The Descent of America
from
Constitutional Republic
into a
Legislated Social Democracy
By Kamron Kirkconnell
Background
The
main difference between a Republic and a Democracy is in the method by
which the changes in its legal structures are managed and in how the
representatives that make those changes are selected.
One
of the key issues considered in the design of a government
is how faction within is managed. Factions are the united
activities of a group with common interests that deprive another group of
their liberty. Faction is the single biggest threat that most governments
encounter and a great amount of effort was devoted to solving this problem
for the American Republic.
In any government the will of the majority, even
when well intentioned and carefully weighed,
overwhelms the minority and reduces their liberty. No matter how
much this issue is ignored or reduced to inconsequentiality, it is true
and one of the most difficult detriments to manage. We cannot just
consider that the taking away of liberty is due to the deprived not being
aligned with the majority or that they have ill considered causes. They
have the right to their views and the right to live their form of Liberty
even when it is not optimum. Often
times a small active faction with enough political energy can end up
controlling the will of the majority and depriving all of their proper and
well conceived and deserved Liberties.
If a government is to be long lived, then this
problem must be eliminated or properly managed.
A government can eliminate factions by either;
1.
destroying the liberty that allows its existence or by
2.
converting the public through various means into homogenous
citizens with the same opinions, desires and interests.
The first method is not easily tolerated by the
masses and also rubs salt into the wound of the deprived. It inspires the
will of the minority and causes its membership to grow. It also reeks of
tyranny and is not politically correct.
The second method was considered impossible and or
impractical. It would require coordinated control over all forms of
education, information dissemination and public governmental interaction. It was also considered impossible because of the diversity in
the opinions, passions and reason that the American people possessed.
A well educated society has a wide diversity of honest hard working
people with genuine straight forward interests and awareness of the
mediums of education and information dissemination systems.
With a natural wide ranging diversity a particular
unstable and detrimental faction could not prosper. It follows then that
one of the most important functions of a good Government is to protect the
diversity of the peoples opinions, passions, interests and activities.
The organization of Government must insure that this beneficial
diversity flourishes. This is done by not centralizing control. Diversity
is the key to a sane well balanced public and the key to a long term
successful governmental entity. An abundance of small factions is
healthier than a couple of loud powerful factions.
The cause of factions resides in the nature of man.
Man is disposed to passion, especially in his opinions, religious and
political beliefs. He also has a strong desire to be part of a group.
Some people are born with an ability and
propensity to unite members into groups. Combine this with ambition
and active vocal parties result. When
these groups put their rights and desires ahead of others they become
oppressive. This is when a problem faction results. This propensity is so
strong that when no good cause is available ridiculous ideologies can even
emerge to allow the eruption of ill will promoted by a faction. This is
how detrimental powerful factions emerge.
Differences and divisions occur in Nature. These
differences can become issues that create factions. The most common
division in societies is the unequal distribution of property and wealth.
As a nation grows and its population expands the property is developed for
different purposes. Manufacturing
concerns are created and materials and natural resources are sought out
and gathered. Distribution systems and procedures are developed. A society
must regulate and protect this development in order to sustain growth and
protect those who invest time and energy in their development. This is one
of the basic tasks of government and necessitates the creation of
legislation. Who gets to legislate and
how these legislators are elected and managed, becomes a primary
focus for the activities of political factions within the society.
The
Problem
Here arises the
problem in Democracies and Republics alike. No man should be a judge at
his own trial or at his own cause. It would be near impossible for him to
be unbiased and not rule in his own favor.
So when legislators are judging particular bills for passage they
are in effect, judges in their own cause.
Should a representative who represents manufacturing concerns vote
for greater import tax on foreign manufactured goods? Should a
representative who represents a mass of non property owners be allowed to
vote for legislation that increases property tax?
How does a society design a government that reduces
or eliminate the problem of factions?
In a democratic form of government the people vote
for the laws or direct representatives.
When a detrimental faction is less than the majority, it will be defeated by public vote. However,
when the detrimental faction is the majority,
its desires become the rule. Regardless of how it is accomplished,
the legislators that are elected by factions represent them and are
biased in their cause. This is the problem that crafters of government try
to manage.
In popular democratic government the majority is
always in control. How do you keep the majority faction from sacrificing
the public good and taking away the liberties of the minorities?
