CycloWizard
Lifer
With every thread in this forum resulting in blaming any problems on the president, I thought about why this might be the case. It seems to me that the problem is with the standard operating procedure of politics in this country. So, here are my thoughts on why things are as they are and how we might fix them.
First, the executive branch is, first and foremost, established to enforce the laws in this country. The president is the head of this branch of government and is, therefore, the leading law enforcement official in the nation. I believe that his job description should focus on this duty much moreso than the creation of policy, though it is the creation of policy that dictates the path of campaigns and elections. The creation/implementation of policy should be left to the legislature, as they are elected to promote the policy that the people want. They write the laws that the people want and the executive branch enforces them. If the legislature oversteps its bounds, based on the Constitution, then the judicial system is supposed to step in and remove the infringing laws. In this manner, we ensure that the voice of the people is heard (legislature), but that it does not trample the rights of the minority (judiciary). We also ensure that laws will be enforced as necessary to protect the rights of the many (executive branch).
The way I see the pendulum of power swinging in this country reminds me of the story of Julius Caesar and the Roman Empire. Maybe this sounds cliche due to all of the comparisons between the US and Rome, but bear with me. The Roman people sought to make Julius Caesar their emporer because they believed that their influence had expanded to the point where the senate was not fast-acting enough to make the necessary decisions. Thus, the power was shifted from the legislature to the executive branch, at first slowly, then in its entirety. The senate continued as a figurehead organization, giving people the illusion that the executive branch did not wield supreme executive power. This same path is being followed now in the US, whether we realize it or not. People focus almost entirely on the actions of the president, from the elections to day-to-day news. The legislature is nearly forgotten. The judiciary is mentioned only in reference to its fulfillment of the wishes of the executive branch. Many bills (not sure of the percentage) originate from the executive branch, rather than within the legislature. The executive branch's nearly complete control over the military (as ensured by politicking - cries of unpatriotic treason) gives it near-supreme executive power.
The checks and balances put in place in the Constitution have worked fairly well thus far in our little experiment in democracy. However, it is possible that, given sufficient time, the power of such a nation will wax and its peoples' pride will become such that they seek to increase their power. This is most readily accomplished by giving the power to the few, as this is the most rapidly responding form of government. These few can then consolidate their power and act as they see fit. When the masses have turned over the keys to the city, the government is no longer beholden to them. Greed, corruption, and lust for power are the only driving forces that the government need heed at this point, as the populus no longer has the ability to stop them from pushing their agenda to the brink. The government can even perform actions to catalyze their ascent, usually through a demonstration of patriotic might in military form to swell nationalism and blind the reason of its constituents with emotion.
The 'few' at the top in our country are not simply the Bush administration. They are the class of professional politicians - the elite of society. They have, through shrewd usage of their powers, slowly and steadily climbed above the masses and insulated themselves with money, power, and fame. They have consolidated their power and quashed all opposition by wielding their influence as a weapon. They make the rules that you and I are forced to abide by, though they are not held to the same standards due to their wealth and status. Those in the legislature are merely patsy for the executive branch, forced by politics to do as their leader does to keep up appearances. In the end, their actions are inconsequential. Either major party in power will accomplish much the same end, but by putting up a front that the two are diametrically opposed, the masses believe that there is still a true alternative to the inexorable trot off the precipice. However, those with experience dealing with government realize that so many layers of insulation (bureaucracy) have been put in place as to make change nearly unattainable.
I'll refrain for now from going into the implications of what I've said here, as there is only so much ranting I have in me tonight. Any thoughts are welcome.
First, the executive branch is, first and foremost, established to enforce the laws in this country. The president is the head of this branch of government and is, therefore, the leading law enforcement official in the nation. I believe that his job description should focus on this duty much moreso than the creation of policy, though it is the creation of policy that dictates the path of campaigns and elections. The creation/implementation of policy should be left to the legislature, as they are elected to promote the policy that the people want. They write the laws that the people want and the executive branch enforces them. If the legislature oversteps its bounds, based on the Constitution, then the judicial system is supposed to step in and remove the infringing laws. In this manner, we ensure that the voice of the people is heard (legislature), but that it does not trample the rights of the minority (judiciary). We also ensure that laws will be enforced as necessary to protect the rights of the many (executive branch).
The way I see the pendulum of power swinging in this country reminds me of the story of Julius Caesar and the Roman Empire. Maybe this sounds cliche due to all of the comparisons between the US and Rome, but bear with me. The Roman people sought to make Julius Caesar their emporer because they believed that their influence had expanded to the point where the senate was not fast-acting enough to make the necessary decisions. Thus, the power was shifted from the legislature to the executive branch, at first slowly, then in its entirety. The senate continued as a figurehead organization, giving people the illusion that the executive branch did not wield supreme executive power. This same path is being followed now in the US, whether we realize it or not. People focus almost entirely on the actions of the president, from the elections to day-to-day news. The legislature is nearly forgotten. The judiciary is mentioned only in reference to its fulfillment of the wishes of the executive branch. Many bills (not sure of the percentage) originate from the executive branch, rather than within the legislature. The executive branch's nearly complete control over the military (as ensured by politicking - cries of unpatriotic treason) gives it near-supreme executive power.
The checks and balances put in place in the Constitution have worked fairly well thus far in our little experiment in democracy. However, it is possible that, given sufficient time, the power of such a nation will wax and its peoples' pride will become such that they seek to increase their power. This is most readily accomplished by giving the power to the few, as this is the most rapidly responding form of government. These few can then consolidate their power and act as they see fit. When the masses have turned over the keys to the city, the government is no longer beholden to them. Greed, corruption, and lust for power are the only driving forces that the government need heed at this point, as the populus no longer has the ability to stop them from pushing their agenda to the brink. The government can even perform actions to catalyze their ascent, usually through a demonstration of patriotic might in military form to swell nationalism and blind the reason of its constituents with emotion.
The 'few' at the top in our country are not simply the Bush administration. They are the class of professional politicians - the elite of society. They have, through shrewd usage of their powers, slowly and steadily climbed above the masses and insulated themselves with money, power, and fame. They have consolidated their power and quashed all opposition by wielding their influence as a weapon. They make the rules that you and I are forced to abide by, though they are not held to the same standards due to their wealth and status. Those in the legislature are merely patsy for the executive branch, forced by politics to do as their leader does to keep up appearances. In the end, their actions are inconsequential. Either major party in power will accomplish much the same end, but by putting up a front that the two are diametrically opposed, the masses believe that there is still a true alternative to the inexorable trot off the precipice. However, those with experience dealing with government realize that so many layers of insulation (bureaucracy) have been put in place as to make change nearly unattainable.
I'll refrain for now from going into the implications of what I've said here, as there is only so much ranting I have in me tonight. Any thoughts are welcome.
