Military Spouses for Change posted a MySpace bulletin about new policies about Military service members running for office.
[Check it out: http://www. stripes. com/article. asp?section=104&article=53960]
Here is an excerpt from the article that kind of rubbed me the wrong way.
__________________________________
The restrictions are rooted in the constitutional philosophy of maintaining a clear separation between the branches of government, said Shumake.
“It’s in keeping with a general tightening of the rules to really try to separate the executive function from the legislative function under the concept of separation of powers,” Shumake said.
...................................................................
"Those on active duty face big limitations on campaigning for office.
“Those limitations are huge,” Shumake said. “Basically, you can be a candidate or nominee, but you can’t do anything. You cannot, while on active duty, campaign. Some people will turn it over to a spouse or a campaign manager, and they’ve got to do it all. You’ve got to keep out of it. There is no behind-the-scenes game playing. It is an absolute, 100 percent prohibition."
__________________________________
(I am talking about office in the GRAND scheme of things--federal government, but the state governments will work the "same way" there is always a system of checks and balances.)
Separation of the branches: The idea of separations of the branches is truly about the philosophy of separation of power-- a system of checks and balances. (Are we all getting flashbacks to US history!?)
Executive function vs. Legislative function: The article only points out two of our three branches of government, they forgot to mention the Judicial branch!! (Which will prove to be very important later in this blog.) Let's take a look at the job description of each branch:
Legislative: Writes and enacts laws, Enacts taxes, authorizes borrowing, and sets the budget, Has sole power to declare war, May start investigations, especially against the executive branch, Often appoints the heads of the executive branch, Sometimes appoints judges, Ratifies treaties
Executive: May veto laws, May refuse to spend money allocated for certain purposes, Wages war (has operational command of the military), Makes decrees or declarations (for example, declaring a state of emergency) and promulgates lawful regulations and executive orders, Often appoints judges, Has power to grant pardons to convicted criminals
Judicial: Determines which laws apply to any given case, Determines whether a law is unconstitutional, Has sole power to interpret the law and to apply it to particular disputes, May nullify laws that conflict with a more important law or constitution, Determines the disposition of prisoners, Has power to compel testimony and the production of evidence
Enforces uniform policies in a top-down fashion via the appeals process, but gives discretion in individual cases to low-level judges. (The amount of discretion depends upon the standard of review, determined by the type of case in question.), Polices its own members
The judicial branch is always mentioned last, probably because it's role usually comes at the end of the process of legislation. In short, the Supreme court determines constitutionality-- whether or not the proposed law adheres to the constitution, or completely goes against it. (Something we all enjoy and love, right?)
The reasoning for these new rules, or additional rules for service members is to prevent any "conflict of interest." These rules are put in place to protect the separation of branches...
But does it protect the idea of a republic?
A government FOR the people, BY the people?
Does a person's profession affect the constitutionality of legislation?
What branch of the government do Military service members fall under?
The executive probably? Because... the president would have the title "Commander-in-Chief?"
Are they not citizens before they are service members?
100& prohibition: Remember the movie Jar Head? Jaime Foxx's character tells his marines what they can and cannot say to the media. One of the marines says, "Isn't that censorship?" I have heard soldiers make comments, "Freedom of speech? I don't have any rights for the next 4 years. I can fight for them, but I don't have them." (Sad thought isn't it?)
These new rules call for 100% prohibition of a service member's speech and actions.
The prohibition of action for change--essentially attacking the philosophy of this republic we love so dearly.
This country is based on the idea of a republic--a government for the people, by the people. We are a republic based on democratic value and practices.
I don't have any "special interest" in writing this... my husband does not seek a position in public office. I don't know any service members personally who do, but I do know that I admire what the likes of George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, have established for this nation. A new republic. A democratic state. A hope for a new country. (Wherever we have gone since our founding days is where we, ourselves, as citizens have taken it. There is no blame game.) But there is always hope.
I hope that those who feel lead to do so... stand up and fight for what they know to be right and true.
I hope that our country remembers the blood that has been shed for the founding of this nation, this government, and the Bill of Rights.
I hope that we keep watching our government, to make sure there is a balance in power.
I hope that we can stand for something bigger than our own self interest. (Stolen from Sen. McCain.)
I hope for a renewed spirit of America, a renewed love, a renewed fire for change and revolution, not to overthrow our government, but to fix what needs to be fixed, to fine tune it... to respect where it has come from, and build on the philosophies of love for country, strength in unity, and national pride.
I am proud to be an American. I am proud that I have the ability to say something if I am unhappy with something. Whether or not it action takes place rapidly, or if I never see it in my lifetime, I will not have been unheard.
“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.” (John Adams)
What position does anyone have to judge another's ability to serve their country?
These rules-- protect the DOD as an organization, at the cost of their service members' freedoms, abilities, desires to be active citizens.
Essentially, I feel like it is possible for my voice to be muted. Because if one person can be overlooked (service member running for office), the possibility that two more, three more, fifty more voices... can be overlooked as well.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
