(07-06-2010, 03:49 PM)kandrathe Wrote: This is the point of contention between Pete and I in our previous discussion. In order for things to work for the people, the people need to ensure they elect officials who serve their interests. They don't.
Unless you adopt a very naive perspective as to who "the people" are, isn't this exactly the problem you are railing against? That elected officials do not ask "what is best," or "what is right," but "whose interest do I serve"?
The interests of different constituencies, regions, demographics, all weigh on politicians' minds all too heavily. Would voting one's interests change that? It seems to me everyone already does - and that this is the fundamental (and perhaps unchangeable) source of political problems.
Whether reducing the number of lawyers would help or not, I can't say for certain, but I'm skeptical to say the least. While I like diversity in government as much as the next guy (my favorite Canadian senator is a career jazz pianist and bandleader) are taxi drivers and rig workers and junior high school teachers really such angels that their presence would change the very nature of government?
-Jester
For the interested, there is a breakdown of the Congress by profession here, for the 110th congress. While law, public service, and business dominate, there are representatives from just about every type of job. I am especially impressed by the shellfish specialist and the mortician. Wondering why politics stinks? Ask those guys!