So How Did We Get Here

How did we arrive at this point?

The United States operates as a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy, despite what some may claim. For over a century, there has been a concerted effort to reshape our nation into a Democracy. Let’s examine the key developments that have led us to our current situation.

The first phase of this transformation began with the introduction and ratification of the 16th and 17th Amendments. So, what was the structure of governance before 1913? That’s an insightful question, and I’m glad you’re asking. Before 1913, state governments held significant power over the federal government, primarily through financial control. State legislatures elected senators to represent their interests in Washington, D.C. At the end of each fiscal year, senators had to present a financial report to their respective state legislatures, explaining how federal funds were being utilized. If the explanation was unsatisfactory, senators could be dismissed and replaced. This arrangement fostered genuine accountability among elected officials. However, this system was destined to change, paving the way for a political elite.

Initially, the 16th Amendment appeared innocuous, as it aimed to enhance funding for the Federal Government, making it more streamlined and efficient. Yet, human nature remains unchanged throughout history. Citizens supported direct funding to lessen governmental interference in their lives, unaware of the implications of diminishing state influence over the federal budget.

When combined with the ratification of the 17th Amendment, this created a volatile mix. The 17th Amendment allowed for direct election of senators by the populace, extending their terms beyond that of the President without imposing term limits. At the time, this seemed logical, granting citizens an illusion of direct accountability from their representatives. However, can anyone recall a politician who has openly discussed the pros and cons of spending in a way that directly puts their job at risk, aside from during elections? I cannot think of any. They enjoy a level of job security until their term ends, relying on party loyalty and name recognition to secure re-election.

Fast forward to 1935, when the Social Security Act was introduced, often referred to as the widow's or orphan's fund. It was created out of a communal obligation to support those in need, especially since many women were not part of the workforce at that time. While well-intentioned, this program has been criticized as a poorly managed government scheme, allowing for unchecked spending by federal officials. Today, social security payments are frequently viewed by politicians as entitlements rather than responsibilities. There is a prevailing sentiment that once individuals are no longer contributing to society, they lose their value, a troubling perspective. Had politicians overseen the social security program more effectively, it could have been a sustainable lifeline for many.

It is crucial to restore the power of the states over the federal government. The original intent of the Constitution has been distorted beyond recognition. The federal government has increasingly overstepped its bounds, and unfortunately, “We the People” have played a role in this shift by remaining disengaged from political matters. Many still hold onto the belief that the government acts in their best interests.

What can be done to reverse this trend?

Get involved!

Ask questions!

Demand transparency!

If you find the answers unsatisfactory, consider running for office yourself.

By James Matlock

#politics #PoliticalNews #texas #oilandgas #Constitution #matlockfortexas