The president has created a new defense spending reform package that is designed to construct a smarter and more up-to-date national security budget. The reform package includes the closing of a military bases that are no longer in use and conveying that money for programs that will protect national security. The cons of having a huge naval base removed is that it will leave people with a short economic loss. Upon casting a vote on a president’s program, one should be well informed before making any decisions, really look at the pros and cons of both sides of the argument and listen to the opinions of the people.
As a senate, it would be ideal to act as both a trustee and a delegate because we would want a trustee with expertise and a delegate who can win. A trustee is an elected representative who listens to his constituents’ ideas, takes them into consideration and ultimately makes the final decision based on his own opinions of what he thinks is best for the nations interest. In contrast, a delegate is a representative who listens to his constituents, records their views and then regurgitates their opinions in whatever legislative body he is a part of. A delegate represents the will of the people by doing exactly what the majority of the constituents want.
In this situation acting as a trustee would have the best interest of the people. Simply because a trustee is trusted enough by the people to represent them and make difficult choices while taking their opinions into consideration. Furthermore, elected representatives might be better educated then the general public and therefore make better decisions for their well-being.
Although removing a huge naval base is best for the nation, we should really take into consideration that the constitutes are going to suffer a huge economic loss. After much deliberation, I have to decided not to close the naval base, simply because it is the heart of the state’s economy. Yes, it serves no vital purpose to the nation but it does serve purpose to a small state. Closing it means constituents will struggle economically, creating another problem.
The president’s political party would have an influence on my decision. For instance, if the president and I had the same political party I would be more inclined to listen to the president’s reasons. In contrast, if the president was a part of the opposing political party I would be more reluctant and question the president’s motives and choices.
Seniority does matter in deciding how to vote because the longer one has served on the community the more likely he or she will be invited to important parties and other get togethers. In addition, Seniority can bring higher rank, precedence and status. Having seniority, you might receive a lot of pressure from constituents to sway your choice in their favor. At the end of the day, people are never going to be 100% content with the final decisions made. There is always going to be people who agree and disagree.
