"We the people" thought.

[StandingReady]

Not many things can be boiled down to a simple statement, but I think this one can be. The direction that this nation has gone has greatly changed from what it was founded as. I doubt many would disagree with that. I think the statement that summarizes the reason for that can be boiled down to this:

Our Founding Fathers created this nation as "We the People," knowing that they were still "the people" and including themselves in the legislation and restrictions. Too many of the politicians today have a "You the people" mindset, which makes it all too easy to pass malicious and erroneous legislation. They hold themselves as a ruling class of elite, and not as people elected to that position to reflect the people, AND to act as one of them. How can the politicians truly represent us if they are able to exempt themselves from the very regulations that they say we "need" or that they try to say are for our good?

If the politicians today acted like our Founding Fathers did and included themselves in the "We" then I don't think we would be anywhere near the perilous position that we are in today. I know that there are a lot of issues and subject matter for this, but do you think that it comes down to politicians forgetting the "we the people" mindset established by our Founding Fathers and enacting bad laws and regulations that they can exempt themselves from? Thoughts?

 

[MisterChester]

All I know is that the founding fathers are turning in their graves right now.

 

[phylodog]

Not many things can be boiled down to a simple statement, but I think this one can be. The direction that this nation has gone has greatly changed from what it was founded as. I doubt many would disagree with that. I think the statement that summarizes the reason for that can be boiled down to this:

Our Founding Fathers created this nation as "We the People," knowing that they were still "the people" and including themselves in the legislation and restrictions. Too many of the politicians today have a "You the people" mindset, which makes it all too easy to pass malicious and erroneous legislation. They hold themselves as a ruling class of elite, and not as people elected to that position to reflect the people, AND to act as one of them. How can the politicians truly represent us if they are able to exempt themselves from the very regulations that they say we "need" or that they try to say are for our good?

If the politicians today acted like our Founding Fathers did and included themselves in the "We" then I don't think we would be anywhere near the perilous position that we are in today. I know that there are a lot of issues and subject matter for this, but do you think that it comes down to politicians forgetting the "we the people" mindset established by our Founding Fathers and enacting bad laws and regulations that they can exempt themselves from? Thoughts?

The rest of our society has some culpability in the the way things are for allowing it to happen and forgetting themselves that "the government" is made up of We, not Them. You will rarely find anyone speaking about the government as anything but a thing. It was not intended to be a thing, but a part of us.

 

[Trooper]

The rest of our society has some culpability in the the way things are for allowing it to happen and forgetting themselves that "the government" is made up of We, not Them. You will rarely find anyone speaking about the government as anything but a thing. It was not intended to be a thing, but a part of us.

That is a good point. How many have an anti-federalist view thus see government as being statist? Government is to be a part of us. It is our expression, self rule.

But then how many in the elite circles identify with the people either? Most professors do not. Many in government do not. And too many business leaders do not.

At some point the people need to get their heads out of their collective butt. But with a population that is so uninformed, so out of touch, few are smart enough to see that government is an extension of themselves.

 

[Kart29]

I don't think I quite agree. I believe the founding fathers purposely instituted a representative form of government and the electoral college so that our representatives would be more qualified to lead than the opinion of the general masses.

But, I do agree withy phylodog that eventually we have to face the fact that what we are getting out of Washington DC and state governments is largely because this is what We The People have asked for and to some degree what the media and leaders of popular culture have told us we should ask for. I don't mean any particular people here - but the US voters in general.

As Winston Churchill said - a democratic form of government seems like a good idea until you spend 5 minutes talking to the average voter.

 

[Manatee]

What "we" have asked for?

​Follow the Money

 

[AtTheMurph]

"A Republic if you can keep it".................. It's the nature of government to assume more and more power over time. It's our job as citizens to stop them.

 

[Trooper]

"A Republic if you can keep it".................. It's the nature of government to assume more and more power over time. It's our job as citizens to stop them.

It is not our job to stop them. It is our job to be informed, involved and part of the system. Government is US. It is WE the PEOPLE. We hire representatives to deal with the daily mess.

What we have now is a population that is tuned out and lazy. Too many want to be cared for.

 

[91FXRS]

It is not our job to stop them. It is our job to be informed, involved and part of the system. Government is US. It is WE the PEOPLE. We hire representatives to deal with the daily mess.

