Friday, July 23, 2010
Vote for the program - not the politicians
I have been spending sometime thinking about real concerete solutions to the problems facing our country today. In order to best do this I have made effort to be open to ideas wherever and from whomever they may come.
From the Wizard of Oz comes the phrase, “If you don’t know where you’re going, any path will take you there.” When we consider the paths that we all are taking in life, do we all know where that path is taking us? When I see some of the people who have made the most notable achievements in this world, they seem to be those with a clear idea of what they want to accomplish and posses a strong desire to accomplish it.
I have heard it said that no one will make it to heaven on accident. I don’t believe that Walt Disney stumbled upon Disneyland, or that any major achievement of success happens without a plan or path in place to take us there - plan first, act second.
Businesses make business plans, strategic plans, marketing plans and financial plans to achieve the goals desired. Under this philosophy sometimes I wonder if we should be voting for people to run for office? Should we rather vote for the programs we want to have enacted THEN pick the most efficient candidates for the selected public policy. Should we not be the one’s voting for certain bills to be passed, not voting for people to do who knows what in office? When we vote for elected officials it is if we don't know where were going as a people. Voting becomes a form of legalized gambling. Should our country be more focused on a "business" plan and less about who to put in office? Success comes first from vision, and second from accomplishing that vision. This seems to be true both personally and in business, why not in government too?
In someways I feel that voting people in and waiting to see what happens next opens a window for a power grabs by the few over the many. This is not a movie, this is government, this is our lives. We should not find out "what happens next" and just keep watching like a passive brainless audience.
Politicians lie, politicians are power hungry, and politicians can make "deals" that favor themselves over country. Programs don't - at least not without the people's consent. What if a program was outlined and was presented to the people for their vote. Say that program was to run a government program under "xyz" conditions. After these conditions are established and agreed upon, our elected officials are simply there to effectively carry out the plan of the people. Elected officials then become managers of the people's affairs, not the unrestricted leaders of our affairs and designers of our future. Crazy concept, I know.
Currently, we can vote an individual into office that may or may not do what they campaign on, and they may, as our president has done, wield entirely too much power over the lives of the citizens. If a national health care plan is to be put in place, it should be one that the people first know about, and second, vote on. To be forced to take whatever one president pushes on us is unconstitutional at a minimum. Our senators and representatives vote on bills they cannot possibly read let alone ponder and comprehend. If programs were well though out, and the people were given sufficient time to read them, much like propositions in an elective process, we would have far fewer programs in place that waste money, increase the size of government, without the voice of the people putting such things in place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's not a bad idea actually, just put all the issues to a vote of the people instead of electing politicians to decide for us. If someone proposes a national health care plan, let's vote on it - for one thing it would have to be simple enough for people to understand and that would be a good program. Likewise, let's put the Iraq War to a vote and the Afghan War as well. Let's put the trillion dollar Pentagon budget to a vote alongside a bill to cut school funding or social security. My guess is that the American people would make better decisions than the politicians.
ReplyDeleteI do take your idea to heart in another way. One of the problems we now face because of decades of divisive politics in this country, is that we as Americans no longer have a shared mission statement. We simply do not look at the larger questions? What should America's role in the world be and why? What should the government do today to form a more perfect union and provide for the general welfare? We argue about the methods, the tactics and the solutions when we don't even know if we share common goals.
I believe most Americans love this country and would be willing to take the time to grapple with the big questions if they felt it would be productive and that they could do so without fear. However, most Americans are either struggling to make ends meet and don't have the time, energy or intellectual foundation to think long and hard about our nation's problems and its future, or they simply don't believe their voices will be heard by those in power. It's a difficult set of problems, but while we do little more than type about them, they get worse every day.
I think you are right Charles. As a country we really have no idea or vision of where things are going or should go, so we generally take that fear of the unknown and assimilate that negatively. Fear of the unknown when it comes to our government is a sad state. No one likes to have their future determined for them.
ReplyDeleteThere is a bit of the chicken and egg going on here. One could say that people are too poor or to disinterested or disenfranchised with government to take favorably to this idea. But I think that if this concept were in place, people would be more involved than we think - at least the door would be more open to feeling connected and concerned with our country as a result. Some states have propositions and the people can be very connected to voting in programs. They are certainly less cynical towards government when it doesn't go their way. I believe people are understanding when the people vote in majority. we may not always like it, but we accept that as a cost to our freedoms and in many ways, the loss is seen as a victory for democracy.
I have a feeling that more people would have been open to the concepts of a national health care program had there not been so many unknowns. Nobody knew what they were voting or not voting for. Perhaps it would have died and never come to be. Fine, if that is what THE PEOPLE wanted. Special interests would have less pull because they would not be able to buy the votes. It would cost too much :)
Perhaps the reason the people feel apathetic towards government is because those in office don't have to listen. If we were to vote on such programs instead of people to make the programs for us, we would HAVE to be more connected. I believe voting would become more relevant.