Democracy or Democratic Republic?

We have a problem in this country. Well, we have a few problems in our country but this is one of them. One I have never heard anyone talk about. One I don't think most people know exists.

The Constitution was written and this country was set up as a Democratic Republic. That means we had a balance of a Democracy and a Republic. It was a mixture made to balance out the bad of both systems. Our founding Fathers studied all of the classic governments and saw the good and bad in each one. Their goal was to create a lasting framework that could be a foundation for a lasting Government but still have just enough flexability to change through the years when needed. They also wanted a government that never had too much power or gave too much power to any one branch of the government. So they set up a Hybrid system of a Democracy and a Republic.

A pure Democracy is government by popular vote. Everything is decided by popular vote. You don't have someone to "Represent" you in the government, all you have is a system for voting on bills and laws that are brought before the people as a whole. The good of this system is the government doesn't take rights away from the people. You have no one that you voted to represent you get into office and then change their views. This kind of government can be very attractive. You also don't have to worry about corruption of public officials because they don't exist in this form of government. This sound great until you look at the dark side of Democracy.

A pure Democracy can be VERY scary too. Democracy is mob rule. What the mob wants, it gets. Or more accurately, what the person or group that can control the mob wants it gets. As an individual you have no protection from what the whole wants. Democracy is worse then a dictator. A dictator at least is somewhat consistent on their agenda and as long as you are not on it you are fine. Democracy, on the other hand, is as fickle as the latest fad. Every few years would bring a different minority into the sights of the mob. They would strip that minority of their rights saying it was for the good of the whole and then move on to their next victim. Everybody is a minority in some way or another. What church do you go to? Do you even believe in God? What profession are you in? What entertainment do you like? What color is your skin, hair, eyes? Do you hunt, camp, boat, fish, eat meat, don't eat meat, sew, have a garden, not watch TV, excel in school or work, have a medical condition, what country did you or your ancestors come from . . . ? We are all minorities in some way and under a pure democracy none of us would be safe.

A Republic gets rid of mob rule. In a Republic you pick who will represent you in the government and then they make the decisions. For the individual this form of government is much less work. You don't have to worry about each bill, proposition, or law that is being debated. You did you duty and picked someone to represent you and figure all that out. When you vote all you would have to decide is who would represent you for the next term of office. Most Republics had multiple levels in them too. So the representatives the public picked would then elect a higher committee, senate, or president normally for a longer term then they serve. this way you have balance and consistency. Republics tend to be much more conservative and reserved then Democracies. This form of government also tends to have a higher quality of elected officials. If you only have one chance to pick someone, then you tend to do more homework first.

The dark side of a Republic is they tend to be elitist, rich, and not care about the "average" person in the country. Once they are elected they can do whatever they want. the people have to recourse until they come back up for election. And in the upper houses of a Republic that the people have no direct vote, the only remedy for change is to elect representatives into the lower house that will block bills from the upper house until the representatives can elect a new upper house. Change is SLOW in this form of Government.

Our Founding Fathers didn't want the evils of either of these forms of Government. They decided on a framework that would hopefully eliminate the evils of both and keep the benefits of them at the same time. they created a Democratic Republic. We had three branches of government that were set up to "check and balance" each other. To make it simple, the Legislative branch had the power to write laws. The Judicial branch decided if they were constitutional. The Executive gave a face to our government for foreign affairs and had veto power over the legislative branch.

Now, in the Legislative branch, we have two Houses. We have the House of Representatives that is chosen by popular vote from a specific geographical area. That representative represents the people in their area. Then we have the Senate, now this is where we get all screwed up! The senate was created to represent the States and their individual rights in the government. According to the Constitution Senators were elected by the State Governments so they could keep the Federal Government in check. They weren't elected by popular vote in the whole state like they are now. So If the Federal Government started encroaching on State's Rights, the Senate could block the bill and it wouldn't get passed. States wouldn't be blackmailed by the Federal Government by withholding Highway funds or other money from the state if they didn't do what the Federal Government wanted. The Senate was there to keep each state in control of their own destiny, and not be just side shows to the Federal Government.

In 1913 the people and state legislatures were sold the 17th Amendment that changed the Senate from representing the States to being popularly elected. Sounds good, right? Well the States lost their "check" against the Federal Government and this opened the door for the Mammoth, Overgrown, Over powerful Federal Government we have today. State Governments now have to recourse when the Federal Government steps on their rights and we all lose because of this. Without this change we would not have had FDR's socialist "New Deal." A social security program would have been up to the states, and you could then choose to live in a state with one or not. Education, Speed limits, driving age, drinking age, state health care, income tax, welfare, are all examples of areas that the decisions originally would have been up to individual states, but are now Federal. No more local choice with the choice to move to a state that better fit your ideals. What we have now is the population of bigger States dictating how everybody in every state should live.

Let those bigger States pass all the bills they want in their own States, just don't force the people in my State to live with it too. Let us decide what is best for us as a State. Let us decide how to educate our own children. Let us, as a State, decide if the age to drink should be 21, 30, or 12. If you want government health care, do it in your State and let everyone else decide what they want. If you don't like what your State is doing, become more politically active or move to one that you like better. But we are losing more and more of this choice, this freedom every year. And the sad part is we gave it to the Federal Government in 1913.

So we live under a Government that is unbalanced. We took a government that was balanced and moved a weight off the Republic side and dropped it onto the Democracy side and slid that much more to mob rule. We lost out and so did all our States. Our past generations gave that right away, and good luck getting it back. So next time you vote, be careful what rights you take away from someone else. Next time it could be your way of life up for a vote!!!