HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
May 10, 2004 I saw a bumper sticker today which said "Imagine a world with no Liberals." I wondered about this for a moment, then realized that if there were no liberals, there would be no conservitives either, only moderates. The question is, would this be a better world, or not? Politically, I think it could be a good thing. Washington was horrified when he saw political parties forming shortly after the birth of our nation. Before the parties, there was a concept of men working as a common group towards a common goal, each with different opinions, and often with conflict, but without any metiphorical lines in the sand. But in a system where only 50 percent plus one wins, it makes sense to try to form a group and try to hold 51 percent of the public's (or the legislature's) will. I think this has caused untold harm to our country, harm that isn't seen because we have enough other things going for us that it only holds us back, rather than moving us backwards...until now anyway. We have gone from a government which only borrows money to fund wars into a country that runs deficits as a matter of course. Conservitives used to "do it right," (another bumper sticker), but now even conservitives scoff at a balanced budget. We elected Republicans to both houses and the presidency, and still we hemmorage money. Each party needs to "buy," votes, and feels that it is more important to hold the majority so that most of the platform goes forward, rather than voting on each issue, and each item of pork, with their consciences. So, a radical proposal, the parties fight to keep a slim majority, and squander our future to get that slim lead, make a slim lead useless, and money more difficult to spend. This is an idea that should appeal to true conservitives, and probably true liberals as well. It would take a constitutional amendment, but what if it took 60% of congress to increase or create an appropriation (to spend more money), but only 40% of either house to cut an appropriation? Radical, yes, doable, I think so, and should even 49% of the people be forced to spend money on programs they don't support? ------------ About the author: Aaron Baker is an Ensign in the US Navy. Email: Aaror@writing.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
