hist_speaking

I recently wrote an article about a lesser known influence on the Founding Fathers, a man named James Harrington. I think, with the recent acquittal of President Trump and, more specifically, the vote of Senator Mitt Romney, it is worth examining another influence on the Founders.

This time the man was a contemporary and a member of the British House of Commons. He was famous for many concepts, but I want to focus on his ideas of how a republic should work.

Edmund Burke was born in 1729 and was a leading statesman and political philosopher of the time.

Edmund Burke

Edmund Burke, studio of Sir Joshua Reynolds, oil on canvas, (1767-1769)

He supported the American colonies’ struggles with Britain, but did not support the Revolution. Probably Burke’s most famous quote is, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

As inspiring as that is, I am more interested in two other quotes. First, “When the leaders choose to make themselves bidders at an auction of popularity, their talents, in the construction of the state, will be of no service. They will become flatterers instead of legislators; the instruments, not the guides, of the people."

The second quote is, “Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.”

What Burke is arguing is that in a republic, it is the duty of representatives to vote their conscience, not the will of their constituents.

I know this goes against everything we think today about our democracy, but that is not the way the Founders envisioned representation. As I have said before, the function of the Constitution was to protect the people from the government and the government from the people.

As much as they feared tyranny, they feared the masses even more. When it came to our representatives, the Founders believed in the idea of government by our “betters” and virtual representation.

Unlike today where we tend to want representatives who are like us, who somehow know what we are experiencing and can relate to us, the Founders envisioned our representative to be our betters.

If we were going to elect someone who was like us, we might as well have a direct democracy.

Instead, they created a republic where the masses would choose someone who was smarter and more informed than we are to make the important decisions.

This was a practice taken from the British, where the masses could vote, but had to vote for a nobleman who had the time to understand the issues. The reason the Founders chose a republic over a democracy was not just out of practicality, but because most people do not have the time or ability to comprehend and study every issue and vote.

The concept of virtual representation also came from the British.

Think of it this way. Once you vote for your congressman or senator, they represent all Americans. Every decision they make affects everyone, not just people in the state or district where they live.

In this way they represent everyone virtually.

It was never meant that our representatives poll their constituents. Instead they were to vote their own conscience or intelligence. As Burke said, representatives owe us their judgment. That is why we elected them.

If we decide we do not like their judgment, that is why our representatives are voted on every two or six years.

With the acquittal of President Trump on his impeachment charges, I have actually found there is more talk of Senator Mitt Romney’s decision to vote for conviction then the acquittal itself.

mitt_romney

Senator Mitt Romney, R-Utah

I assume it is because everyone already knows of the outcome of the senate trial before it even started, but the idea of a politician breaking ranks goes against the current norm.

Not all, but most, of the praise for Romney is coming from the left, while the vilification of the senator is coming from the right. This is not surprising.

The left is praising a man who dared break ranks to stand up for what he thought was right. I have even seen the word hero being used. Of course, I doubt they would use those same words if one of their own broke ranks and voted their conscious supporting the President.

Those people would be traitors.

That is how the right is seeing Romney, a traitor who is only jealous because he lost his presidential bid. Many have argued that Romney is breaking his trust with his constituents in voting against Trump.

One comment I read said that he owes nothing to his faith or his family, the reason Romney claimed he voted to convict.

Rather, the only people he owes anything to are the ones who voted him into office.

Though I understand the frustration of the right, party loyalty has replaced virtuous representatives, but historically speaking Romney has acted exactly how the Founders expected our representative to act.

Follow Historically Speaking at www.Historicallyspeaking.blog or Facebook at @jamesWfinck.

Columnist

Dr. James Finck is an Associate Professor of History at the University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma and Chair of the Oklahoma Civil War Symposium.

(1) comment

diligent dave

I voted for Romney for president in 2012, and for Utah Senator in 2018. I read and understood your 'virtuous' (if not 'virtual') representation. If indeed Romney had voted his conscience, I'd agree with you. However, in this case, I do not take him at his word. Earlier in 2019, he stated he might run for president as a Democrat. I was a booser (& voter, as I said) for him in 2012, in large part, because we (he & I) are of the same religion. In fact, a few years after Mitt did, I served a mission for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints in the very same France Mission Mitt did.

He was not my first choice to be a GOP Senator from Utah. Like Orrin Hatch before him, both moved to Utah to get elected senator (Hatch from PA, Romney from MA). It seems between Romney, Kennedy's, Trump, Bloomberg, and many others, we're quickly & fully becoming a plutocracy (rule by the rich). Romney had 2nd & 3rd homes & probably more in various states. So merely move & run for office 'wherever'!

Most of what Romney has talked about since going to be Utah's junior senator has not been as much about Utah, but about Trump. He can't let his failed, and Trump assailed faulty run go. Just today in the (LDS) Church owned Deseret News, Romney is featured again saying Trump hasn't done, and isn't getting enough done to prepare us for the Coronavirus pandemic headed our way. Mitt is the man to speak of Trump on about anything he can fault him on (both before & since his acquittal from conviction from impeachment).

If Romney were genuine on the reason he voted to convict Trump, then 'crying conscience' would be legitimate. But I am not taking him now at face value. He is trying to get back at Trump any which way he can.

He sure has been hailed by Democrats and Europeans since doing what he did regarding Trump. But Mitt Romney was a child of wealth & privilege, who is as much a juvenile as the president he is attacking (yes, they're both juveniles, in vindictiveness.

Still, I'll vote for Trump in 2020. His actions speak louder & sounder than Romney's murmurings.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.