Sign in to follow this  
CasuallyCollin

The Once and Future Republic

Recommended Posts

April 6th, 2011

IN THE AGE OF COMMUNICATION, Why are we not able to vote on such non-critical issues as whether or not to allow veterans 50% disabled or above their base privileges back so they can shop at the commissary and PX? This legislation has been on the docket for YEARS with no significant action, along with THOUSANDS of other important, but non-critical issues.

We have cell phones, the internet, and free public access to the latter, so why is it that we don't have an app on our mobile devices, or a government website we can visit where there is a list of domestic issues to vote on as citizens? Instead of remaining silent in the vacuum of leadership, we would like the ability to cast our votes on issues of national importance.

For instance: Obamacare is of vital national importance, but a non-critical domestic issue that the public should immediately be allowed to vote on, since the Government is making those DEMANDS upon the public itself.

Why not create an action date on measures and bills, say a year or two, and if the bills do NOT involve national security or foreign policy, and they've just been gathering dust, then allow WE THE PEOPLE to vote in cases where our elected officials have FAILED TO ACT.

We have been an exceptional people because of our ability to reign in our indolent or runaway governments. If the government isn't doing its job or can't come to a decision, don't shut down the government, OPEN THE VOTE TO THE PEOPLE!

Western government MUST evolve or perish.

Edited by pam
link deleted. We will not use this site to solicit signatures or votes for issues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

April 6th, 2011

IN THE AGE OF COMMUNICATION, Why are we not able to vote on such non-critical issues as whether or not to allow veterans 50% disabled or above their base privileges back so they can shop at the commissary and PX? This legislation has been on the docket for YEARS with no significant action, along with THOUSANDS of other important, but non-critical issues.

We have cell phones, the internet, and free public access to the latter, so why is it that we don't have an app on our mobile devices, or a government website we can visit where there is a list of domestic issues to vote on as citizens? Instead of remaining silent in the vacuum of leadership, we would like the ability to cast our votes on issues of national importance.

For instance: Obamacare is of vital national importance, but a non-critical domestic issue that the public should immediately be allowed to vote on, since the Government is making those DEMANDS upon the public itself.

Why not create an action date on measures and bills, say a year or two, and if the bills do NOT involve national security or foreign policy, and they've just been gathering dust, then allow WE THE PEOPLE to vote in cases where our elected officials have FAILED TO ACT.

We have been an exceptional people because of our ability to reign in our indolent or runaway governments. If the government isn't doing its job or can't come to a decision, don't shut down the government, OPEN THE VOTE TO THE PEOPLE!

Western government MUST evolve or perish.

You DID vote for them. Or maybe you didn't. I know my husband did last November. I didn't because I'm not American. When you send some guy to Congress, that's exactly what you're doing. You put the guy to work for you so he can cast your vote on all these issues.

Opening the vote to the people like you envision is what we call MOB rule. Kinda like American Idol... who cares if Sanjaya cannot sing worth a lick... he got majority vote.

In a country of 5 wolves and 2 sheep, democracy is great... unless you're the sheep.

So yeah, I'm hoping your vision does not come to fruition. Sorry.

Edited by pam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Anatess. Also some of these bills are very complicated and I'm sure the majority of the people would not read them or some may not understand them completely, therefore would be voting blindly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep. Google 'Founding Fathers' 'Tyranny of the Majority'.

The US was never founded on the pure democracy. It was formed on a Republic.

NOTE FOR OTHERS: A constitutional republic that is still Democratic. It is just not a pure Democracy. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were not founded on these principles because back then IT WASN'T POSSIBLE!

We would not be voting on any issues other than those IGNORED by our representatives, and then only after a deliminating period. So if government DID ITS JOB, there would NEVER BE A VOTE, it would be INCENTIVE TO WORK.

Be it on earth as it is in heaven. In heaven there is no monetary system, and in periods of stalemate EVERYONE CITIZEN GETS A VOTE!

There are not enough people on the hill to EVER get through the legislation on the backburner. So we must either imrpove our process, or just sit around till Christ comes back and then explain to him how "well, I did my part by voting once every four years".

We may either CONTINUE consenting to the indolence of our governments, or DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT beyond voting an individual into office who's in 5 lobbyists pockets before their rear-end ever hits the seat.

NOT amending ourselves into a more advanced system, while letting the corruption and indolence accelerate can only serve the purposes of the adversary, not the Father.

Please pray about this!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look around you at our culture. The general population is too ignorant to vote on issues, instead they will vote on whichever side has the best PR campaign. As was stated above, you have to watch out for the wolves.