What we have now is a population that is tuned out and lazy. Too many want to be cared for.

Exactly!

 

[zippy23]

I believe it boils down to power and greed. Plain and simple. Holding office is now a way to get filthy rich, make business contacts, get famous, write books, pass legislation that benefits your buddies so you get rich down the road, etc. i believe its all corrupt, as money usually corrupts people.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I don't think I quite agree. I believe the founding fathers purposely instituted a representative form of government and the electoral college so that our representatives would be more qualified to lead than the opinion of the general masses.

More important, they instituted LIMITED government for this reason. Unfortunately, through the election of corrupt politicians and the appointment of corrupt judges we now have in practice a nearly UNLIMITED government.

 

[Hoosierkav]

While it is impossible to keep up with all the proposed legislation (and since the legislators themselves do not always read the proposals), it is important that we take an active role in advocating for issues, and hold accountable those that do things beyond the rules of decorum/The Constitution (federal and state) by private and public means.

WE the people have let our government exceed its authority, and now WE the people are paying the price.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Not many things can be boiled down to a simple statement, but I think this one can be. The direction that this nation has gone has greatly changed from what it was founded as. I doubt many would disagree with that. I think the statement that summarizes the reason for that can be boiled down to this:

Our Founding Fathers created this nation as "We the People," knowing that they were still "the people" and including themselves in the legislation and restrictions. Too many of the politicians today have a "You the people" mindset, which makes it all too easy to pass malicious and erroneous legislation. They hold themselves as a ruling class of elite, and not as people elected to that position to reflect the people, AND to act as one of them. How can the politicians truly represent us if they are able to exempt themselves from the very regulations that they say we "need" or that they try to say are for our good?

If the politicians today acted like our Founding Fathers did and included themselves in the "We" then I don't think we would be anywhere near the perilous position that we are in today. I know that there are a lot of issues and subject matter for this, but do you think that it comes down to politicians forgetting the "we the people" mindset established by our Founding Fathers and enacting bad laws and regulations that they can exempt themselves from? Thoughts?

"We the People," was a pretty small group when the first coined. White, landed, males made the law and yet everyone was subject to those laws. So it was more of a case of "We the People"...make the laws, and "You the People" follow them. Not so much difference when you look at it. So yeah, other than the fact that they might be upset with who has been included in the voting process, I doubt, other than that, they'd be spinning in their graves.

 

[sun]

I know that there are a lot of issues and subject matter for this, but do you think that it comes down to politicians forgetting the "we the people" mindset established by our Founding Fathers and enacting bad laws and regulations that they can exempt themselves from? Thoughts?

Many legislators are given a special exemption from being prosecuted during the legislative session so that they can cast their votes. That's one of the privileges that many folks believe is right for them to have so as to not interfere with their duty as a duly elected official.

Members of the United States Congress enjoy a similar parliamentary privilege as members of the British Parliament; that is, they cannot be prosecuted for anything they say on the floor of the House or Senate. They also enjoy the right to be present in Congress: that is, they may be in prison or jail the rest of the time, but they have the right to attend Congressional sessions, speak on the floor, vote, etc. These rights are specified in the Constitution and have been fairly uncontroversial in U.S. history. Courts have consistently interpreted them very narrowly.

Several state constitutions provided equivalent protections for members of state legislatures.


Parliamentary immunity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regardings state legislators:

Arizona Legislative Immunity Repeal Proposed

SECTION 12. LEGISLATIVE IMMUNITY
Except in cases of treason, felony or breach of peace, a
member shall be privileged from arrest going to, during, and
returning from sessions of the General Assembly. A member
shall not be held to answer before any other tribunal for any
speech or debate, written or oral, in either house. These
immunities shall apply to committee and legislative
commission proceedings.
(Source: Illinois Constitution.)

Illinois Constitution - Article IV

 

[Trooper]

More important, they instituted LIMITED government for this reason. Unfortunately, through the election of corrupt politicians and the appointment of corrupt judges we now have in practice a nearly UNLIMITED government.

Do not under estimate how corrupt the people have become.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Do not under estimate how corrupt the people have become.

Excellent point. We would not have practitioners of larceny (of both our rights and our money) if they were not supported by voters with larceny in their hearts and their votes, and enough of them to elect these miscreants. Another way of looking at it is that in a society which chooses leaders by majority vote, the society will have the leaders that it collectively deserves.