The People's Sword: The Vote.

By Semperpapa

At least this is what reasonable and responsible politicians tell us: make your voice heard and go vote.

In November 2010 we did so and some notable individuals were voted into office(Col. Allen West comes to mind immediately), but definitely not enough.

So is the vote our sword? Is the ballot what we have left to exercise our right as members of a representative republic? Of course not. People who are unhappy with the political system they are subjected to, have the power of overthrowing that political system and replace it with something better or worst.

As we have witnessed in Egypt, Libya and we are seeing in Syria, civil unrest may not bring about the changes that equal freedom.

Even here in the land of the free as intended by the Founding Fathers, the power of the vote has been corrupted and diluted. One more example of this truth is what the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal did just today: declaring Prop 8 unconstitutional here in California.

Prop 8 was a controversial proposition that made its way on the ballot in 2008 to allow the people of California to express their opinion regarding same sex marriage.

The people of California overwhelmingly agree with the supporters of the proposition to establish that marriage is intended to be between a man and a woman. It was not a proposition that would discriminate against homosexuals, except for the issue of marriage.

Regardless where one stands on that issue, the fact remains that the issue was voted on by the people. But as soon as the results were in, lawyers filed suits on grounds of unconstitutionality.

This has become a normal occurrence in California with the propositions system. Several of them were voted on by Californians, only to be blocked in the court system by activist lawyers.
Personally I do not vote on proposition any longer for such reasons. In the case of Prop 8, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal decided that the will of the people means nothing and the pressure from lobbyist and activist tramples the voting of the majority.

My question is simple. If a proposition is so blatantly unconstitutional, as some would have you think, why isn't the prop entirely prevented from reaching the ballot? Shouldn't the legality of a proposed piece of legislation be scrutinized before the population is asked to endorse or reject?

The truth is that those who support or reject these propositions take the gamble to receive the blessing of the people one way or the other. In the case of Prop 8, the people spoke clearly, but those who disagree were counting on the ultra-liberal mindset of Californians for the defeat of the proposiiton. When things did not go their way, then they use the court system.

How much taxpayers' money would have been saved if Prop 8 never made it on the ballot? If the wording in the proposed legislation does not pass the test of constitutionality, than it should be rejected and reworked until it does. In most cases, though, the work of progressive courts like the 9th would render anything common sensical utterly usless.

Just my thoughts!