Great Idea, Bad Execution

When the Founders wrote the Constitution, there is no way they could have ever imagined that things would be as they are today. If they had, I think the Constitution would have had another 50 pages or more easily to deal with the stuff that has happened over the last 100 years.

They clearly didn't want any group of people to have too much power. That's why they wrote the checks and balances into it. But, as we've seen over the last while, they don't always work.

With the way our system is now, one party, and their power players, financial backers, and almost millitant supporters, can control the system almost without interference. All it takes is to elect the President, win the House, and get 60 or more Senators from your party. The 60 represents the amount that will not let the other party filibuster your plans. In the current case with the recent defection of Arlen Spector, Pa., from the Republican to the Democrat Party, and with the ongoing court case involving the disputed Minnesota Senate election between incumbent Norm Coleman (R) and challenger Al Franken (D), the Democrats could have a filibuster proof 60 senate seats. This, along with the majority that the House has in Democrats, would allow for much easier passage of President Obama's plans. No other party, primarily the Republicans, would have the ability to stop it. With all the power controlled by one party, the posibility of a Democratic/Liberal agenda being placed on the American people is high. That shows that at this time, as it also was from Jan. 20, 2001 until Jan 20, 2006 for the Republicans, that one party control can lead to people feeling left out, ostracized, and dis-enfranchised. Then it was the Democrats, now, potentially, the Republicans.

I don't think the Founders could have ever imagined a day when all there was was a two-party system. I think if they had, they might have put more safeguards in place to prevent this almost one-party rule.

The key problem is the only two-parties to choose from formula that we are stuck with right now. Party solidarity at times trumps common sense, constituite voice, and doing things that are right for the people. Add in the influence of lobbyists, and the money they bring to the table, and the population does not get fully represented by the system in place. More parties, with enough differences between them, would address this problem. As would lessening the influence of money directly to the persons involved. So I am a advocate of more parties than what we have right now.

So even though our Founders did not want a almost one-party rule, that is what we can be stuck with today. When the situation is right, that party could almost swing every law in the books towards the position that they have towards it. So, we could end up with a one-party rule system under our current Constituion.

I think this is wrong! One party control is very Un-American!!