Posted by
CKHustler on Wednesday, March 04, 2009 12:59:36 AM
The House of Representatives
From the New York Packet. Friday, February 8, 1788.
HAMILTON OR MADISON
Federalist Paper #52
"The definition of the right of suffrage is very justly regarded as a fundamental article of republican government."
So I wanted to know what exactly he meant there so I checked it up.
"Allow the right exclusively
to property, and the rights of persons may be oppressed.
The feudal polity alone sufficiently proves it. Extend it
equally to all, and the rights of property or the claims of
justice may be overruled by a majority without property,
or interested in measures of injustice."
http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s26.html
You notice the conclusion our founders came upon. Today Liberals have decided that class warfare is the way to go for gaining votes. Promise free money to those who don't want to work to get it and they will elect you. Just imagine if, say, our laws were that only people that pay a positive income tax to the government, can vote. Do you think that we would get better reps in government? You bet we would! Every person voting would know that their vote counts more than it did. They would keep themselves informed because they have something to lose if our government was irresponsible. Currently those on the bottom only vote for those who promise the most and hence have nothing to lose and do not educate themselves. I believe that voting should have stipulations based on contributions to society. If you positively contribute to society, then that is enough to warrant a vote. Uneducated voters have really messed up our system.
"very long and dangerous intermissions were often contrived by royal ambition."
Human nature here was the cause of a long and dangerous intermission. In other words, human nature caused a decision to be made that was against logic in how the House of Commons was supposed to represent the people. Human nature is greed and power. Our republic government was set up so that the government would be held in check from greed and power, while the economy would work best with greed and power. Currently we have DC full of greedy, power hungry people who wish to control the rest of the country. Pelosi would love it if our country fell from power, but she was the king of us. Socialism is the government running the economy, so all the checks and balances against them would be null if they controlled the private sector. It would turn into a government full of greed and power going against the will of the people, while the economy ran best if mindless robots were instead its constituents. More backwards thinking coming from the left.
"the greater the power is, the shorter ought to be its duration; and,
conversely, the smaller the power, the more safely may its duration be
protracted."
With something like that being said I wonder why they chose 6 years for senators. Perhaps he will delve into that in a latter paper.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke