Letter to Congressman

[Keneke]

I was recently writing a letter to my Senator about removing under God from the pledge. (the opinions of this poster does not necessarily reflect the opinions of JREF.) His letter back was almost certainly a form letter, saying the mojrity of the people want it, freedom of religion, etc etc.

Then I got to thinking: aren't senators and congressmen simply voices of the people? If something is unjust, shouldn't that be a job of the Supreme Court to fix, and not our Congressional branch?

Realizing this, I find it odd that the answer to every problem in America is "Write your Congressman", because they (ideally) do not vote according to what is just...am I right? They only vote on what their state's population wants them to vote, leaving fairness to the courts, right?

 

[Evolver]

Realizing this, I find it odd that the answer to every problem in America is "Write your Congressman", because they (ideally) do not vote according to what is just...am I right? They only vote on what their state's population wants them to vote, leaving fairness to the courts, right?

Isn't that why they are called your "representatives"?

They are supposed to balance what the people want with what is right. In the majority of instances, they should be voting with the will of their constituency. They should have a damn good reason to do otherwise.

 

[gnome]

Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

Isn't that why they are called your "representatives"?

They are supposed to balance what the people want with what is right. In the majority of instances, they should be voting with the will of their constituency. They should have a damn good reason to do otherwise.

In a perfect world, I see that as an ideal division of power between the House and the Senate. I'd love to see the House approximating direct democracy, and voting exactly how their constituents prefer they do... if the Senators were voting on conscience and justice...

I'll keep dreaming i guess...

 

[Keneke]

Re: Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

In a perfect world, I see that as an ideal division of power between the House and the Senate. I'd love to see the House approximating direct democracy, and voting exactly how their constituents prefer they do... if the Senators were voting on conscience and justice...

I'll keep dreaming i guess...

Isn't that kinda like the difference between the congressional branch and the judicial branch?

 

[American]

You think the majority DON'T want it? Or you think the majority is wrong? Congress is reflecting the people's view. You need to convince people not to worship or pray.

Good luck.

 

[gnome]

Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

You think the majority DON'T want it? Or you think the majority is wrong? Congress is reflecting the people's view. You need to convince people not to worship or pray.

Good luck.

I'd be satisfied to convince people not to make the government an instrument of worship or prayer.

 

[Keneke]

Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

You think the majority DON'T want it? Or you think the majority is wrong? Congress is reflecting the people's view. You need to convince people not to worship or pray.

Good luck.

So do you agree with my main point: that the Congressional branch is based upon populism with a tad of autonomy, and that writing a letter to your Congressman about a clearly minority-supported issue is almost useless?

And I wonder why they say "write your Congressman" if you have a problem. It's a cheap, lazy way of polling, skewed towards the noisy.

 

[Tmy]

Congessmen dont always know what the people want in every situation. "Gee do the people of Dayton really want more funds for dogcatchers?" Letters can help in that part.

Ive known people to get form letters back saying the exact opposite of what they wrote. "Thank you for your letter. I was also outraged by the Halftime show." When the original letter was about how it wasnt a big deal.

 

[Kerberos]

Re: Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

So do you agree with my main point: that the Congressional branch is based upon populism with a tad of autonomy, and that writing a letter to your Congressman about a clearly minority-supported issue is almost useless?

And I wonder why they say "write your Congressman" if you have a problem. It's a cheap, lazy way of polling, skewed towards the noisy.

Well writing to you congressman also indicates that you feel strongly for the issue, which also matters since it might be in the congresmans interest to vote with the minority, if they feel very strongly about an issue, and those in the majority regard the issue as fairly insignificant. This is of course not the case, when it comes to the in god we trust issue. As an aside the Danish constitution specifically says that a MP is bound only by his own convictions that is, not by the opinions of his constituents. I basically agree with this, but I have few illusions that this is how it actually works.

 

[American]

Re: Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

So do you agree with my main point: that the Congressional branch is based upon populism with a tad of autonomy, and that writing a letter to your Congressman about a clearly minority-supported issue is almost useless?

Yes. So either do something useful, or learn to live with it. Your example is like writing to congress that you have advanced stage cancer and they should do something about it. Who are you kidding?

Whatever you choose to do, don't break the #1 rule of life: don't complain.

 

[Jocko]

Then I got to thinking: aren't senators and congressmen simply voices of the people? If something is unjust, shouldn't that be a job of the Supreme Court to fix, and not our Congressional branch?

No, the Supreme Court only rules on the constitutionality of laws, not on what is "just." Kind of non-intuitive for "justices," but there you have it. They're not allowed to legislate (in theory, but let's not go there!)

The irony is that the pledge issue is most certainly a constitutional one, and will be settled by SCOTUS, not your congressman.

 

[Keneke]

Re: Re: Letter to Congressman

No, the Supreme Court only rules on the constitutionality of laws, not on what is "just."

Well, come to think of it, majority vote and the US Constitution are the only sources of law this country has anyway, on the simplest level. So I guess that makes sense.