Courage To See

Over the course of the last few months I have been reading the Federalist Papers; it has been a slow read for me, the wording of the time period is different and consequentially at times, grasping the authors meaning becomes a laborious task.  Yet I am continually awed,  the foresight of these founding fathers and the  formidable task they undertook to dissect and examine the very tenets of the proposed Constitution. So what exactly are the Federalist Papers?

The Federalist Papers were a series of eighty-five essays urging the citizens of New York to ratify the new United States Constitution. Written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, the essays originally appeared anonymously in New York newspapers in 1787 and 1788 under the pen name “Publius.” A bound edition of the essays was first published in 1788, but it was not until the 1818 edition published by the printer Jacob Gideon that the authors of each essay were identified by name. The Federalist Papers are considered one of the most important sources for interpreting and understanding the original intent of the Constitution.

As one reads through the Federalist Papers, what becomes most obvious are the current events where politicians with either ignorance or arrogance have strayed from the meaning of the Constitution.  In the future, when appropriate I will write from a position which highlights sections of the Federalist Papers and apply the Constitutional meaning to current events.  Admittedly, I am not a Constitutional scholar.. what I endeavor to be is patriotic American.  WE-THE-People are the barriers against a tyrannical government.

Speaker Pelosi to shield vulnerable members from controversial votes

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has privately told her politically vulnerable Democratic members that they will not vote on controversial bills in 2010 unless the Senate acts first.

clip…

“The Speaker has told members in meetings that we’ve done our jobs,” a Democratic leadership aide said. “And that next year the Senate’s going to have to prove what it can accomplish before we go sticking our necks out any further.”

Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), the president of the freshman class, said that Pelosi came to last Wednesday’s freshman breakfast to deliver that message, and that it was met with wide spread approval.

“I think freshmen, particularly, are not enamored of the idea of being asked to walk the plank on a controversial item if the Senate is not going to take any action,” Connolly said.

The above article reeks of overt partisan politics. Why would these House members be concerned about their re-election if they were voting according to the wishes of the districts they represent?  Simple answer.. they wouldn’t.  This is the crux of the current problem, elected individuals are voting at the bequest of the political party hacks, regardless of the stated opinion of their constituents.

The Congresspersons who are having second thoughts on what will happen come 2010 better be concerned.

Excerpt from Federalist Paper 57, The Alleged Tendency of the New Plan to Elevate the Few at the Expense of the Many in Connection with Representation:

All these securities, however, would be found very insufficient without the restraint of frequent elections. Hence, in the fourth place, the House of Representatives is so constituted as to support in the members an habitual recollection of their dependence on the people. Before the sentiments impressed on their minds by the mode of their elevation can be effaced by the exercise of power, they will be compelled to anticipate the moment when their power is to cease, when their exercise of it is to be reviewed, and when they must descend to the level from which they were raised; there forever to remain unless a faithful discharge of their trust shall have established their title to a renewal of it. (emphasis mine)

They are to remain dependent on WE-THE-PEOPLE and faithfully discharge their entrusted duty.  Seems to me that the Democratic party is stating (from Pelosi), they have purposefully pursued, twisted arms of and coerced members of their own party to enact legislation which the people who elected these chicken yellow Democrats did not favor. Which means that regardless what these members do over the next year, they should be voted OUT.  The dependence Congresspersons have on their constituents is there so their allegiance remains with their constituents not the party.

The oath of office they took at their first seated session of Congress;

“I, (name of Member), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.” (emphasis mine)

I suggest the domestic enemies are the ones which have coerced, prodded or threatened the member of Congress who voted against the desires of their district.  They have failed to uphold the trust placed in them and consequentially they should be removed from office in their next election.