senators were elected by state legislatures.
So what you’re saying then is we hope, as a minority, to win the bulk of congress so we can force our will on the democrats (I’m being serious here) just as they are now doing to us? I think two countries are in order frankly, let them go live as commies and us as free people ...
This is series hugh ... ;)
The closest we have to Direct Democracy in the USA is the State of Kaliforniya. With their Referendum process San Fransicko , at one time, voted to COUNT Seals that live in the area in the census for Congressional Representation.
Kaliforniya is a BASKET CASE, and I’ll blame it on their Direct Democracy..
The Ultimate example of “”Democracy”” .. the group ..2 Wolves and 1 Sheep.. voting on “What’s for DINNER!”
While I would personally love to take every member of Congress and KICK THEIR BUTTS BACK HOME, it’s still better than the alternative.
All we have to do is replace them all- congress is part of what makes America great.
“Democracy is based on the assumption that a million men are wiser than one man. How’s that again? I missed something.”
Robert A. Heinlein.
Congress has become a wealthy elitist’s club that is out of touch with the American people. Direct democracy IS NOT a solution. This is a Republic. Not a democracy. The three branches of government should provide the checks and balances written into the constitution. The Supreme Court needs to stop the unlawful, unconstitutional actions of congress and the executive branch. They’ve been silent too long.
Really. The fact is, right now we don't HAVE a Congress.
A pure plebiscitary democracy would be a complete madhouse. No limits on what 50%+1 could do, and no way to be sure that it was 50%+1 in any case.
No. Limited Constitutional Republic is still the way to go. Be nice if we still had it.
I'm glad we didn't. It passed only because of a huge & costly political battle which took months longer than the ram-thru 2 weeks first planned, delayed and almost dead because those who understood it and its consequences actually had a viable say in the matter; even now, it faces dim prospects in the second round of votes. If we as a whole DID get to vote on it, it would have passed easily, they tyranny of the majority being law.
Try SEIU, Marx, Mao, Stalin. This is the base of the Dictatorship of the Proletariat. In their particular model, the people appear to have “the voice”, but the government controls for whom and when it will speak. Exactly who do you trust to count the “national ballots”? Representative government works because it’s power is derived from the most local issues and elections.
Just watch how well the “national census” works for the petty dictators in Washington. Again, if this were forced to happen as it was envisioned, we would have a responsive government.
“Direct Democracy”
Mob rule, nope, a Republic would be nice.
Course that is what Ben Franklin said they created that we have moved away from.
This a ridiculous and incredibly stupid idea.
Well, with the majority of state houses controlled by Democrats, we’d still be in a mess. Dumb idea.
As another FReepers stated yesterday, “I’ll show them, I’ll hurt me”.
OUr form of Government was set up the way it is to directly avoid “mob rule” and protect the rights of the smaller constituant states.
If we want to get back to the form of government our founders intended, we need to do a few specific things.
First and foremost is to repeal that amendment of the Constitution that provided for the direct election of Senators. Senators were meant to be ambassadors of the individual states, appointed by the state legislatures.
Second, repeal the amendment which authorizes the income tax. There are serious questions about its legality anyway (whether the requisite number of states actually voted for it, whrether those states which later withdrew their support of it were acknowledged and whether all states actually ratified the same amandment (there were different versions).
Finally, there needs to be guaranteed votor identification at the pools. Not only a voter ID card, but also identification of those individuals who actually voted (”purple finger”) No last minute registrations permitted and all overseas military ballots permitted after validation.
The Supreme Court needs to stop the unlawful, unconstitutional actions of congress and the executive branch The SUPREME COURT.
Its not WHO votes its who COUNTS the votes that matters! Never Forget!
**********************
Exactly.
This is an incredibly bad idea.
In a pure democracy, the US would be completely ruled by the heart’s desire of the voters in the large cities along the east and west coast.
Is that what you’d prefer?
Our founding fathers, guided as they were by Almighty God, saved us from their fate by implementing a constitutional republic. If allowed to work properly it is the best and most durable kind of government we could have.
And did you think that the average American has the intelligence to vote for anything resembling our Constitution. These idiots put King Obama in. Majority rule is shi@.
Nope. Restore a Republic on American soil.
Wasn’t Democracy called “Mob Rule” and Two wolves and a duck talking about making dinner?
I’ll take my chances.
We are now an oligarchy, not a republic. The political elites have engineered a permanent encumbency. We now have a one party system with a sham party to provide the illusion of choice. Direct democracy is an option, but I believe we must first split the country to allow the liberals to have their marxist utopia, leaving free Americans to restore their freedom. The Republican concept of a political elite controlling every aspect of our lives is outmoded, obsolete. We now have instant communications, something that did not exist when the concept of political elites was started. Republicanism is finished. We have to choose between Democracy and dictatorship.
I like this idea. Would the public have voted on TARP? On Stimulus? On the auto bailout? On NEA funding? On Cap and Trade? On the Medicare drug benefit?
Why anyone thinks direct democracy would work any better here than it does anywhere else is beyond me. Sounds like liberals saying communism hasn’t worked because no one has done it right.
I’m even further confused as to why some conservatives when facing adversity, run immediately to the most wildly left wing ideas they can think of.