To prevent this from occurring, you would need to prevent the passion or interest from taking
hold in the majority or you must prevent the majority from being able to
create and carry forward schemes that are oppressive in nature. If the
majority becomes enamored in a position,
then it is almost impossible
for reason, sensibility or morality to take hold and thwart its
realization.
Then added to the mix was the development of mega
factions or political parties. Parties are devoted to achieving an uneven
balance of power, the exact thing that ideal government structures to
eliminate. To increase their
power parties combine and consume other parties. The process over time
seams to result in two strong parties sometimes a third and fourth but
usually just two. These parties promote their cause and do everything they
can to become the dominant majority.
How do we elect legislators who have unbiased
interests and will judge bills for the good of the whole, with an
unwavering eye on the constitution, without
prejudice?
In answering this we find the basic differences
between the original Constitutional Republic and the Democracy it has
become.
In a democracy
where popular voted representatives control the legislation, the political
process allows unfit candidates to be elected. They only need to gain the
support of corporate and mega factions for the funding to run a media
campaign blitz that convinces the people to elect them. The average
citizen gets all their information from the media, mainly the television.
These campaigns are very expensive most of the time hundreds of
times more money is spent on a campaign that the salary of the position.
This funding is an investment in the candidate done by entities that
expect a return. The process breeds corruption that can attack even the
most honest and moral persons. The investments must be repaid or the
person doesn’t get re-elected. It is as simple as that.
These types of governments have turbulent short
lived histories. In theory individuals of high esteem might vote for the
greater good of the entire country but
in reality, given the
propensity of the nature of man, it doesn’t work. The populace votes
into government the individuals that promise them what they want, or the
one that convinces them that they are
the best to attain the goals propounded by the faction.
Another phenomena occurs after a factions stays in
control for an extended period of time. The politicians also conclude that
they may be able to legislate mankind into
a more homogenously equalized group that will all think and act
correctly according to the defined norm. They have the time to mold the
education system and bring it into alignment with their views. . Their
legislation favors media and agendas that present their positions in a
better light. They can direct funds into projects that promote their
agendas, ideals, and lifestyles. Term limits would definitely help reduce
this aspect of the political system.
Representation
There are two components to consider when designing
a system of representation. One is the quantity of representatives in the
governing body, the other is the size of populace that each represents. It
stands to reason that no matter how small the group, the quantity of representatives must be enough to prevent a
cabal of bad individuals from
controlling the whole. The
number also has an upper limit. If the body of representatives becomes too
large it easily becomes a confusion of too great a multitude. The correct
quantity of representatives is a certain number that best balances between
these two extremes.
There is another factor
to consider and that is the fitness of the representative verses
the size of the group he represents. The larger Group consisting of more
individuals could produce candidates of better fitness. This leads us to
the conclusion that larger Groups will probably have more fit individuals
from which to choose. Another benefit of
larger groups is that the representatives will be chosen by many
more citizens rendering a better overall perspective.
On the other hand,
if an individual is selected from
a very large group, he
is less likely to be aware of all the circumstances and interests of the
wide range of the group. If he is selected from a very small group he is
too tied to their particular circumstance and too little acquainted with
the nation as a whole to make a good balanced legislator.
Question
at hand
How is a system of representation designed that
offers the benefits of the large group with the awareness of constituents
that a small group has as well as eliminate the
majority faction from squashing the minorities?
The
Constitutional Republic Solution
Our original Constitutional Republic solved this by
splitting Congress into two entities; the Senate and the House of
Representatives.
The Senators were appointed by each State’s
Legislature. This process eliminated the politics and kept them out of the
hands of the factions and parties. By eliminating campaigning with its
contributions and its reciprocate activities, the Senate body was free to
act without owing allegiance and favors.
It also gave the State itself a voice in Congress.
The President
and Vice President were elected by electors that were appointed by
the state legislatures. This was very important as it not only kept the
highest position free from the political quagmire of campaigning but quite
often would insured that the President and Vice President were not loyal
to the same party or faction. The man with the most votes was president
and the man with the second most votes was vice president.
This is the foundation of our Republic system as it
was designed. The people elect State Senators and Representatives who then
select the President and National Senators.
