USA why is there not any websites for a national coalition to amend our constitution for a true democracy?

Question

I have noticed all my life over 50 years that majority rule or will of the people is all to often ruled against by local,state & federal legislation. Generally the few ruling class stand to profit from these laws. Which suggest to me that the tables of rule & control need to be switched if you or I & our families are ever going to live the American dream.

Answer 1

The constitution is devised in such a way as to avoid "the tyranny of the majority." The majority is not always right, just in the majority. People who are not in the majority have rights and legitimate needs, too. In your family, not everyone agrees, but they all sit down at the same table, do they not? The constitution is structured to recognize the majority, and yet protect the rights of the minority and include them in nation's life.

Misuse of office is not a question of democracy, it is a question of law enforcement and public vigilance.

Answer 2

Democracy isn't perfect, by any means. It has many flaws, and even if a "true" democracy were to exist, the American dream would still only be a dream for many Americans. I tend to side with Plato (yea, I'm throwing out an academic buzz name... say something!) about the ideal state. He actually ranks a democracy at #4 as far as an ideal state is concerned, just before Tyranny (Ya need a scary individual to shut up the morons that get "their say," in democracy). People are so used to democracy though, that what Plato ranks as the ideal state, could never come true. An aristocracy is "the rule of the best," where philosophers rule. While this also has it flaws, I'd rather listen to the ideas of Plato, than those of George W. Bush. It’s a stretch, but seriously, the human race is too diverse, weak and ridiculous for any government to really work out for everyone. Buy lotto tickets!

Answer 3

A true dempcracy would require a mass meeting of all citizens who can argue for and against each bill, offer amendments, and then vote ... on each and every law. Nice in theory, but if you think it takes a long time to get things done in congress (435 members), think of how long it would take to debate an issue where there are MILLIONS of people in attendance who want to debate. Further, if the congressmen, and their staff, do not have time to read and understand the bills, do you really think the average citizen, who has a job, a family, and other obligations, will have time to read and understand the material?

Perhaps a better solution would be to change to a parliamentary form of government (where minority parties get a voice in congress), which would eliminate one party having all the power in a political body. Right now, its the republicans. So, even if the democrats had better ideaas, their ideas cannot even make it to the floor for a vote (Hastert will not allow a vote on any bill that does not have the support of a majority of Republicans, regardless of total support). It won't be much better when the democrats regain control (and Republicans sit on the sidelines).

If a system were developed with minority parties receiving seats, the likelihood of policies being openly questioned would increase; and the ability of one party to have effective control over all legislation would be minmized. Perhaps then, the members would vote more reasonably based on good public policy than on special interest support and power plays.

Answer 4

I take it you are not a fan of the electoral college either.

The bottom line is that majority rules when it comes to our representatives, and that is supposed to equate to a majority vote on a house or senate floor. Ward, district, and precinct lines are revaluated at least every census so that is ensured. The problem with the system is that the voice of the people is far too weak.... the folks that have the most to complain about do little to make themselves heard. They don't vote, they don't organize, they don't write letters. The undereducated do not understand the concepts of political pressure and political capital.

I wouldn't go as far as to say there is a ruling 'class', as feudalizim died a long time ago. But you are right that polititians can and do profit from some of the issues they vote on. Even if they abstain from a vote on the basis that they have financial interests, they very mention of that, influences party members to vote resolutions through. I do think business affiliations and voting records should be scrutinzed much more than they are as well. An organization must be created in order to track the changes in voting and affiliations with each representative. I think a website is the perfect platform for such an organization.

I wouldn't hold my breath for a pro-individual vote coalition to appear, b/c I think that most people realize the cost involved to let every American vote on every issue. Furthermore, I think doing so would preclude any possbility of an educated vote go through. I would prefer a few dozen semi-corrupt officals voting on an issue rather than thousands upon thousands of regular Americans that they have only seen commercials about and not bothered to read themselves. Imagine.... you would see 20-30 propaganda commercials a day, every day. The few who didn't grow bored with the state of government and actually vote every day would be easily swayed in their opinions. The multitude of polling places would be easily corrupted too.

In short, if you don't like your representatives, organize, petition, vote them out, and pray you end up with a better one. Don't assume that there would be any improvement b/c the public is actually voting. Personally, I'd take greedy over dumb every time.... at least greedy is predictable.

Answer 5

The United States is a Constitutional Republic - the Founding Fathers were well aware that no 'true democracy' had historically been able to stand the test of time and would have a disastrous impact in a country such as ours.

In a true democracy, the equal rights amendments would never have passed when they did and abortion would still be illegal in this country.

I am grateful that this country is not a "true democracy" and that I bothered to pay attention in school to learn the difference!

Answer 6

The Founders were men of intelligence and they realized that direct democracy usually and quickly degenerates into mob rule and oppression of the minority. A representative republic creates safeguards for the minority.

Any time you begin messing with the constitution on those regards, you open it up for all sorts of trouble. We are seeing a rise in the number of people in this nation who are against any form of public religious expression even though it is guaranteed by the First Amendment. Are you really ready to make that change? We already know that a growing minority of people would ban hand guns from the public in direct contrast to the snd Amendment. Mob rule equals tyranny.

Answer 7

What in the name of Sam Hill is true Democracy? Theres no such animal.. that isnt even allowed under a Theocracy! Under a true Democracy you would be able to use drugs legally and own Slaves and do what ever the majority wanted. What people want and what they need are two different things.. freedom is whats screwed the United States up. Seldom does it excecute or really punished hard core criminals. The streets..Schools.. Churches work places and as a matter of fact.. no where are you safe in the US.

Answer 8

i'm getting what you're declaring yet we will ought to shop more advantageous than the bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the structure). different amendments outline important rights alongside with the right for women and minorities to vote. ok, shall we've a Constitutional convention. i ask your self who will be there? timber? Clintons? Roves? Kennedys?

Answer 9

A true and complete democracy (where popular vote decides everything) for a country this size is not only a logistical nightmare, it is completely inefficient.

I would not a want a 'true democracy'. Represenative government is a great thing.

Answer 10

If there were majority rule, we would still have slavery and women would not be allowed to vote. The Founding Fathers created a secular democratic republic intentionally, and wisely.