Thursday, September 2, 2010
California Senate Debate Turns on Economy
I picked this article because I felt like it touched on a lot of the topics/issues we talked about last class. It gives a modern perspective to what we're studying if you will.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I agree! This article seems to bring up the timeless question: "how rigid or malleable should government be?" On the one hand, we want a government "by the people, for the people." This suggests that government officials' terms should be short, allowing for frequent replacements in representatives that represent the changing attitudes of the people. Yet Publius (Madison) also expresses his fear of the impulsive and mis-informed mob, suggesting the value of longer terms in order to prevent mistakes that could alter government in a negative way.
Senator Boxer is now running for a fourth term in the senate and is facing criticism for not "letting other people try" being a senator. Yet her response seems to embody some of the checks provided in our constitution to prevent government from being too weak. Her response, every election is a chance. That’s what America is about". Seems to underscore this point.
Ms. Fiorina's comment "But to do all these things, we must start by changing the people we send to Washington" seems to echo the other side of this timeless issue: How rigid should government be in order to successfully represent the people without becoming a reflection on human error and impulsivity?
Post a Comment