It functions as a filtering system and a graduation
system. It virtually eliminates the possibility of a poor or irrational
Congress and President ever selling the entire country down the river.
When the most
fit individuals the
States had to offer pooled their intellect and judgment, what they
selected as our Senator or President was guaranteed to be more fit than
what the general public’s wisdom as
a whole had the judgment to select.
The Republic process refines and expands the public
view through a body of citizens whose wisdom,
patriotism, and love of justice
can help override any local or temporary unhealthy factionist
impulses; effectively filtering out the faction problem.
Here are the articles that define how these
officers were elected.
Article
II [The
Presidency]
Section 1. The executive power shall be vested in
a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his office
during the term of four years, and, together with the Vice President,
chosen for the same term, be elected, as follows:
Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the
Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors, equal to the whole
number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled
in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or person holding an
office of trust or profit under the United States, shall be appointed an
elector.
The electors shall meet in their respective states,
and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an
inhabitant of the same state with themselves. And they shall make a list
of all the persons voted for, and of the number of votes for each; which
list they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the
government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate.
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House
of Representatives, open all the certificates, and the votes shall then be
counted. The person having the greatest number of votes shall be the
President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors
appointed; and if there be more than one who have such majority, and have
an equal number of votes, then the House of Representatives shall
immediately choose by ballot one of them for President; and if no person
have a majority, then from the five highest on the list the said House
shall in like manner choose the President. But in choosing the President,
the votes shall be taken by States, the representation from each state
having one vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or
members from two thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states
shall be necessary to a choice. In every case, after the choice of the
President, the person having the greatest number of votes of the electors
shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who
have equal votes, the Senate shall choose from them by ballot the Vice
President.
The Congress may determine the time of choosing the
electors, and the day on which they shall give their votes; which day
shall be the same throughout the United States.
You
can see, they solved the faction problem here by first having the State
elect the electors, who voted. The man with the most votes became
President and then they appointed the man with the second most votes as
the vice president. This usually would create a pair of individuals from
two different factions as President and Vice President. It was assumed
that most elections would be determined by the House of Representatives
further refining the faction filtering process. This process would keep
one faction from developing their agenda and creating a cabal in the White
House. The actual method by which this was done remained open to the
states in the beginning but the right to change the method of appointing
electors was given to congress.
The
system worked fine until the unforeseen development of national parties.
In
the 1800 election the party concept was so consolidated that every
elector, instead of voting his first and second choice for president
wrote in the names of the parties candidates for president and vice
president, the Jefferson/Burr ticket. They won the election in a tie for
president. The election then
was deferred to the House. The vote tied 35 times. Finally on the 36th
vote Jefferson was elected as President.
Congress
changed the system the next year with
the 12th
amendment.
Amendment
XII
[Election
of President and Vice-President (1804)]
The electors shall meet in their respective states
and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at
least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they
shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in
distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall
make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all
persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each,
which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat
of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the
Senate;--The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate
and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes
shall then be counted;--the person having the greatest number of votes for
President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the
whole number of electors appointed; and if no person have such majority,
then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on
the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives
shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the
President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from
each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a
member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the
states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of
Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of
choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next
following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case
of the death or other constitutional disability of the President. The
person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the
Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of
electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two
highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a
quorum for the purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of
Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a
choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of
President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United
States.
There
was still expectation that the president would normally be chosen in the
House preserving some of the Republican filtration system. However,
now the vice president was chosen separately; eliminating the
election of president and vice president of different factions. It is
interesting to note that they even allowed the possibility of the House
not being able to decide the president from the choices appointed by the
electors.
In
1824 the electoral college did not elect a candidate by a majority and the
House decided the vote for John Quincy Adams.
There was a wide sweeping change in the electoral system
thereafter. The changes occurred at the state level
where one by one all the states changed their system from
appointment by the legislatures to election by the common vote. The common man now decided how the elector would vote
removing another component of the Republic system.
Then,
in 1836, the two major parties adopted National Conventions to nominate
candidates. The dominate political parties chose their own methods of
electing political parties to the Convention. This change allowed party
regulators and elected public officials to dominate the conventions and to
steer their parties toward the candidates they chose reducing the faction
filtration.
