Tuesday, February 07, 2006

Don't let the people decide

Dennis York, my favorite conservative blogger (a dubious honor), warns of the perils of letting the people decide, the battle cry of Wisconsin Manufacturers and Commerce in supporting the constitutional amendment formerly known as Prince, er TABOR.

Says York:
"At WMC, we say: 'Let the people decide!'"

Oh really?

Well then, let's throw it open to a public vote and let the people decide on the following:

Universal Health Care

Withdrawing Troops from Iraq

Capping Gas Prices

Legalizing Abortion (assuming Roe v. Wade is overturned)*

Capping CEO Pay

And the list goes on and on. All of these, of course, would pass, and each would be disastrous. In every case, the discretion of our lawmakers serves as a goalie to thwart public opinion. It works the other way, too. Think carrying concealed weapons would pass a public vote? I'll put it on the board right now - what gets the higher percentage - concealed carry or whoever runs against Herb Kohl?
Actually, I would be quite happy to let the people decide all of those issues. But let's not forget that the legislature was created to thwart the will of the people.

2 Comments:

At 10:45 AM, Blogger Deedub420 said...

Universal Health Care - Gee would people vote for something if they knew the gov't would start paying for it instead of them? Hell why don't we have a flat salary across the board. Every person make $50K no matter what they do, that's fair for everyone right?

Withdrawing Troops from Iraq - My vote on this will have no bearing on 43 to bringing them home.

Capping Gas Prices - this would be a landside vote

Legalizing Abortion (assuming Roe v. Wade is overturned) - R v W will NEVER be turned over despite all the crazy talk from the left.

Capping CEO Pay - because gov't is run sooo well, we should tell the private sector how to run their business.

yes I have too much time on my hands today.

 
At 4:18 PM, Blogger Interloper said...

If WMC advocated the abolishment of the Legislature and the establishment of direct democracy, then maybe I'd hear them out on issues like this. In the absence of that, they're simply hypocrites and advocates for going around the direct representatives of the people for purely political reasons.

Political Science 101 teaches us that we have representative democracy in this country, not direct democracy. The people are represented by legislators. Thus, the people do decide.

Why should we have direct democracy for some issues, but not others?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home