To represent

It occurs to me that we ask a lot of our representatives in congress. Sure, we give them lots of perks, and we lavish staffs and other trappings of power and near-nobility upon them. I’m not feeling sorry for them.

All the same, I can see where it is a bit of a minefield for some. And when we, their constituents, don’t pay much attention, I can see where they can run afoul of their constitutional purpose.

rep·re·sent
(r p r -z nt )
tr.v. rep·re·sent·ed, rep·re·sent·ing, rep·re·sents 6. a. To serve as the official and authorized delegate or agent for. b. To act as a spokesperson for.

In the strictest sense, our “representatives” should subjugate their own beliefs to those of their constituents, and always vote the way the majority of their constituents want. Effectively, they would become proxies through whom their constituents speak and act.

But, on the other hand, we elect people who (purport) to have the most similar viewpoint as we do… so that in our stead, they will likely vote the way we would.

There are times that a congressman will “vote his/her conscience”. But is this their place if the majority of their constituents desire them to vote a different way? (Similarly, if a Senator is elected as from one party, and then changes to the other party in mid-term, isn’t this something of a fraud on the voting public?)

Often, I have stated that our elected representatives should show some leadership, and lead their constituents to understand why something the majority doesn’t want really is good and necessary (or conversely, why something the majority does want isn’t the best idea, and something else is the proper direction or selection).

But, we don’t elect our Senators and Representatives to be leaders, we elect them to represent us in Washington, whilst we go on about our lives.

This, it seems to me, to be one of the gaps and seams that occurs, through which our “representatives” end up not really representing us at all, but representing narrow slices of “us”. This is also the gaps through which they fall prey to self-aggrandizement (Sen. Byrd), self-enrichment (Rep. Jackson) and gross unaccountability (pork, earmarks, Sen. Kennedy).

As with most things, “sunlight is the best disinfectant”. More eyes on our representatives in Washington (and in State houses, and town halls, etc.) the less corruption and graft we will endure. (One reason the “McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act” is so odious and counterproductive… but that is grist for another time). More people actively involved in what their officials are doing. More people engaged, vocal and knowledgeable. But, this runs counter to the very human reasons we send people in our stead to these representative bodies in the first place, doesn’t it?