Legislating by constitution is hazardous

  • Article by: JACK DITMORE and ARVONNE FRASER
  • Updated: January 29, 2012 - 6:27 PM

Experience demonstrates the wisdom of governing as our founders intended.

  • 139
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
tinosaJan. 29, 12 6:56 PM

Spoken like a man who doesn't believe that the people should speak unless they are spoken to. When the government fails to represent the people, then the people have the right to fix the problem. If the people are not allowed to fix the problem with non violent means, then the same conditions exists as what lead to the Revolutionary War. We don’t believe what the government tells use blindly any more. You can lie down like sheep or stand and demand that your government represent the majority and live by the Constitution. At the end of the day, we are all responsible for what happens.

35
115
drichmnJan. 29, 12 7:01 PM

couldn't agree more with all the points presented. The Constitution should not be turned into a partisan document designed to advance party ideology.

117
25
drichmnJan. 29, 12 7:30 PM

"When the government fails to represent the people, then the people have the right to fix the problem" .... you fix the problem by voting them out of office. Dayton was elected by the people just like the Republican legislator's were. If you can't vote in enough Republican's to override his veto then your claim about the government not representing the people is merely hot air. The people voted in a divided government but the Republican's are attempting to circumvent the governor and legislate by Constitutional amendment. It's anti-democracy.

116
24
melonicityJan. 29, 12 7:37 PM

7 out of 10 people are uninformed. that doesnt necessarily mean they are unintelligent but they dont see being informed as the same level priority as elected officials do. whether you agree with our elected officials or not they were indeed elected. considering the fact that they were elected they should be held responsible to legislate instead of just passing on the "tough" decdisions to the voters. at the end of the day if you take issue with the decisions the people you've elected make let your next vote reflect that sentiment. lets also remember we can have more influence than a vote, letters can be sent and phone calls can be made...

85
12
tinosaJan. 29, 12 7:53 PM

If I remember correctly, Dayton didn't receive over 50% of the vote. He received more votes than the total of the people who believed in a different direction. Better hope that those people don't become united.

20
77
dltrmtJan. 29, 12 8:04 PM

tinosaJan. 29, 12 6:56 PM Spoken like a man who doesn't believe that the people should speak unless they are spoken to. When the government fails to represent the people, then the people have the right to fix the problem. If the people are not allowed to fix the problem with non violent means, then the same conditions exists as what lead to the Revolutionary War. We don’t believe what the government tells use blindly any more. You can lie down like sheep or stand and demand that your government represent the majority and live by the Constitution. At the end of the day, we are all responsible for what happens................They did vote. They voted on November 4th, 2010. As much as you't like that it's true. We have a checks and balance government and 3 branches of government. Administrative, Legislative and Judicial. For Government to work at it's best all three need to be heard from. The legislative branch passes the laws and the Administrative either signs those laws into effect (sometimes with line item vetoes when it's concerning States) or vetoes them and sends them back to be reworked. Circumventing that process is nothing more than trying to usurp the process to forward an agenda by whatever party is in the majority with a opposing party in the office of Governor. It seems appropriate that it's the GOP trying to do this. It's not really about the entire State but getting their agenda through somehow. They need to quit trying to be heroes to their party and try being heroes to the people of Minnesota. If they truly believed their "let the people vote" mantra they would have listened to the people when 67-73% of them (depending on which poll you used) wanted both cuts and revenues to balance the budget. This is not about letting the people decide as much as it is about their belief that people side with them on these issues. The problem is government is not supposed to do what a party thinks but what is best for the entire state, even if it goes against their beliefs. Government is not perfect or tilted in one direction but many because their are many who need protection and support. The minority will never be heard from if we always "let the people vote" and will be harmed. The State and National Constitutions are for all of Americans protections. Not just certain groups or classes of people. We all aspire to have our own happiness and it's different for most everyone. That needs to be protected.

72
14
googs19Jan. 29, 12 8:05 PM

How about for every amendment put to voters that could be handled through a new law, each representative who supports it has to take a 20% pay cut for making us do their job.

78
11
kimi08Jan. 29, 12 8:31 PM

I love how liberals only care about "what the founding fathers" believed it when it suits them. The founding fathers gave us the ability to amend the constitution because they were smart enough to know that there might be an blockhead in the executive branch that needs to be bypassed from time to time. Period!

31
97
tinosaJan. 29, 12 8:35 PM

I have always said that the people have the control if they want to exercise it. Take for example the National Anti-Gun groups stand against the 2nd amendment. If they believe that the people really wanted to outlaw the private ownership of guns, then all they need to do is have their reps past the change to the amendment and sent it to the states to be ratified. Simple as that if you don't like the direction your government is going. Of course we all know how our government officials are only acting in our best interests and such. The strength of our Constitution is that it was design to be flexible and change when the people decided it was time. Sometimes you like change when it goes your way, other times, it sucks to be you.

11
61
mcsimianJan. 29, 12 8:47 PM

It sure stinks when people have a voice and use it. Liberals would rather legislate from the bench rather than let people determine the law.

25
88

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT