Dr. Forbush Thinks

"To retain respect for sausages and laws, one must not watch them in the making."- Otto von Bismarck

With the golden sword in hand the Democrats finally have the power to make the laws that they had wanted to make for the last 12 years or so. But, one often wonders why the minority party has such little influence over making laws. After all, the minority party represents almost half of the voters no matter which election we are discussing, because most votes in most districts are often that close. If Democracy really had anything to do with the will of the people, or establishment of laws for the common good we could imagine the two political parties working together for the common good. Or, we could imagine representatives crossing back and forth across the aisle depending on the issue and how it effects his or her district.

The problem, however, is that many politicians become at first infatuated and then in love with political power. They realize that they can make things happen, or better yet prevent things from happening because of their actions. It isn’t only about voting on laws, it is also about writing the laws.

Imagine an example of a local law funding a way to save little kittens abandoned in the city. How is the law written? First, lawmakers need to define the scope of the law. What about adult cats, do they get assistance? Who pays for the service? Who is allowed to collect the money for providing a service? How much money is the maximum allowed?

Perhaps a simple law is written that mandates that $10,000.00 is allocated from the city’s general fund to be paid to the local veterinarians $25.00 per documented kitten or cat if the vet proves that they had the animal spade or neutered and vaccinated then given to the local animal shelter. Whether this law makes sense in reality is irrelevant for this discussion. The point is that the local lawmakers want to do something to help take care of the ferrule cats in the city. Maybe this law is great as written, but other lawmakers need to determine that. So, the law comes up to be presented before the city council. Now, it could be voted on, or it could be amended.

Suppose a lawmaker does not like the idea of spending money on these cats, but he doesn’t want to be called a cat hater by his constitutes. How can he vote against the law and keep his loyal voters? Well instead of voting against the law at the end he can add an amendment. If he adds an amendment that he does not like he can vote against the law. For example, he might add to this law the provision that dogs that are caught by the public could be brought in and put to death. The person bringing the dog in could also be paid $25.00.

Don’t be surprised by the construction of a law that offers to both saves cats and kills dogs, because lawmakers do things like this all the time, even if they are not as blatant as this example. A lawmaker can concentrate on one aspect of the law and use that reason for justifying a vote for or against the law. If other lawmakers add additional amendments that law may become complex and the result of the law might not be clear. But, also the lawmakers can even use the vote of one lawmaker against him in an upcoming election. A lawmaker intending to save cats and votes for the law might be called a dog killer in the election because of the other aspect of the law. Lawmakers might decide that the provision of paying for the destruction of dogs doesn’t matter, because they have determined that very few dogs would be turned in and many cats would be saved.

In real life lawmakers pass laws that can specifically help one or two companies while regulating an industry in another way. They can give tax breaks, or make it legal to hire non-Americans for specific work. Getting your own personal law made usually costs something. It might be a campaign contribution or the promise of your influence to tell the union to vote for the lawmaker in the next election. In this way laws can become extremely complicated and sometimes incomprehensible. And, most troublesome is the fact that the laws are not written with the “common good” in mind.

The Republicans made a big deal out of Democratic special interests that had influenced the making of laws over their reign in Congress. But, the point is that Republicans gained power and worked for their own special interests. Neither political party seems to have the common good of all Americans at heart when they write the laws. And, both parties want to maintain power, so they don’t like the submission of amendments from the opposing political party. If they did, there would be even more laws like the example above.

This being said, I have to mention that not all lawmakers behave in these ways. In fact, California Governor Schwarzenegger surprised me with his state of the state speech yesterday. Being a Republican I would have expected that he would be pushing the Republican agenda. But, yesterday he decided that the state actually wanted him to solve problems and work with the people. He told us that he will work to pass California Health Care reform, a typical Democratic issue. He told us that he wants to continue the California fight against Global Warming, regardless of what the Bush administration is pontificating. In fact, if the Governor didn’t have a political label on him I would be prone to call him a moderate Democrat instead of a Republican based on his agenda for 2007. Arnold has made the most amazing political turn around of any politician I have ever seen. He has listened to the people of California and responded to their needs. He is actually working for the “common good” of California and it is certainly visible. It is certainly too bad that more Republicans haven’t heard the message.

Tonight George W Bush will make his long awaited Iraq speech. Based on the leaks from the White House and the reactions from those privy to the knowledge I expect that George W Bush is about to embark on his next failure. Even though I am almost certain that President Bush will not learn from Governor Schwarzenegger’s example I can only hope and pray that he does listen. Americans do not want an escalation of the debacle in Iraq.








-----------------------------------------------------





Don't forget what Stephen Colbert said, "Reality has a well-known liberal bias."


Cross Posted @ Bring It On, tblog, Blogger and BlogSpirit



Reflection