Finally,
in the twentieth century, a new system of selecting the national
convention delegates was established in a few states and then spread to
become the current system
we
now have to elect the President.
This
system is called the Primary Elections. In the early months of an election
year each party chooses electors and alternates for their state usually
done at a state convention. New
Hampshire always has the first Primary. In its laws is a statute requiring
that they hold the first Primary in the nation; it is held on the first
Tuesday in March, or the first Tuesday at least seven days prior to the
next earliest primary. In 1996, this occurred
February 20.
In
the primary system, a popular vote by the people elects the candidates for
their party. They then hold a
national convention where a mock elector count elects the candidate of
their party. This system virtually eliminates the elector’s decision
altogether. Unless they go haywire at the convention, the electors just
parrot what the common folks voted for in the Primary.
The
presidential election has now become 51 separate State and D.C.
popular vote elections for electoral votes. The candidate who wins
the most votes in a State wins all the electoral votes for that state.
The
popular vote occurs in November and the popular vote votes for the
candidate which determines which parties electors go to the Electoral
College. The exceptions are Main and Nebraska who choose two electors by
popular vote statewide and the remaining are chosen by popular vote in
each congressional district. This is a little better but not near the
Republic form the constitution envisioned.
In December, the Electoral College meets in each state capitol and
in D. C. to cast their votes.
We
have what was designed as a Republic vote for president turned into
democratic popular vote with all the trappings of the democratic
process. The whole process is run by factions for the benefit of factions.
The party that spends their millions on the most effective campaign,
convinces the populace that the opponents are not good. It goes on
for the year preceding the election, full blown political factious
warfare.
The
individual States are to blame for the decent of the presidential election
from a Republic system to a totally controlled media frenzy democratic
popular vote.
Another
area where the system has deteriorated is in the election of State
Senators.
Here
is the original method.
Article I
Section
3. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from
each state, chosen by the legislature thereof , for six years; and each
Senator shall have one vote.
The State legislatures were to choose the Senators
from each state. This kept the Senate and the Senators totally free from
political concerns. They were elected by their political peers. This
process would insure that only the best, wisest most moral persons were
chosen. This kept them from the corruption
and political trappings that are necessary to run a campaign and toget
elected by the popular vote.
The
17th amendment totally changed the process in 1913. (Same year
the income tax amendment passed)
Amendment XVII
[Election
of Senators (1913)
The
Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each
state, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator
shall have one vote. The electors in each state shall have the
qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the
state legislatures.
When
vacancies happen in the representation of any state in the Senate, the
executive authority of such state shall issue writs of election to fill
such vacancies: Provided, that the legislature of any state may empower
the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill
the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This
amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of
any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
With
this amendment the Senate became nothing more than a copy of the house of
representatives with the all the political trappings and faction control
associated with it.
Conclusion
The constitution created a federal government that
was balanced by the local popular vote Representative and the State
appointed Senators. It kept the President and Vice President free from
politics and probably from different sets of constituents . It was
designed to eliminate the problems and the controls that
factions have on the liberties of individuals. This faction
filtering that the Republic form of government provided has been almost
totally eliminated by the changes that have occurred over time.
I
think we should return the system back to its original form. I think the
17th amendment should be repealed and allow the state
legislatures once again to appoint the Senators of each state.
Senators should be appointed by the State legislature.
The presidential electors should be appointed
by the State legislatures independent of parties and factions. These
electors would convene at the State Capital and cast their votes for two
men they consider presidential, then the ballots would go to the House for
counting and if necessary, the House could vote.
This would eliminate the entire spectacle of
Senatorial and Presidential elections and present us with much
better candidates to staff
the legislative and executive branches.
"In a pure
democracy, the majority - nothing more than an organized mob backed
by money and commerce power - rules without restrictions, while the
individual is given no rights. However, the individual is granted
privileges by the majority rule according to their whims and pleasures at
the moment. Of course, those privileges - not rights - can be taken away
as easily as they were granted by those who rule from the majority."
"If
history will be adhered to and learned from, no modern nation of people would
ever voluntarily subject themselves to a pure democracy. It just doesn't
work. In every historical instance of the establishment of a pure
democracy, the end came quickly and violently. In every historical
instance, a purely democratic government made slaves of those individuals
who were not counted as being a part of the majority."
|