RE: Democracy?

[Greg Peisert <gpeisert@jamesgregory.com>]

Roy;

  How do you think Lincoln would have fared, with a recall vote, on the 
issue of slavery? Do you believe that the masses can be (and often are) 
very wrong, swayed by emotion, irrelevancies, prejudice and fear? I 
understand the frustration over a stadium vote. But when it comes to 
congress, we're talking about some important issues.

  Clearly, based on what we are seeing, the cockroaches scurrying for cover 
in the Senate are not fit to conduct an impeachment trial. The 7th 
amendment denuded them of their ability to think, apparently. Originally, 
the Senate was appointed by, and was accountable to, the state 
legislatures. I think it was a terrible mistake to ever change that. They 
cannot be the deliberative body the the founders envisioned when they are 
blown about by every political wind. I hope history's hand deals them all 
the derision they so richly deserve. And they are clearly frightened of the 
polls, which I believe are being misread. I don't think most Americans care 
one way or the other if Clinton is removed from office. If he was removed 
from office tomorrow, there would be nary a ripple. All the polls say is, 
"Hey, don't mess up my life!" End of story.

  Could the way our government was originally set up by the founders be 
improved upon? Yes, in the sense that they could have added more safeguards 
to keep the state in check. Unfortunately, they didn't have quite the 
foresight to require a 3/4ths majority in congress to raise taxes, impose 
universal term limits, and make certain constitutional clauses more 
explicit in terms of articulating the concept of enumerated rights. But 
other than that, I think they did an inspired job. It is too bad we have so 
denigrated those principles over the past 50 years, to the point where so 
many Americans think the state owes them something other than the 
opportunity to take charge of their lives and do something with them.

--Greg



On Friday, February 05, 1999 11:19 AM, Hegge, Roy [SMTP:Roy_Hegge@adc.com] 
wrote:
> Sure Greg, I am aware of the protections built into our system for the 
minor opinion.   I certainly am not advocating
> that we eliminate that.  In fact, much of that is written into our 
Constitution and I am a very strong supporter of
> constitutional rights.   I would not go to the extreme of mob rule.   But 
I would like to see more direct accountability
> for an elected representative to his/her constituents.
>
>    For example, in Wisconsin (last year I believe it was), they had a 
vote on a new stadium.   It was a contested issue
> and public opinion was pretty much against using tax dollars to support 
it.  It was a very close vote in their legislature
> and the deciding vote was cast by a representative from northern 
Wisconsin who had run on an anti-stadium platform.
> His vote was in direct violation of the will of the people that had put 
him into office to represent them.   Wisconsin does
> have recall, and this particular community was unified enough to recall 
their elected official and boot him out because
> he no longer represented them.    If this same scenario happens in 
Minnesota, we have no recourse but to wait out the
> official's term and hope that the citizens remember.   The same is true 
of our federal officials.   I would have liked to
> have seen a recall initiative for Congressman Ramstad after he voted on 
the articles of impeachment.
>
> This accountability does not mean mob rule.   We still must respect the 
laws of the land which protect all citizens,
> majority or minority.  But it would create a government more in tune with 
the populace.  Again, look at the opinion
> polls across the nation and then look at the actions of Congress.  They 
are way out of step.  Recall might make
> our officials stick to business more and play political partisanship 
less.
>
> As for my other suggestions,  referendum, open sessions, and better 
access to proposed bills and modifications,
> these too would make government more accessible and accountable to the 
public.
>
> Roy
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	Greg Peisert [SMTP:gpeisert@jamesgregory.com]
> > Sent:	Thursday, February 04, 1999 11:20 PM
> > To:	Multiple recipients of list NOPRIVACY
> > Subject:	RE: Democracy?
> >
> > So, you would advocate a pluralist democracy, abandoning the notion of 
a
> > representative government? Are you aware of why the founders set things 
up
> > as they did, and of the problems throughout history with respect to the 
> > tyranny of mob rule at the expense of the rights and liberties of
> > minorities?
> >
> > -- Greg Peisert
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, February 04, 1999 12:25 PM, Hegge, Roy
> > [SMTP:Roy_Hegge@adc.com] wrote:
> > > How about referendum and recall?  I wish that we had these in 
Minnesota.
> >   How about something similar on a federal level.
> > > How about no closed sessions for our elected officials?
> > > How about really posting bills and proposed modfications to public 
places
> > (web sites) prior to consideration within Congress?
> > >
> > > A comment that I have heard from both Henry Hyde and Orrin Hatch (and 
I'm
> > sure others on the Hill) during this recent turmoil
> > > goes something like this (I have to paraphrase because I cannot 
remember
> > the exact words) 'We are not here to be swayed by
> > > public sentiment (the will of the people), we have a higher calling 
to
> > the law of the land.'  i.e. we are no longer representatives
> > > but rather rulers.
> > >
> > > Roy Hegge
> > >
> > >