I’ve been listening to a podcast version of the Federalist Papers, and I’m up to number 66. This sentence is a gem:
The truth is, that in all such cases it is essential to the freedom and to the necessary independence of the deliberations of the body, that the members of it should be exempt from punishment for acts done in a collective capacity; and the security to the society must depend on the care which is taken to confide the trust to proper hands, to make it their interest to execute it with fidelity, and to make it as difficult as possible for them to combine in any interest opposite to that of the public good.
This makes me wonder: What are the times that it isn’t in Members’ interests “to execute it with fidelity”, what composes those interests that are separate from the public good, and what is the difference between society’s security being confided in the “proper hands” and perhaps the improper hands?
Does the popular consensus that “Washington is Broken” coalesce into any solid reform proposals? On separation and limitation of powers, I wonder what the popular view would be on how effective Congress itself is checked by the enforcement mechanisms in place: elections, House Rules (and, by extension, the Ethics Committee), the law as it applies to everyone, judicial interpretations?
Make a Suggestion
1 response so far ↓
John Wonderlich // Jun 15, 2008 at 11:03 pm
I should add that the podcast series I’m listening to can be found here, and is free: http://www.learnoutloud.com/Podcast-Directory/Politics/U.S.-Government/The-Federalist-Papers/18947
Leave a Comment