2007-09-25 08:02:21 · 5 answers · asked by gordem 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
You are assuming that every one of his constituents has the opposite view and that the legislator would not be representing any one of them if he/she votes his/her "conviction"? That is a pure hypothetical unlikely to occur in the real world.
In our system, legislators are representatives of their constituents. So, if every single constituent feels one way and the legislator votes the other, then the legislator is not doing the job they were elected to.
However, a legislator does not have to bow to majority rule where there is a minority of the constituency to be represented as well. In that case, the legislator may vote in favor of the minority opinion if, in the well reasoned and supported judgment of the legislator, the decision will result in the greatest good for the largest number of constituents.
2007-09-25 08:14:26 · answer #1 · answered by raichasays 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The whole idea of the election process is to determine where a candidates convictions lie. John Kerry hurt himself by saying he voted for before he voted against. Candidates accused of "Flip-Flopping" on issues are seen as lacking in their convictions. We try to find a candidate who's convictions closely resemble our own (hopefully) and go with him or her. If a candidate votes against a previous stance they took, we have to ask why? Lobbyists? Polls? Good head by the secretary? Without personal convictions, you have nothing to go on with a candidate and cannot trust them to do what they say they will do. They have to be able to say "I believe..." and not have someone say "until the polls say you should believe something different". Without convictions, there can be little vision for the future.
2007-09-25 08:12:35 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Generally, I'd say yes -- they would be bound to vote on behalf of their constitutency, as they promised to do.
I'm assuming that's what you mean by "their convictions" -- the promises they made to get elected by that group. If you mean their personal beliefs -- when those beliefs conflict with those of their constitutents -- then it makes a difference whether the politician made those personal beliefs public -- and whether they promise something different during the election.
2007-09-25 08:06:17 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Constituents vote. A smart politician if intending to be reelected will listen to and vote the way their constituents want.
2007-09-25 08:07:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They must remember that we're the ones who put them in power for our voice.
2007-09-25 08:10:32 · answer #5 · answered by Blue Oyster Kel 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