The Disarray of Majority Rule in American Democracy

(When Democracy Is Not Democracy)

The framers of the constitution faced a serious problem. Following the American Revolution, many of the colonies maintained an independent spirit despite the notion of becoming a group of united states.  They still saw themselves as reluctant parts.  After all, they had been independent colonies.

Another reason for this reluctance was the smaller populated states had a dim view of democratic majority rule since they would have fewer representatives and inevitably be outvoted by the more populated ones.  One solution to gaining their commitment to the union was creating the undemocratic Senate to thwart the pro-democratic rule of the House of Representatives.  While the House represented the population’s majority rule, the Senate represented state majority rule – equalized empowerment by giving each state two votes irrespective of their population.

 Also, extraordinary powers were given to the Senate which made it even more appealing as an un-democratic body. State rights would prevail over national citizenry rights – thwarting the notion of national majority rule and creating cultural fiefdoms.  In addition, the terms of office for Senators were six years whereas those for the House of Representatives was only for two years – a statement about superiority.  The states, rather than congress, were given the authority to amend the constitution.

Moreover, once constituted, the Senate was determined to make its own voting process even less democratic.  It eventually created the filibuster which raised the level of a determining vote to 60 which allowed the minority of its members to nullify the desire of the majority.

Also, the framers of the constitution had their own democratic reluctance.  They were concerned about the general educational ignorance of a large segment of the population.  They feared that out of this ignorance, the people would elect a president unqualified for the job.  To undo this possibility, they created the Electoral College.  Supposedly, these state groups would be politically savvy and correct any presidential election mistake made by the general populace.  The framers had not an inkling that this would actually create the opposite effect of overturning the popular vote in favor of a less qualified candidate.  Again, rule by democratic majority vote could be nullified by a small politically biased body.

The importance of citizenry majority rule was further downplayed by putting citizenry voting time on a workday.  This made it difficult for a large number of citizens to participate.  The message was clear: The vote of the lower uneducated and non-land-holding classes was minimally important.  Political bodies continue creating laws that deliberately thwart the ability of some of the citizenry to vote.

Also, a single person, the president, was given the power to veto the majority vote of both the House and the Senate.  It was a part of what the founders called checks and balances.  However, it was just another way of thwarting democracy as majority citizenry rule.

In recent years, what should be called the fourth branch of government, the Supreme Court, has made it clear that a conglomerate of big business is free to determine who is elected through all manner of economic machinations of both the electoral and governing processes – handing over American governance to a wealthy plutocracy.  The citizen majority is only in control by virtue of its response to this manipulation.

Here is a synopsis:

• The Senate, representing the states,  was created to thwart the majority rule of the House of Representatives, representing the citizenry.
• The Senate created the filibuster to allow its minority vote to overpower its majority vote.
• The states, rather than congress, were given the authority to amend the constitution.
• The constitutional framers created the Electoral College to nullify the majority vote of the citizenry in a presidential election.
• The role of the lower classes in the election process was downplayed by holding elections on a workday.
• The president, one politician,  can veto the vote of either the Senate or House.
• The Supreme Court has ruled that both elections and those elected can be determined by the whims of an economic plutocracy.  
• The Supreme Court can overrule anything the majority of the citizenry desires.

America is not a nation grounded in representative majority rule.  It is a complicated system of political empowerment that tends to deny the actual intents of democracy.  That it has survived for almost two-hundred-and-fifty years is amazing and underscores the nation’s indebtedness to those who have been the diligent guardians of democratic intent  – its grounding in the citizenry’s mutual worth, its commitment to the citizenry’s common good, and its insistence on the citizenry’s right to vote.

At this moment we are reaping the consequences of the compromises made to create the United States.  From this history come these two ensuing issues:

• What is required for America to actually become the United States rather than the Independent States?
•  In American democracy, is the enemy to be most feared that of ignorance or something else? 

Your opinions?

Robert

mythinglink.com