Sunrise — 6:43.
1 hour ago
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Professional Politicians
The elected individuals who govern our country are supposed to uphold the constitution, our individual liberties, and act on behalf of the people. However, because of the retirement perks, the advantage of incumbency, and the way campaigns are ran, US representatives are really more professionals at getting elected than lawmakers. Most of the work a politician will do in their political career will not be done making laws, changing lives, or protecting personal freedom. Most of the work a politician will put in will be during an election. It is very expensive to run for a seat in the government, and because most politicians do not run with their own money the money they use to run for office comes at a price. So even after a politician manages to get elected and most of their work is finished, what little effort they put in to actually governing will already be bought by money coming from somewhere dictating what a politician will do with their power. There should be maximum terms one can run for every office, maximum amounts of money one can receive from people with political agendas. There should be no retirement perks for a lifetime of government servitude. Public leaders should be business owners or otherwise gainfully employed. They should have to look after their business whilst in office, grounding them to the pains of the civilian and not allowing their elevated government position to change how they perceive the real world. There should be advisors in place to help the newly elected members of the public create laws, and any and every law should have an expiration date so that it must be debated upon again so laws will stay valid and relevant. Once politicians are more concerned with making the will of the people into law than getting elected and re-elected America will be a better place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In response to the blog, “Professional Politicians”, by Chelsea, I, too, think that politicians should be more focused on the work of the position, instead the work of campaigning to get there. The purpose of having politicians is to have skillful people in higher positions of power to make laws and decisions for the good of the people, not to be the biggest campaign moneymaker, or the most known person because it. This is one of the reasons why I do not support the idea of having political parties. To me, political parties may have at first seemed like a good idea because they help group people and politicians into groups based on their main beliefs for government and the nation, but now parties mostly seem to be large groups of people trying to out-spend, out-campaign, and out-maneuver each other so that their political group can be in power for a period of time. Yes, they still have the ideas of their party influencing them, but elections seem based more on the vastness of the campaign than the actual personal beliefs of the person running for a position. People should make decisions about who they elect to offices based on individual beliefs and character, instead of just party affiliation. This system of political parties has led to the topic that Chelsea addresses, which that of politicians being more adept at campaigning than holding a position of power because of the huge expense of running for office. As for me, the word politics comes from poly, meaning many, and tics, meaning blood-sucking creatures. Yes, I know that is not the actual root of the word politics, but I still believe that it accurately represents what it has become.
ReplyDelete