The Day After<\/p>\n
When writing the Constitution of the United States, the founding fathers were concerned about the \u201cpeople\u201d exercising their will on the Government without the necessary judgment to carry out the task.\u00a0 So, instead of developing a \u201cdemocracy,\u201d where every person would have an equal say in government, they built a Federal Republic.\u00a0 They recognized that the United States was in fact sovereign states joining a sovereign Federal government.\u00a0 And they developed that government to represent the views of the people, and of the states.<\/p>\n
The power of the states was guaranteed in the United States Senate, where each one, small in population or large, would have two representatives.\u00a0 They served for six years, a long time without a reckoning, so they could act more independently. Originally, those representatives were chosen by the state legislatures rather than by popular vote, putting Senators a full step away from direct election. This was changed by the 17th\u00a0<\/sup>Amendment (1913) requiring a direct vote, but Senators are still not based on equal representation.\u00a0 Senator Tester of Montana represents a little over a million people, Senator\u00a0Feinstein of California thirty-nine million.<\/p>\n The voice of the people was to be heard in the House of Representatives.\u00a0 They were directly elected, their districts apportioned equally throughout the country.\u00a0 Today, each member represents about 800,000 people, whether they are from New York or Rhode Island or Alaska.\u00a0\u00a0 The House was designed to be \u201chot,\u201d a place of argument and action; the Senate, the \u201csaucer to cool the hot tea\u201d of the House, a place for long debate and deliberation.<\/p>\n Review for that old American Government Exam is over.<\/p>\n Yesterday the nation made a choice.\u00a0 We chose to put a check on the Presidency of Donald Trump, by using the \u201cPeople\u2019s House,\u201d placing it in the hands of the opposition party, the Democrats.\u00a0\u00a0 Today President Trump actually offered to compromise with the incoming House of Representatives (though he did threaten to withhold cooperation if the House investigates his behavior.)\u00a0 Even he recognizes the message.<\/p>\n But while he is trying to \u201cmake-up\u201d to the Democrats, he has \u201cdoubled-down\u201d on his attack on the Press.\u00a0\u00a0If Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic Party aren\u2019t to be his b\u00eate noire, his conference today made it clear that the Press will continue to serve the role as \u201cwhipping boy.\u201d\u00a0 Ask Jim Acosta of CNN.<\/p>\n Yesterday the nation also chose to back many of those Senators who were \u201cblessed\u201d by the President. No repudiation of Trumpism should be seen in the results of those elections, only a desire of Americans to give Democrats a chance to change the constant clamor of divisiveness and inability to achieve.\u00a0 The nation wants something to get done, Democrats are now being given a chance to act.<\/p>\n So it\u2019s up to Democrats.\u00a0There probably is no one who wants investigations of the President more than me, and there should be thoughtful and deliberate hearings into the actions of the President and his campaign.\u00a0But if that\u2019s all that Democrats can get done, then they will not have answered the mandate given them last night.<\/p>\n After two years of Resistance, it\u2019s hard not to \u201cgo for it all\u201d right away.\u00a0 We want to undo the \u201cmistake\u201d of 2016, and we want to limit further damage to our nation.\u00a0 But that\u2019s not going to convince a broader element of the country to turn away from the polarization of Trumpism, and it will fall into the trap of the President\u2019s plan.\u00a0 He needs the divide to succeed for his own success (God forbid) in 2020 and it\u2019s up to the House not to get used and give it to him.<\/p>\n It should fall to the Mueller Investigation, with the support of the House, to ferret out what happened in the 2016 election.\u00a0 And if the President decides to lash out at Mueller and Rosenstein, firing them or trying to short-circuit their investigation, then it will be up to the House to protect the process.<\/p>\n One final history lesson:\u00a0in the election of 1858, the \u201ccompromisers\u201d were given a last chance at government.\u00a0 It was already too late, but Illinois choose Stephen Douglas, a moderate, over Abraham Lincoln, who wanted to limit slavery.\u00a0 It didn’t work, and within two years Lincoln was President, and Douglas was defeated.\u00a0\u00a0 The Civil War soon began.<\/p>\n So we need to ask ourselves, are we at the point where only the extremes can prevail?\u00a0 And if that\u2019s true, then is the outcome some kind of alteration of our way of government, unable to withstand the pressure from either side, as was the case in 1860? \u00a0Or can we get back to a point where there can be dissension without polarization; that while the President and the House may clash about investigations and cooperation with foreign adversaries, they could still find areas to work together to improve America?<\/p>\n The choice of the people last night, was to take another chance on a functioning government.\u00a0Democrats, and the President, the sole and acknowledged leader of ALL \u00a0Republicans, now have to decide what to do.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"