Originally Posted by Aunt Sponge
True, times have changed - yet the measures (aka - differences I'm refering to) that were put in place can be worked in favor of reform, not against it.
The states have increased and, thus, proportionately the population and members in the House have increased from 55 to 535 - 435 members are in the Congress and 100 members are in the Senate.
The Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 - This is what everyone rallied in favor for (in opposition to the British government) and this is what declared us separate from them.
the Constitution was written and ratified in 1787 as a separate document with a separate purpose than the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution was written to solidify and form a new national government.
The Constitution actually completley replaced the Aritcles of the Confederation which was put in place after the Revolutionary war. The lack-of-governing under the Ar-Con is what people protested in that day - Shays's Rebellion, among other actions, actually made them realize that the Ar-Con wasn't the right outline for government (in fact, it left us without much of a national government to the point that the first president under the Articles of the Confederation, John Hansen, didn't even take his president-possition serious enough to show up)
I agree with the consensus point you made - it's true, our Constitution has sealed our right to know and learn, technology has made it possible to know and learn without being part of a select "group" of politicians and scholars and owning property isn't a basis for valuing your opinion, anymore.
- Which is why it's important to break it down and approach it little by little. In such a capable, informed arena It's far more likely that you'll gain necessary support when you keep it simple (remember, KIS)
I prefer, I suppose, to have a large number of people be in support of such a measure - this would ensure that it continues, strong, even after being put into effect.
I'm not seeing it as just helping people - I'm seeing it as making a complete change to people's overall opinions and values.
|
But the people recognized that the inherent weakness of the articles of confederation did make us vulnerable. There was still the threat of a common outside enemy. And still, 21 years later, the vivid memory of that common enemy lingered, just as the vivid memory of recentish events lingers for us.
I think you are far more confident about the information level of the lay person than I am. Unfortunately, I have encountered more uninformed/misenformed/ignorant people than I have well/accurately informed individuals in the health care reform debate. People are hearing and speaking through a filter of fear. Even when you break it down kindergarten style, the reaction has been one of staunch refusal. It's fear of change. Big change, little change, any change. That fear is being stoked by the huge number of available communications avenues. Rather than helping, the plethora of options is overwhelming and hurting. The fear mongers are also hurting, but I'll leave that one for another discussion.
I agree that getting the masses on board would be ideal. It would certainly make my job of implementing health care reform far easier. But I think the country is too ideologically divided to achieve that goal. Look at the birthers. Look at the 85% of white southern democrats who defected from their own party during this past election cycle (vs. the 55% who defected last time) and ask yourself if they didn't defect because of his skin color. Kerry was just as liberal as Obama, so it sure wasn't a defection based on political views. Look at how many people still cringe at the mention of W's name, and he's not even in office any more. Look at the leaders of various parts of our society who advocate for hate. Look at the gun-toting guys attending health care rallys, intentionally (IMHO) intimidating with the implied threat of violence. There are so many signs of the deep divisions in this country. Unfortunately, health care reform is also a devisive issue. It's not a place where common ground and good policy are going to meet and be friends.
I'm now brainstorming for an idea of what OBAMA could tackle that would be a uniter and help bridge that chasm. I'll let you know if I come up with anything. I would love to see it happen. I would love to see some of the wounds in this country start to heal.