No Pleasant Explanation
In trying to grasp what is driving the actions of our national leadership with regard to the immigration issue, I have tried to fall back on a basic premise that I teach my political science students at the local community college. Unfortunately, this does little to offer a rational explanation. But it does illustrate a problem just as serious for freedom-loving Americans.
Beginning with the understanding that American government is accurately termed a republic, or representative democracy, rather than a direct democracy, I note that the people of the United States elect men and women to carry out the nation’s business for them. These elected officials, once in office, will act in one of two ways.
Some elected officials can be expected to see themselves as trustees for the people. That is, they view their elected position as one in which the people have entrusted them to use their own best judgment of what is right and what is wrong when working toward establishing public policy. Others may be expected to view themselves as delegates of the people. That is, their job is to keep their fingers on the pulse of their constituency and base their actions on what they perceive “the voice of the people” is saying.
Of course, it is doubtful that any elected official falls neatly into either of these two categories. Rather, one can expect a politico to give varying weights to the value of public opinion and personal judgment, depending on the specific issue being considered, or the circumstances surrounding it. But what is maddening about the response of our leaders in Washington is that it’s difficult to see how either of these classifications describe their actions in a way that would calm the nerves of many people like me.
The American people – and by that, I mean the actual citizens of the United States who live and work here lawfully, vote in elections, and who are supposed to enjoy all the rights and protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution – have not been ambiguous on how they feel about the problem of our government allowing people who demonstrate no regard for our laws to enter the country, impair our market-based economy, and even take to the streets demanding that no one dare question their “right” to be here in defiance of the law.
Over and over again, the people of the United States can be heard to declare the need to secure our borders – particularly the southern one – and enforce an orderly system of legal immigration. And over and over again, Washington – from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other – turns a deaf ear. So much for the “delegate” theory as a means to grasp what is going on in the halls of power.
This leaves the “trustee” possibility – that the leaders have taken it upon themselves to do what they feel is right, regardless of what their constituencies say. Of course, this begs the question of what it is that defines “right” for them.
Obviously, “right” on this issue is not determined by what the people of America want. And any serious student of history – both American and world – and human nature, who is concerned with preserving the nation and its government in a recognizable form for his or her children, would have to acknowledge that “right” is not determined by the long-term interests of the United States either.
The “right” that it seems our nation’s leaders have determined to pursue in this instance is what they feel is “right” politically. In other words, it is a decision that is based on what members of either party – with exceptions, of course – believe will provide short term benefits to them and their party in their attempt to obtain, or hold onto, power – through the “opening up” of a new constituency or the appeasement of financial contributors – regardless for what it means for the day-to-day lives of working Americans, or the long-term security of our way of life. If this is not the explanation, then I invite anyone to rationally explain to me what is the explanation.
Failing the receipt of such an explanation, I have to wonder what 21st Century Washington’s reaction to this issue has to say about the form of government we have taken pride in for so long. “Government of the people, by the people, for the people” – can we honestly say this is what we’re seeing demonstrated on this issue?
Beginning with the understanding that American government is accurately termed a republic, or representative democracy, rather than a direct democracy, I note that the people of the United States elect men and women to carry out the nation’s business for them. These elected officials, once in office, will act in one of two ways.Some elected officials can be expected to see themselves as trustees for the people. That is, they view their elected position as one in which the people have entrusted them to use their own best judgment of what is right and what is wrong when working toward establishing public policy. Others may be expected to view themselves as delegates of the people. That is, their job is to keep their fingers on the pulse of their constituency and base their actions on what they perceive “the voice of the people” is saying.
Of course, it is doubtful that any elected official falls neatly into either of these two categories. Rather, one can expect a politico to give varying weights to the value of public opinion and personal judgment, depending on the specific issue being considered, or the circumstances surrounding it. But what is maddening about the response of our leaders in Washington is that it’s difficult to see how either of these classifications describe their actions in a way that would calm the nerves of many people like me.
The American people – and by that, I mean the actual citizens of the United States who live and work here lawfully, vote in elections, and who are supposed to enjoy all the rights and protections guaranteed by the United States Constitution – have not been ambiguous on how they feel about the problem of our government allowing people who demonstrate no regard for our laws to enter the country, impair our market-based economy, and even take to the streets demanding that no one dare question their “right” to be here in defiance of the law.
Over and over again, the people of the United States can be heard to declare the need to secure our borders – particularly the southern one – and enforce an orderly system of legal immigration. And over and over again, Washington – from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other – turns a deaf ear. So much for the “delegate” theory as a means to grasp what is going on in the halls of power.
This leaves the “trustee” possibility – that the leaders have taken it upon themselves to do what they feel is right, regardless of what their constituencies say. Of course, this begs the question of what it is that defines “right” for them.
Obviously, “right” on this issue is not determined by what the people of America want. And any serious student of history – both American and world – and human nature, who is concerned with preserving the nation and its government in a recognizable form for his or her children, would have to acknowledge that “right” is not determined by the long-term interests of the United States either.
The “right” that it seems our nation’s leaders have determined to pursue in this instance is what they feel is “right” politically. In other words, it is a decision that is based on what members of either party – with exceptions, of course – believe will provide short term benefits to them and their party in their attempt to obtain, or hold onto, power – through the “opening up” of a new constituency or the appeasement of financial contributors – regardless for what it means for the day-to-day lives of working Americans, or the long-term security of our way of life. If this is not the explanation, then I invite anyone to rationally explain to me what is the explanation.
Failing the receipt of such an explanation, I have to wonder what 21st Century Washington’s reaction to this issue has to say about the form of government we have taken pride in for so long. “Government of the people, by the people, for the people” – can we honestly say this is what we’re seeing demonstrated on this issue?
posted by JeffreyH | 9:03 AM
1 Comments:
Immigration: On no other issue do we see such a big disconnect between the controlling elite and the American people.
Post a Comment
<< Home