And to the Republic for which it Stands

Why does the pledge of allegience call our government a republic? Why isn't it a democracy?

A democracy in the true sense of the word is a form of government where each citizen votes on each piece of legislation. Our founding fathers knew that this was impractical since most citizens do not have the time to get informed on every subject. A true democracy is unsustainable and results in chaos, much like the National Socialist Democratic Party in Germany. This party stood for these democratic principles to begin with, but power quickly concentrated into a small body of people with Hitler at the head.

A republic, in contrast, is a form of government where leaders are chosen by the voice of the people to represent them in office. These legislators are hired to devote their time and energy to become knowledgeable about the subjects in question and vote according to the dictates of their conscience. If their votes differ from the views of the governed, the politician is then voted out of office. Although this is not a perfect system, it is a practical solution to the problems of a democracy.

Another question: Why isn't it the role of the politician to vote as the people would? This is actually a trick question with two answers. The politician does indeed have the obligation to represent his constituents with honesty, but what if the politician knows something that the people don't? And what if what the people are clamoring for is directly against their best interests?

This situation presented itself during the constitutional convention of 1787. The government at that time was formed under the Articles of Confederation which was the first attempt to create a federal government. The articles were very weak and the legislators decided to meet in Philadelphia to amend the document. When the members met, it was quickly decided that the articles would simply not work and a new document must be created. Every member was put under the utmost secrecy so that public wouldn't get fired up against the convention.

So is secrecy in government good or bad? It's plain to see that there is a great deal of secrecy going on in government today? Is there any difference between 1787 and today?

The big difference happens after the phase of secrecy. During the constitutional convention, the founding fathers argued point after point to find the best solution to federal government. Afterwards the results of all their debates were published in the Constitution and the politicians worked tirelessly to garner support for it. Alexander Hamilton and others wrote 85 articles called "The Federalist Papers". George Washington's letters in support of the constitution were regularly published in the news. The result was that the constitution was ratified and the only free country in the world was born.

The method the founding fathers followed of garnering public support for good legislation is rarely followed today.

"Men in the public spotlight constantly are asked to express an opinion on a myriad of government proposals and projects...All too often, answers to these questions seem to be based, not upon any solid principle, but upon the popularity of the specific government program in question...Unlike the political opportunist, the true statesman values principle above popularity, and works to create popularity for those political principles which are wise and just." -Ezra Taft Benson The Proper Role of Government Click Here

Starting last year with the Bush administration, a series of stimulus bills were passed. Each of these bills was passed quickly with little debate. Bush called for a "direct and rapid" bill to stimulate the economy and proceeded to pressure legislators to pass the bill. Obama pushed the passing of the $787 billion stimulus in record time. The 1,000 page plan was presented on January 26 and passed the House by January 28. Nobody had time to even read the bill much less understand it fully. Whether you support the bill or not, the end does not justify the means by which the bill was passed. If it was a good bill, it could have been passed after our legislators had time to review and debate it. This same rushed method was used to pass the Cap and Trade bill with a 300 page amendment submitted within 15 hours of the vote.

My point is that I firmly believe our legislators have the duty to draft legislation outside of the public eye. This is a necessary component of republican government. Our current legislators have betrayed our trust, however, when they pass bills before the people have a chance to form any sort of opinion on it. And a sure fire way of ending our government as we know it is for legislators to allow themselves to vote according to popular opinion and pass legislation they have not even had the chance to read.