Take for example our religion - what if there was a bill to ban practice and worship of mormonism. We are a minority, therefore with a successful PR campaign they could get that voted in, and it appears like in your world we would be in trouble. Your system is even more flawed than our current system. Keep in mind that those who follow the true word of God are in the minority, and the majority are severely influenced by Satan.

I have prayed extensively on the government's place in our world and how it fits into our lives and insinuating any less is personally insulting to me, like you are saying "I'm right and God approves" however he does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How crushingly cynical of everyone in this room... :(

A vote on whether or not to outlaw a religion would never qualify for this type of citizen's vote. This vote could NEVER contradict the Constitution's 1st Amendment... that is still the law of our land.

No issue would go to vote that is already determined in the constitution, this vote, along with its rules would be an amendment to the constitution itself with all safemeasures built into it to prevent anything like you just described.

I gave two very specific examples of when this type of vote would be used, but I want to thank you for raising your concern so I could express this concept better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, because the constitution sure does protect the government from INFRINGING on my 2nd amendment rights to bear arms - let me just run down to the hardware store and get a thompson submachinegun, a suppressor, and ... OH WAIT.

Most politicians don't care about the constitution anymore, we're living in that day where it's hanging by a thread...well maybe not by one thread but not many more than one.

More examples -

Permits to have a protest or other large FREEDOM OF SPEECH event.

1st amendment zones (hahahahaha)

The 4th amendment's confusion - enough said

The 3rd amendment is good though, right guys? I mean, don't want those british soldiers in our houses during peacetime.

Edited by blackknight5k
more examples

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, to those who raise the issue of "people are too ignorant our outright stupid to vote," I say;

Think on this:

Our culture has indeed been dumbed-down, demoralized, and become decadent.

Wouldn't this spark the movement to again make ourselves an intelligent, responsible, moral, and ethical population?

Wouldn't education need to vastly improve to turn out citizens who actually MATTER to the system?

I say set the bar high and people will reach high. Set no bar at all and you get the present day West.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After serious consideration, I believe we should start small rather than big. After this idea has been refined I'm going to go around my school and get signatures, then around my community, until I have a sufficient number to bring to my local government and state legislature. If we prove this will work on a local scale, it will gain momentum on a national and inter-national scale.

I strongly encourage you to do the same! Great things are accomplished by small means!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think you've payed attention to the last years - the bar has consistently been set higher:

Read a book campaigns

push for higher education

no smoking or drinking, it's bad for you and causes cancer

use protection against STDs when picking that woman up from the bar

The problem is most people DON'T CARE - Do you know how many people I work with who are otherwise "educated" (holding up to and including doctorates) that refuse to read any book now? They think that they are done and all they want to do is watch the idiotbox when they get home and spew out the pollution that is fed to them by the "main stream media" (see cnn, fox news). They just care about what's new and "exciting" today. Yesterday it was the conflict on the Ivory Coast, today it's the Earthquake in Japan.

You can't let those people decide for YOU how to live YOUR life.

Also - these same people who would be voting and comprising the "majority" have neither read nor care about the constitution or how it was formed. They form their opinions on kneejerk reactions to rare events. It sound to me like you have one pet issue that you want to force through no matter what, and since the "in place" means are not working for you so you're grabbing at whatever straws you can.

Stop thinking about "what good this can do" and start thinking about "how can this be abused and used to help the tyrants who abound".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Anatess. Also some of these bills are very complicated and I'm sure the majority of the people would not read them or some may not understand them completely, therefore would be voting blindly.

You mean like Congress did with Obama care?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After serious consideration, I believe we should start small rather than big. After this idea has been refined I'm going to go around my school and get signatures, then around my community, until I have a sufficient number to bring to my local government and state legislature. If we prove this will work on a local scale, it will gain momentum on a national and inter-national scale.

I strongly encourage you to do the same! Great things are accomplished by small means!

This has possibility to work only locally. That's why we have federalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this is as kooky a decision as some are making it out to be.

If the people we elect to govern cannot do so effectively for whatever reason, I believe the right does reside with the people to step in as a unified body and change things up a bit. It would be too complicated for every decision, but if the voice of the people want a certain critical thing done that doesn't violate the Constitutional premises of the government's enumerated powers, I think it's not a bad idea to put it to a huge majority vote. Maybe all we would have to do would give each state a vote- the traditional check on federal power by having all House representatives be state-appointed was erased and has, in my opinion, been a huge problem.

I don't know how it could work. I do know that in the Book of Mormon a few major legal decisions were put to the "voice of the people", even though the government was a judgeship. Ultimately, we can't force an unrighteous people to live according to moral laws. I would rather have the country come under a degraded law and allow GOD to deliver HIS people than to try to maintain the facade of a true democratic republic and slowly have all our real rights eroded away.

