Convention of States concerns itself with how we govern ourselves as opposed to any one particular political party, policy, or candidate.
Historically, political parties tended to form around a particular platform, a set of policies, ideas, or principles. COS doesn’t care what those ideas are as long as the way they are executed conforms with the checks and balances outlined in the constitution.
The downside of our constitutional checks and balances can be gridlock, inaction, and slow response to national issues. Diverse ideological or geographic interests can cause fragmentation and lack of consensus. These differences of opinion have been and continue to be inevitable.
As an example of one big difference at the conception of this country, Federalists such as Alexander Hamilton preferred a strong central government. Jefferson and the Anti-Federalists (AKA Democratic-Republicans) feared and opposed the potential tyranny of a powerful central government.
The two-party system in American politics began with the Election of 1796, when John Adams was elected the second President under the Federalist Party, and Thomas Jefferson ran against him for the Democratic-Republican Party. study.com
Direct democracy is majority rule at the expense of minority interests. An example would be a strong central federal government trying to make one national election law for all 50 states. A republic, on the other hand, is designed to allow minority opinions to be protected based on local decisions.
Contention and compromise between national and local interests is the history of political parties.
During Monroe’s presidency, his pressure to eliminate factional party influence resulted in what appeared on the surface to be a one-party government, but different ideas were merely suppressed rather than openly debated. Stifling opposition will never form a more perfect union.
Van Buren observed his predecessor’s conflicts and decided that “Party attachment in former times furnished a complete antidote for sectional prejudices by producing counteracting feelings.” When political parties define a platform, nominate loyal candidates, and hold them accountable, citizens can choose between specific plans not individual candidate personalities.
As in all things human, eventually, cronyism and patronage corrupted the political party system. Consequently the last hundred years in the U.S. has seen a shift away from party influence toward the cult of personality, leading to unbalanced power in the administrative branch.
Executive orders were not part of our constitutional plan. Regulation by agencies instead of elected representatives should not be part of our constitutional republic. Spending citizens’ tax dollars without congressional representation is “taxation without representation.”
Today some Americans take pride in voting for a specific candidate rather than a party platform. Others vote the party line regardless of who is on the ballot. Perhaps our current inability to move past gridlock is because of the demise of articulated party principles. Do we need more or fewer parties? That will be something to consider as we watch election results of the 2022 midterms.
Meanwhile, COS honors the original constitution and works toward educating and activating informed citizens. Our mission is to build a grassroots army of self-governing activists willing to be involved in finding solutions.
Join us today.
