In 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinborough published his studies on the world's first Democracy, Greece. Tyler's studies led him to conclude that a Democracy will always fail.
Tyler found that a Democracy alone is doomed because no system of checks and balances exists to control the abuse of power. Tyler's findings led him to say:
"A Democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A Democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every Democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship."
Ironically, Tyler made these statements in the same year our nation's Constitution was drafted. Some might say that Tyler's studies are out of date and therefore his findings have no bearing on government today. On the contrary, Tyler's comments have stood the test of time. During the 1930's, Germany, a Democracy at the time, elected Adolph Hitler. Clearly, without a system of checks and balances in place, the majority can vote and place a dictator in power with no recourse for removing that dictator.
The founders of our nation did not create a Democracy, but a Democratic-Republic. This is a balance between a Democracy, which is rule by the majority and a Republic, which is rule by the law. In our nation, the majority rules, but only within the boundaries of the law--specifically the law of the Constitution.
If tomorrow, the majority of people in one of the fifty states votes to legalize slavery, for instance, the judicial branch of our government should step in and declare the vote "un-Constitutional". In this case, the Republican part of our government would keep the Democratic part of our government in check.
So many in America believe that if a majority of voters want something to become law, it should automatically be called "Constitutional". That is not always the case. Only when the majority of people vote for change within the boundaries of the Constitution of the United States, can it then be deemed "Constitutional".
By the same token, if a judge or body of judges for instance, declares that the will of the people is "un-Constitutional" when in fact the will of the people is "Constitutional", it is up to Congress, our representatives, to put that judge's ruling in check. This can be done by way of legislation and even impeaching a judge.
Think back to the 2000 Presidential election. The Constitution of the United States allows for the election of the President of the United States by way of the Electoral College, not the popular vote. Yet, by listening to the media, Al Gore, Bill Clinton and the rest of the cultural left, you would think G.W. Bush was not elected President.
The real truth of the matter is Al Gore and his team of high priced attorneys attempted to circumvent the Constitution and have the courts name Mr. Gore President, even though G.W. Bush won the Electoral College. Thankfully, the Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional process and re-affirmed the Electoral College as the vehicle by which our nation elects its President.
Today in America, the Supreme Court is made up of three conservatives, four liberals and two moderates. Yet, the Supreme Court found in favor of G.W. Bush on one count by a 7-2 margin. This means, three conservatives, two moderates and two liberals each agreed that the Electoral College in fact elected G. W. Bush President.
So we see, the founders of our nation were amazingly astute. They created a system of checks and balances that would act like a pendulum, swinging back and forth to keep both elements of our government, the Democratic and Republican, in check. However, this system of checks and balances we live under can only be effective if "We the people" understand that a majority vote is not always right, nor is it always "Constitutional".
No comments:
Post a Comment