Showing posts with label democratic. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democratic. Show all posts

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Why America is No Longer a Democratic Republic


Based on an editorial by David Model, posted at OpEdNews
Cited here are quotations from David Model, a college professor, author, and public speaker.. They are excerpts from his recent editorial titled Media Circus Obsession: Obfuscating the Real Deficiencies of U.S. Democracy, In addition to the statements below, Mr. Model presents what he sees as thirteen defects in our government that keep America from being a democracy.Aside from his list of thirteen defects, these are the comments I see as being of greatest interest to Americans who dread the erosion of democracy in America.
When commenting on the impact of elections on democratic ideals, it is necessary to look beneath the symptoms and identify the real problems.”
Barnum and Bailey would turn green with envy at the circus masquerading as an electoral campaign currently in the United States.”
Electioneering spectacles are both artificial and superficial but are really just a symptom of the underlying infringements of democratic ideals.”
United States, Britain and Canada are the only three democracies that have not implemented some variation of proportional representation but have clung to the First-Past-The-Post system, a majoritarian system, in which only a plurality is needed in each voting district to determine the outcome.”
.”.. it (is) virtually impossible for smaller parties to gain any ground in the elected chambers of government. ”
.”..the Electoral College ... enhances the possibility of the winner having fewer popular votes than the loser.”
American election campaigns are incapable of informing the public about the real stances of candidates on all the issues and revealing the true character and integrity of the candidates.”
In many European countries paid advertising has been banned due to the overriding manipulative nature of a thirty second ad designed by public relations and advertising experts who are only interested in selling a product rather than informing the public.”
Many democracies have also banned donations by any groups such as corporations and unions …”
... the ideal method for funding elections would be based on a fair formula by which the government would either provide all the money or a balanced combination of government funding and individual donations with strict limits.”
In the U.S., there is a two party system in which both parties are beholden to corporate donors …”
In 2011, a total of $3.3 billion was spent on lobbying by 12,633 lobbyists translating into $6,168,000 spent on each member of the House and Senate on average and 23.6 lobbyists per each member of both Houses.”
In 2012, many pundits are predicting a total expenditure of $5 billion for all campaigns, the major source of which are wealthy benefactors or corporations.
Lobbying virtually destroys political equality in the United States thereby undermining the principle of "by the people, for the people" and "dedicated to the principle that all men are created equal.”
It is impossible to govern with only the public interest in mind when candidates are beholden to the people who funded their victory.”
As for ordinary citizens, they may be able to meet with their member of Congress or Senate but the extent of their influence is often minimal.”
The bailout during the financial crises ignored those who suffered the most, namely those who lost their jobs, the poor and those who lost their homes.”
Leadership in Congress has been accorded too much power which can be used to serve ideological ends rather than the public interest.”
In the United States, Supreme Court appointments are tainted by ideological considerations.   The Citizens United and the Florida Recount cases demonstrate the role of ideology in the Court's judgments.”
.”.. the criminalization of dissent and militarization of the police have resulted in a multiplicity of violations of civil and legal rights not to mention the First Amendment.”
Corporate ownership and advertising and the symbiotic relation between big corporations and the government have reduced the media to stenographers of power.”
I hope the items quoted here will prompt you to read Mr. Model's entire editorial on the subject. And, of course, you will have to read his full statement to review the thirteen defects he sees in our government today.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Democracy: From Definition to the Constitution

First let's examine two types of democracy and see how the founding father chose the type they did..

Pure Democracy

A pure democracy is one in which the power to govern lies directly in the hands of the people. Hence, it is sometimes also referred to direct democracy. All citizens are allowed to participate on an equal basis with fellow citizens in establishing policies, regulations and laws, and their enforcement. This form of democracy can work well for organizations or small towns, but it becomes unwieldy and virtually impossible at a national level. Attempts at pure democracy in a few colonies failed, which helped lead our country toward a different form of government.

Democratic Republic

To overcome the unwieldiness of a pure democracy, the drafters of our Constitution turned to a representative form of government. Instead of direct participation of the people in day-to-day governance, they set up a system that provided for elected representatives to enact executive and legislative policies and laws on behalf of its citizens in accordance with the common good and the welfare of our country. Therefore, our country was founded not as a pure democracy but as a democratic republic.

The Articles of Confederation

The Articles of Confederation were this country's first attempt to draft a constitution, uniting thirteen states under a weak federal government whose primary responsibilities were overseeing the revolution against England, conducting diplomatic discussions and negotiations with Europe, and dealing with territorial matters. There was no president, no cabinet, and no federal departments of any significance. It had no power to levy taxes (which was understandable considering the issues at that time), and was totally at the mercy of the states to make voluntary contributions for its support. This confederation did not establish a new country. Rather, it established only a loosely knit association of thirteen separate, diverse, and independent states. While this confederation was relatively successful in the three areas outlined above, it was totally ineffective in dealing with other urgent matters that required a stronger central government to be effective in other critical areas.

The U.S. Constitution

The United States Constitution was written in 1787 and took effect upon ratification of nine states in 1789. In framing a new constitution, its drafters had to walk a very tight line between national rights and states' rights. Many concessions had to be made on both sides to develop a document that would be acceptable to states with widely varying principles and practices. As a result our Constitution as drafted was considered by many to have been imperfect, even for the times, and had many defects which needed to be corrected after ratification. 

Where Do We Go From Here? 


Our Constitution has served us fairly well for more than 200 years.  It has endured thousands of challenges to our democratic republic.  However, it was not written to address every possible event or development that could arise in the indefinite future.  There is no way our founding fathers could ever, in their wildest dreams, have conceived that one day corporations would be recognized as persons, entitled to the same rights of free speech as private citizens, and that money would be considered free speech.  They could never have perceived of our government and our political system essentially being bought by big money interests. Most of all, they could never have envisioned that this country would one day (today) have established an aristocracy that rivals the very one they sought and fought with their life's blood to escape.  It is small wonder that Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently made the comment,  "I would not look to the U.S. Constitution, if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.,".

Our Constitution could not anticipate the challenges of the distant future, and our government has failed to guard our country from adapting it to changing times..  The bottom line is that our beloved Constitution  is in critical condition and needs to be revised.  The only real question that remains now is whether or not we are up to that challenge.


Next Topics:
                      Are We a Democratic Republic or a Plutocracy?

Major Threats to Our Democratic System

The Great Economic Divide