A gentleman once told me
that one of his professors, at the university he had attended, taught that the
founding fathers intentionally gave us a government that doesn't work.
Not quite.
The democratic, republic
established by the founders is inefficient by design, not defective. The most
capably efficient alternative is authoritarian: a monarchy, oligarchy,
theocracy or dictatorship.
The United States of America
was well conceived by educated men in the Age of Enlightenment (a.k.a., the Age
of Reason). They were separating the states from a colonial monarchy (with an
established tie to a state religion: the Anglican Church) and specifically set
out to avoid creating a similar new monarchy.
Authoritarian regimes are
prone to efficiency, because they put all things in the hands of one monarch,
theocrat, dictator or small group of autocrats (an oligarchy). However,
authoritarian regimes are only as good as their leaders. That type of
leader was recognized by the founders as human, and therefore fallible.
To avoid the foibles of a
single person, or small group of people, a system of Checks and Balances was
created to distribute governing power amongst three groups in the government:
the executive, legislative and judicial branches of a strong central
government.
This was the second attempt
at creating governance for a new country. The first effort, the Articles of
Confederation, had created a weak central authority and was considered an
abject failure.
A Constitutional Convention
was convened in 1787 to rectify the failure, and thus a second try was begun;
ratification was successfully completed in 1789. The US Constitution is still
the basis of our government today. Thus was created the longest lasting,
functioning, democratic, republic in history.
Mass participation in a
democratic republic, universal suffrage, is the antithesis of efficiency,
because it requires everyone qualified to weigh in on the selection of the
legislators, executives and all other elected officials in the government.
There can also be policy (and other) initiatives on the ballot.
There is no right to the
vote specified in the US Constitution. The early 21st century has
been marred by attempts, almost exclusively in states with Republican
majorities in their legislatures and a Republican in the governor's mansion
(aided by the Supreme Court's gutting of the Voting Rights Act in 2013), to
restrict access to the voting booth.
Limited/limiting
participation of citizens in their government is considered to be radically
conservative politics and can be the beginning of the end of Democracy.
Discouraging participation in government is most often done by folks who
believe that a return to an authoritarian regime (e.g., dictatorship,
oligarchy, monarchy, theocracy, etc...) is preferred; often identifying
themselves as the most capable of leaders.
Paul Weyrich (a politically
active, religious conservative and co-founder of the equally conservative
Heritage Foundation) was known for opining that he didn't think everyone should
be able to vote. He had recognized that a smaller turn-out at the voting
booth favored his perspective. The Republican Party started to move in
the ultra conservative direction, promoted by Weyrich, around 1980 and has
adopted policy positions expressed in publications from the Heritage
Foundation.
Ken Emanuelson, a Tea Party/Republican
Party member from TX, is on record stating that the Republican Party doesn’t
want black people to vote if they’re going to vote 9 to 1 for Democrats.
The assault on voting rights
and access to polling places espoused and practiced by the current, extremely
far-right, version of the Republican Party has highlighted a need for a
Constitutional amendment to delineate and codify universal suffrage. All US citizens
that are age of majority, not serving a sentence for a felony conviction,
should be guaranteed the right and responsibility of voting in our democratic
republic.
It is essential that
Democrats inform people, especially those that are at odds with the hard core,
conservative tactics of current Republican politicians, that they are most
likely to effect change merely by being a part of an extraordinarily large turn
out of eligible voters in as many local, state and federal elections as is
possible.
Register and Vote!
Give Hope and Change a
Chance... and a Push!