I kind of tend to agree, all this stuff would have been shot down, it’s kind of like the income tax, if it wasn’t taken out of your check and you had to pay it folks would be against it.
If folks had to vote on big scary bills that were going to take their freedoms and paychecks they’d read them, or at least listen to both sides of the argument, that is not what happens today. I think you would have a hell of a lot more conservatives if people truly voted on such issues, ya, it’s all crazy, I know, just talking out loud here is all ...
My message to the author?
I think a major problem (along with the 17th amendment) is this ridiculous cap on the number of members in the House. What is so magical about 435? Our population is 300,000,000+ yet we have one Representative per 750,000 people.
The Constitution spells out that there shall be one Representative per 30,000 people. I am well aware this would mean a House with 10,000 members. I’m sure many Conservatives cringe at this thought of “growing government”, but it isn’t ... it’s cranking up the volume on our voices with respect to issues facing this nation.
I think this would allow more of the smaller, “3rd parties” to have a much better chance at having a voice in Washington no matter if they represent left or right ideas. More importantly, these idiotic “let’s slip a vote under the people’s nose on a Saturday night” tactics would be difficult if not impossible to pull off since Representatives would be a heck of a lot more accountable. A big problem is most of these people know that they’ll be reelected regardless of their actions in the House (both intra and extra :-) ).
Town Hall meetings wouldn’t have to be held in multiple places spanning an area that rivals the size of some states in New England! You’d porbably get more face to face time with your Representative. Also, I think following the Constitution would also build in a form of term limits as ego would generally keep these career politicians out of the House as being one of 10,000 would be rather boring for those without deep convictions to represent the people in their area. I also think it would remove this gerrymandering nonsense both parties are guilty of doing.
Now, stealing an idea from the poster that started this thread, the larger House could be “linked” with modern communication technology so that we can have new “regional”, Federal capitols. We could probably set up six of these and add more as the population (and House) grows.
The US House was never intended to be “clean and orderly” as the Senate ... it’s intent was to be the mob-rule madhouse. Those days are long gone. It’s mob-rule alright, but not for the good reasons.
Sorry for my incoherent post....writing off the cuff isn’t exactly one of my stronger abilities :-)!
The political position of children.
“democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting onj what to have for lunch. It is the most evil of all political systems.
I see a "damn if you do and damn if you don't" situation here. One of the problems with the above proposals is that not too many of "we the people" can read and fewer yet comprehend the contents of the bills.
On the other hand, the elected representatives that have the capacity to read and understand, don't bother to do so!
What to do, what to do?
You would have the Northeast and California setting policy not a good idea
The electorate that gave us Speaker Pelosi and President Obama, the electorate that supported a public option by over 70% as of last year? They would have opposed more spending? They would restrain themselves from voting mselves benefits out of the treasury?
How wise we are here in the 21st Century, that we know better than Washington, Madison and Franklin.
No thanks. Term limits perhaps.
“hy anyone thinks direct democracy would work any better here than it does anywhere else is beyond me. Sounds like liberals saying communism hasn’t worked because no one has done it right.
I’m even further confused as to why some conservatives when facing adversity, run immediately to the most wildly left wing ideas they can think of.”
You’ve left me chuckling! Why, indeed?
This process would inevitably devolve not to rule by the majority, but rather to rule by the majority of those who feel strongly about a particular issue.
Since extremists are more likely to feel strongly about an issue, they would have wildly disproportionate influence. People with actual lives and jobs would be busy with other things most of the time.
That said, putting in some way whereby the people can override their government on a particular issue is entirely appropriate. Something difficult enough to implement that it would be used only rarely, but simpler than the present almost impossible amendment process.
No, we need to have reps and a Congress. But they are in need of serious reform.
Quack, Waddle... Tyranny of the Majority.
“TO SECURE THESE [individual] RIGHTS, governments are instituted among men”.
Article 1, section 2 says “shall not exceed” one per 30,000.
Increasing the size of the House is an interesting idea, which I wouldn’t reject out of hand, as long as we agree that the total amount of salary, benefits, Nancy’s private airline, etc, is held to what we spend today.
This article is complete crap, the founders consciously rejected true democracy for a reason, and it had nothing to do with technical feasbility, it had everything to do with they knew that it led to nothing more than mob rule and did not want their country to wind up like the true democracies that had come before.
What we have is a REPUBLIC, IF WE CAN KEEP IT. The problem is the people have done a piss poor job of keeping it. The bulk are absolutely undereducated in indoctrination centers run by the same government. People who are on the dole vote simply to get more dole and don’t care what is in the best long term interests of the nation.
You really want to clean up congress, do the following:
1) ONly land owners can vote, you don’t actually own property, you have no vested interest in the future state of that property.
2) You are on the government dole, you don’t vote
3) If you are a government employee, you cannot unionize, you are a civil servant, not a collective voting block.
4) Witholding for taxes is illegal, citizend must pay their tax bills out of their wages directly, no automatic witholding.
You engage in those 4 acts, and you’ll see how quickly congress gets cleaned up.
Whoever put this together isn’t hittin’ on all eight cylinders me thinks.
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.