Today I'm sending the following to the Statesman and the Press Trib. 599 words... their limit is 600. Whew! Hope it gets in.
My brother sent me an e-mail. A long list showed the numbers in the group accused or arrested for fraud (7), spousal abuse (36), drunk driving last year (84), assault, bad credit, drugs, bad checks, and so forth. We were to guess what group it describes, hinting that members might be violence prone professional athletes.
Turns out they are the 535 members of the United States Congress.
Talking with Bob after, we knew only a few friends who might make that list. We wondered what about politics these days might lead to what seems a skewed sample of humanity.
If you love our country, you’d enjoy reading Catherine Drinker Bowen’s The Miracle at Philadelphia. It is a wonderfully detailed accounting of how in the summer of 1787, after the struggle which earned freedom from England’s rule, fifty five delegates representing twelve states (Rhode Island balked) accomplished the miracle.
Some delegates were wealthy aristocrats. Others almost poor. Some avowed slavery, others came from free states. Some states were quite urban, with sea ports; others inland, predominantly rural, near the wilderness frontier.
Temporarily leaving their farms, businesses and families far behind, delegates took room and board near the Pennsylvania State House. Through days and evenings they spoke, listened, debated principles, drafted proposals, argued alternatives, invented compromises.
Even with those differences, what prevailed was a strong belief in the common good: The country would prosper if every person could. Strength for the new nation would build from the collective hard work of individuals if they could experience equality, could learn, know justice, be free.
Also in common: After years under a dominating king and a national religion, they wanted instead a system that separated the church from the government while respecting all religious beliefs.
It is remarkable that they accomplished this.
The fascinating book takes you through the miracle of that summer, listening to our founding fathers as they invented a government, complete with checks and balances, capable of assuring those ideals would be ours. They called their work The Constitution of The Unites States of America and it was ready for the states to ratify or not. It’s a wonderful, thrilling story.
They had started in May. They adjourned in September.
All of that in just five months!
How? It’s a reasonable question, given the committees, the endless studies, commissions, delays in resolving most every issue facing Congress today. Almost nothing can compare in complexity to the challenges met in 1787.
One major difference hinges on the matter of party loyalties. In 1787 it was unimaginable to vote as directed by party leaders along party lines. Rather, each delegate was respected as an independent, thinking individual, adding to the collective wisdom needed to decide issues critical to the national common good. Today, most politicians depend on party loyalty for support when campaigning, and rarely dare to vote opposing positions determined by party leaders.
There is another great historical difference. Our country’s founders believed that elected persons would serve the nation best by taking their civic turns at government, then returning to their homes and private livelihoods. This would enable a continual freshening of ideas emerging from the commons, to be considered for merit: Government’s duty. The concept of today’s career politician just did not exist.
It is time for change. Good government requires leaders who would not, could not sacrifice the common good for personal job security, power.
There are many wonderful choices... fresh candidates at all levels, aware of conditions in the trenches, with untarnished histories who just wouldn’t make the list Brother Bob sent.
We could be proud again.
------------------------------
Al McGlinsky
Nampa, ID
No comments:
Post a Comment