One thing is clear: the country is critically divided right now, and if things continue to escalate we will have to take drastic action to protect ourselves. I am worried about things starting to come crashing down and a strong figure rising and attempting to take control (think Hitler and the fall of the Weimar Republic). I don't think that will happen- but it's a possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the problem of uneducated voters... I'm willing to believe the Founders weren't too far off base when the rule was that only landowners could vote (the whole "white male" part I don't agree with, but abolition and Women's Suffrage took care of those parts).

If we, as a whole, are too lazy and complacent to take care of ourselves, it is high time we get knocked off the high horse our educated fathers made for us. GOD works miracles in times such as these!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this is as kooky a decision as some are making it out to be.

If the people we elect to govern cannot do so effectively for whatever reason, I believe the right does reside with the people to step in as a unified body and change things up a bit. It would be too complicated for every decision, but if the voice of the people want a certain critical thing done that doesn't violate the Constitutional premises of the government's enumerated powers, I think it's not a bad idea to put it to a huge majority vote. Maybe all we would have to do would give each state a vote- the traditional check on federal power by having all House representatives be state-appointed was erased and has, in my opinion, been a huge problem.

I don't know how it could work. I do know that in the Book of Mormon a few major legal decisions were put to the "voice of the people", even though the government was a judgeship. Ultimately, we can't force an unrighteous people to live according to moral laws. I would rather have the country come under a degraded law and allow GOD to deliver HIS people than to try to maintain the facade of a true democratic republic and slowly have all our real rights eroded away.

One thing is clear: the country is critically divided right now, and if things continue to escalate we will have to take drastic action to protect ourselves. I am worried about things starting to come crashing down and a strong figure rising and attempting to take control (think Hitler and the fall of the Weimar Republic). I don't think that will happen- but it's a possibility.

The problem is federal overreach into issues that should be left to states. If it wasn't for that, people would be able to use the initiative process in their respective states.

I don't know if you were meaning to imply that we were, but I think we're pretty far away from getting to a point where we as a people would need to exercise our constitutional authority to tear down our current government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How crushingly cynical of everyone in this room... :(

A vote on whether or not to outlaw a religion would never qualify for this type of citizen's vote. This vote could NEVER contradict the Constitution's 1st Amendment... that is still the law of our land.

No issue would go to vote that is already determined in the constitution, this vote, along with its rules would be an amendment to the constitution itself with all safemeasures built into it to prevent anything like you just described.

I gave two very specific examples of when this type of vote would be used, but I want to thank you for raising your concern so I could express this concept better.

Incorrect. Religions in the US may be outlawed by circumventing the 1st amendment: Preventing organizations from purchasing land for the purpose of worship, outlawing the wearing of garments like the Hajib being outlawed in France, outlawing literature that 'promotes antisocial behaviour'(Whatever that means), etc. The Constitution is a living document designed to guide the country. People determined to circumvent it can by virtue of its flexibility.

Please read what happened to Athens Democracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect. Religions in the US may be outlawed by circumventing the 1st amendment: Preventing organizations from purchasing land for the purpose of worship, outlawing the wearing of garments like the Hajib being outlawed in France, outlawing literature that 'promotes antisocial behaviour'(Whatever that means), etc. The Constitution is a living document designed to guide the country. People determined to circumvent it can by virtue of its flexibility.

Please read what happened to Athens Democracy.

Indeed, the Constitution* is a paper barrier that protects only where and as long as those tasked with the interpreting and enforcing of it decide it does. Regardless of what school of constitutional interpretation you belong to it's not like the document itself is going to break out of the National Archives and prevent or ensure anything.

*And equivalent protections given by different governments.

Edited by Dravin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The whole gist of this entire thread is basically this:

The OP is disgusted by the accomplishements (or lack thereof) of Congress and wants to change the process.

But... the problem is, the OP is only looking at one issue at one point in time - very myopically at that - and trying to solve THAT by changing a process that spans through every issue at every age of the republic... and I even doubt the OP understands clearly how the American Government is run by trying to solve a federal problem through local means, thereby untangling all levels of government.

It really is crazy. REALLY!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Erm, I thought governing the country was one of the reasons we hire/elect officials to represent us. Some of us have jobs and have to work for a living. We don't have the time to do in-depth research about and vote on every single issue of governance. For all citizens to vote on everything (pure democracy), we'd have to have a much, MUCH smaller body politic that doesn't have to deal with nearly as many of the issues the United States, or even your average city, faces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this