Mike Essay

276 WordsMay 5, 20152 Pages
How responsive should the government be to changes in public opinion? When the founders wrote the Constitution, they tried to strike a balance between allowing citizens' demands to influence policy without making the government overly responsive to temporary shifts in public opinion. Particularly in cases where emotions are running high, the Framers did not always trust the public to know what was in its best interests. We can see this balancing act on display in the different term lengths for the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Framers wanted the House of Representatives to be more immediately responsive to public opinion, so they made members face the electorate every two years. On the other hand, Senators serve six-year terms, specifically because the Framers believed that this would allow Senators to ignore temporary shifts in public opinion if they thought the public was acting irrationally. So has it worked? Is the government correctly responsive to changes in public opinion? Were the Framers right to suspect that the public does not always know what is in its best interest? What examples can you think of where government policy responded quickly to public opinion? Where has government policy moved more slowly than the public's views? Generally, the actions of the Government officials are pretty consistent with the preferences of the public. I believe the government should responds pretty quickly to the public opinion to avoid any chances of another civil war and to keep control of the country. Happy citizens make for a happy country. The government does not want the people to rebel against them so they try to respond to the people request

More about Mike Essay

Open Document