Democracy in America is as usual in difficulties. A country that has relied on and believed in the integrity of its voting systems, seems forever to be trying to micro manage how people vote and who they should be voting for.
Although there appears not to be a specific written “right to vote” in the Constitution of the United States (unlike free speech and possession of arms) there is clearly an implied right to vote, otherwise why stipulate in Article I, Section 2, that representatives of the House should be chosen by Electors. It goes on to define who can qualify for election, and the numbers to be elected for each state. In section 3 it defines those who can qualify to be a Senator and how many elected senators there can be per state. Also, Senators will have voting powers in the Congress, as well as representatives. If ever a right to vote was implied in the Constitution, Article one makes that very clear, otherwise how does the government happen. It can only exist by election.
The current plethora of legislation, in various States, to specifically redefine the rules of voting, through registration, proof of identity, method of casting votes – in person/by mail/proxy/absentee ballot – and where voting will take place, has generated yet more protest and criticism. By imposing difficult regulations, it is making it more onerous for the less able and the poorer citizen to exercise their right to vote. The principle of “one person, one vote” is being run through a mangle That mangle is being wound by disenchanted republicans, or so it would appear. Mr Trump's divisive rhetoric has infected the party and rather than seek to have multi-party dialogue, isolationism is the new rule.
It is as if Mr Trump’s big lie about the election, was something the Republican Party wishes were true, even though they know it really is a fabrication. Nonetheless, they still feel the need to tamper with the election process as if the lie were true. They are doing this under the guise of bringing the system up to date, making it more efficient and even more secure, because “there have been questions.” Who? The only question is the big lie, so whatever spurious reasons they give for ‘improving the voting system’ are just that, spurious. They feel that by imposing these “improvements” no one will be able to challenge future elections. Any such improvements would not stop a psychotic narcissist such as Mr Trump. It would make no difference to him at all. The only ballot paper he wants to see is one that has only one candidate listed, himself. Anything else would be tantamount to rigging an election. Why is that man still given a voice?
Returning to the right of the
people to keep and bear arms. The constitution does not define arms. It could
be any weapon. In many states the are laws prohibiting the possession of
various types of knives. In particular, in many states butterfly-knives and
switchblades are illegal. If one can outlaw certain kinds of knives, surely
certain types of gun could be made illegal, such as assault weapons and armour
piercing rifles. Why is that such a problem? Why are legislatures more concerned with curtailing the voting rights of the average citizen, than in restricting their firepower?
So far as Mr Trump is concerned, free speech is all very well, but please, the ramblings of a madman are not speech, they are babble, and need medical treatment. Perhaps it’s time to bring back lobotomy? We must send for Dr. Cukrowicz.
 |
| A couple of wonderful
performances. |
Speaking of which I neglected to mention two other great movie presences Franklin Pangborn (238 credits) and Donald Meek (129 credits).
No comments:
Post a Comment