Showing posts with label congress. Show all posts
Showing posts with label congress. Show all posts

Saturday, January 29, 2022

Is the word "all" the most important word in the Declaration of Independence?

 


Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis were interesting characters. Exactly the type of characters a novelist needs to carry a story. In writing Maelstrom, I had a scene where Lincoln addresses Congress after a recess. (As customary at the time, his address was read by a clerk.) Not much has happened during the recess. Eleven states had seceded from the Union, Fort Sumter had been bombarded and surrendered, a piece of Virginia had been occupied, and Lincoln had exceeded his executive powers to spend unauthorized money, build an army, and suspend habeas corpus among other things.

He desperately needed Congress to backfill behind him.

This was a crucial address. Important for Lincoln and the country. The address was not one of his well-known speeches, but I was struck by the clarity and simplicity of the explanation of why he took these actions.

Lincoln said it was a struggle for maintaining a form of government “whose leading object is to elevate the condition of men—to lift artificial weights from all shoulders—to clear the paths of laudable pursuit for all—to afford all an unfettered start, and a fair chance in the race of life.”

On the cusp of war, Lincoln repeatedly used the word “all.” He had previously stated that this was the most important word in the preamble to the Declaration of Independence and had reputedly written that word over and over again on pieces of paper.

I cannot think of a loftier goal for government. Perhaps in this age of divisiveness, we should all write the word “all” over and over again.

Thursday, June 7, 2018

Here’s an idea on how to fix Congress!




My grandson graduated from middle-school, so I’ve been in New York City for the last week. My visits are always fun because my three New York grandchildren will have it no other way. Sometimes we get time to do something other than attend school events, sport games, and dance recitals. Yesterday, I met an old friend from Arizona for lunch. Michael E. Newton wrote Alexander Hamilton: The Formative Years and other nonfiction history books. Hamilton, of course, played a major role in Tempest at Dawn, so despite my emphasis on fiction, we developed a friendship based on a shared love of history.

After discussing book marketing, writing projects, and American history anecdotes, Michael shared a modern-day political idea that has shown some recent popularity. A congressperson today represents an average of 710,000 people. When we adopted the Constitution, each member represented no more than thirty thousand people. Michael suggested that we return to an upper limit of thirty thousand constituents. I laughed. That would make the United States Congress as large as the Star Wars Imperial Senate. I told Michael I didn’t want to pay taxes for a building large enough to hold so many representatives. He asked why they needed to be in a single building? In fact, why did they need to be in Washington D.C at all?

The intent of this movement is to make the House of Representatives once again answerable to the people.  If congresspersons remained in their districts and participated electronically with Congress as a whole, then they would be surrounded by their constituents rather than lobbyists and the House leadership. Further, if a congressperson only represented thirty thousand citizens, individuals would have more personal contact with their representative and greater influence over legislation. If we could pull this off, we would decrease the power of lobbyists and the establishment by geographically decentralizing the House, while increasing the power of the people by making their representative a neighbor. 

An additional benefit is that staff salaries and office expenses would siphon money out of the richest zip codes in America and disperse it to the hinterlands, from where it came in the first place. I count that as win/win.

Are there negatives? Of course. The senate would undoubtedly be further captured by lobbyists, the media, and party apparatchiki. They’ll probably even become haughtier, if that’s possible. But wait, there’s more. We could send senators out to state environs, as well. Maybe we require them to work in the state capital, maybe even the capitol itself. The Framers wanted the Senate to protect the states, and this might move us closer to the Framers’ vision. Although senators would remain popularly elected, proximity to local politicians would provide the states with additional influence over their prima donnas.

The whole idea is a pipe dream, but an intriguing pipe dream nonetheless. Maybe we could bribe them to go along by doubling their salary. It would be a bargain at twice the price.








Wednesday, May 30, 2018

Today's Essay at Constituting America


Today, I again had the privilege of participating in Constituting America's 8th annual 90-Day Study. This year, their study looks at the Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people. 

You can read or listen on SoundCloud here, and all of this years essays can be found here.





Monday, May 14, 2018

Essay at Constituting America

james D. Best
Today's Essay

Today, I had the privilege of participating in Constituting America's 8th annual 90-Day Study. This year, their study looks at the Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people. 

You can read my essay here, and all of the essays here.


Thursday, March 1, 2018

Essay at Constituting America



Today, I had the privilege of participating in Constituting America's 8th annual 90-Day Study. This year, their study looks at the Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people. 

You can read my essay here, and all of the essays here.


Tuesday, February 20, 2018

Constituting American Begins Eighth Annual 90-Day Study

The core mission of Constituting America is to educate Americans about the Constitution

Constituting America has initiated its eight annual 90-Day Study. This year, the study is titled Fire on the Floor, and looks at the "Founders’ vision and purpose for a legislature that belongs to, is comprised of, and serves the American people." The essays have already started posting, so take a read here.

I've agreed to write essays on these five subjects.
  • Why the Legislative Branch is listed first in Article I of the United States Constitution
  • How Congress is designed by America’s Founders so a king could not rule, but instead the American people rule within a civil society
  • The United States Congress versus the Confederate Congress During the Civil War
  • What should and should not be placed in a bill to keep legislation easy to understand and appropriate
  • Impact that running for elected office, and serving in Congress, has on the members and their families
constitution
2018 Essays

Monday, January 29, 2018

Ryan Cooper writes "America's Constitution is terrible"



Ryan Cooper has an opinion piece in The Week with the provocative title, "America's Constitution is terrible. Let's throw it out and start over."

He starts by saying, " The American Constitution is an outdated, malfunctioning piece of junk — and it's only getting worse."

What's wrong, you say? Well, that damned parchment is interfering with him and his cohorts from governing in the fashion they believe best for all of us. How will we ever turn the United States into a European country with that odious “piece of junk” in the way?

He has a prescription, of course. As the intellectual equal of James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, et al, Cooper defines five brilliant changes to our countries most sacred document.
  1. Get rid of the Senate filibuster—super majorities are undemocratic
  2. Radically change the way House members are elected—gerrymandering is just plain wrong
  3. Neuter the Senate—too damn much power to low-population states
  4. Elect the president from the House—a separately elected president “increases tyranny and undermine democracy”
  5. Throw the entire Constitution in the garbage—git rid of the “ancient, janky mechanisms of the American Constitution”