|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
America is in the midst of multiple crises and yet somehow the House is still stuck on the notion of proxy voting. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna’s push for proxy voting sabotaged the Republican agenda while once again trying to go back to having absent members of Congress. Speaker Johnson’s ‘Vote Pairing’ deal just perpetuates the farce.
Governing a nation is not supposed to be done from the couch.
If you can’t show up to vote, whether in an election or on a bill, then your vote shouldn’t count. Luna pushing to carve out an exemption for new mothers is how standards get dismantled. First it’s new mothers, then it’s a litany of other sympathetic cases and then we end up with a Zoom Congress.
There is a more compelling reason for absentee voting by the public then there is for absentee voting in Congress. Members of the public who vote are granting legitimacy to the members of the representative government. Members of the representative government however are there to serve the public.
Rep. Luna has said that we need to have proxy voting “if we truly want a younger Congress.” Do we truly want a young Congress? Is that some sort of consensus that we’ve arrived at? Yes, some members of Congress are far too old, others are far too young. Have younger members of Congress distinguished themselves in some way I’m not aware of? The stupidity and scandal ratio for the younger House members has been pretty epic and while Squad members, especially AOC, have strongly tilted those numbers, some of their Republican counterparts have tried to be online influencers more than actual legislators.
Government officials are not supposed to have a sense of entitlement. We don’t need them. They need us. If they can’t show up to work and give it their full attention, then they should step down for someone who can.
I agree agree agree. Why must Johnson give in? It is to such a lapse in representation. If a representative does not choose to show up then they should lose their seat, IMO.
And an accident or sudden illness might be an exception once in a while, but maybe not.
Certainly, “young” or a being parent is NOT. Do not take the voters votes and trust and then whine elitism thereby losing their trust.
Babies can have babysitters. Breast milk can be stored. Or wait until your children are older. And this applies to men too. Don’t say you represent voters and then whimp out of serving. Once voted in, representatives are much like a military man or woman. Show up or be AWOL and be discharged.
There is no reason that younger members of congress cannot take time out from legislative duties to bear and raise children. They can stop running for congress–and then when they are ready to make legislating their full-time job again, they can run for congress again.
There was a similar situation once in Ancient Rome, where one had to show up in Rome to cast a vote.
If a younger congress means narcissistic, entitled dingbats, then no, we don’t want a younger congress. Even after the Kung Flu I am still astonished at the corruption and just sheer idiocy of our congress people. A reflection of the electorate I suppose.
“If you can’t show up to vote, whether in an election or on a bill, then your vote shouldn’t count.”
I’m picturing my first assignment, Aviano Air Force Base in Italy. Only I’m picturing it in a future where the entire US population of the base goes on leave for a week or so in the first Tuesday of every other November (plus special elections). It’d be a fine time for adversaries to steal/sabotage entire fleets of aircraft, classified cryptography, etc. My first deployment to a classified location where there were just the ten of us. The entire Naval fleet would need to return home from its stations. The same thing would also apply to embassy staff.
Unfortunately Johnson is spineless. His response should have been one word, babysitter.
One of the down sides of women in government. Divided allegiance.
She and other women (regardless on what side of the imaginary aisle they reside) have no business in a civil leadership position of any kind to begin with.
Mothers should have their babies at home and raise them at home, not for just 12 lousy weeks, essentially deserting them thereafter to some surrogate mother to raise them on her behalf.
“Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able MEN, such as fear God, MEN of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them, to be rulers….” (Exodus 18:21)
“As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.” (Isaiah 3:12)
“But I suffer not a woman to … to usurp authority over the man….” (1 Timothy 2:12)
This is not to say that the men in positions of civil leadership are any more biblically qualified than are today’s women – they’re not.
You can thank Article 6’s Christian test ban (by which mandatory biblical qualifications were likewise eliminated) on both counts.
For more regarding Article 6’s Christian test ban, see Chapter 9 “Article 6: The Supreme Law of the Land” of free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at bible versus constitution dot org. Click on the top entry on our Online Book page and scroll down to Chapter 9.
Then Chapter 28 “Amendment 19: The Curse of Women’s Suffrage.”