Did the framers intend for Americans to have this much power in
government? Should citizens have a direct democracy towards government?
The framers saw the dangers about the majority forcing their will on
minorities. Is that occurring today, are we going against the framers
wishes?
Some say that recall is one of the most powerful tools that the people
have. Should the American people have that power? Should we decide to
recall someone we voted for just because we don't like his ideas. Is it
hypocritical of California's to recall a governor for his car sales tax
then implement later on?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I think the framers did not intend for voters to have as much power. They obviously wanted more power than what they had experienced under the British Crown, or they wouldn't have revolted. However, they knew how complicated things could be in a direct democracy government. They felt they needed representatives who were voted in, not kings or some other figure born into their position, to make decisions for the people. Yet these people can be recalled and replaced if the voters do not like them. This seems to be more along the lines of what the framers wanted, representatives with limitations where the voters can have power in this way.
The recall does seem hypocritical in the sense that Davis was recalled for exactly what the governor is doing now.
The power of recall is huge beacause it places all of the power in the peoples hands. The people have the power to vote the person into office and have the power to kick them out of office. I think that the whole recall can get out of hand by people wanting to recall someone just because they dont like his ideas. But I do think it is a good power to have if that person is not doing a good job in his position and is hurting the state. But if people are just using the recall system to get people out just cause they raised taxes its very wrong.
I think that the power to recall a leader is one of the most important tools that we have as a people. I think that it is only right that there be an option to remove someone from office if they turn out to be doing a terrible job, just as any other person would be let go from their position for not completing their job in the way that they were intended to. I think that it is hypocritical of Californian's to recall a governor for a tax that was later put into effect. I think that shows a lack of insight on the side of the voters, clearly there was a need for the tax and we just didn't want to pay it. It would also be terribly irresponsible of voters to recall an elected official based on only one small level of disagreement (providing that it isn't something criminal as in the case of the Gov Ill).
I think recalling someone we just voted for is a little hypocritical, but if we didn't have that power it could lead to corrupt leadership. Someone could run a campaign on a certain platform then, once elected, act a completely different way. Having a recall system in place prevents that, I think. Leading to yet another check on our California government!
The American people need to have the power of recall, because without it once a leader is in office, he would only be focused on keeping the Senate happy and disregard the public's wishes. The power of recall is another check on the governor, but it is very beneficial.It is hypocritical to recall one governor only to implement the policy later but in this situation, I don't think anyone was predicting the economy problems we now have. If this would have been predicted and publicized, maybe people would have kept him in office and focused on other issues when we were electing the governor this past election.
It seemed like the framers wanted the government to be more representative, but not a direct democracy because of the complications that would bring. It seemed as though the Framers would rather have more power as the voters than less power and be more controlled by a government that is not obligated to listen to you.
The Direct Democracy always seems to be a solution to the problem, but it really would complicate things overall. People are indecisive and this could create for a longer voting process. I think that the Framers were pleased to have a represented government. Either way, someone doesn't get their voice heard, whether that is in a direct democracy or a representative democracy.
We are very possibly going against the Framers wishes. The majority does obtain a great deal of power, and usually controls the ideas and policies of the government. I think that we are going against the Framers wishes, but like I said earlier, with a Representative or a Direct Democracy, somebody is always going to be unhappy. Sometimes people must choose a system for the greater good.
Post a Comment