Liberals talk a great deal about consent.  On college campuses, administrators educated new students on all of the new rules surrounding romantic interaction, grilling students on “no means no” and how to ask permission before any sort of physical interaction.  Surely, two adults should be able to make their wishes known without a romance-killing interrogation during intimacy.  (May I place my hand here?  How about here?)

But since these principles are shoved down our collective throats, they ought to bear on the current conversations surrounding government overreach and incompetence. 

Turns out, the Founding Fathers were pretty big on consent too.  The Declaration of Independence makes it clear that governments receive their authority from the consent of the governed.  However, a new Rasmussen pollreveals that most of us believe the government is plowing ahead without it.

The latest example of our political leaders pushing their own agenda over the citizens’ relates to the new census. Democratic leaders lamented that President Donald Trump’s new census would include a citizenship question, which they describe — at the least – as insensitive, and — at the worst – xenophobic, because such a question would dampen participation in certain immigrant communities.

But this is not what Americans believe.  According to a Harvard University Center for American Political Studies/Harris poll, we want the question on the 2020 Census in spite of the Democratic scare tactics. Sixty-seven percent of all registered voters approve of the citizenship question (88% of Republicans, 63% of independents and 52% of Democrats).  Seventy four percent of rural voters, 59% of black voters, and 58% of urban voters want it included.  The biggest discrepancy is between Hillary Clinton supporters (only 47% of 2016 Hillary fans support it) and Trump voters (a whopping 92% – no surprise).

Since two-thirds of voters want the citizenship question on the 2020 census, does that mean we’ll get it?  If the past is any indication, that’s a big no.  Most Americans wantsecure borders, term limits for Congress, and a balanced budget amendment for federal government by wide margins, and we’re sending all the right signals.  However, politicians won’t do anything about these issues either.  

That’s why only one-in-four likely voters believe the federal government today actually has the consent of the governed. 

Call it is the great disconnect of 2019-2020. The American people aren’t as far apart from each other as we are from D.C. bureaucrats.  Only 10% of Americans believe the Betsy Ross flag is racist; only 21% believe the U.S. has no right to determine who comes through the borders; 74% are proud of our country’s history77% say illegal immigration is bad; 81% believe legal immigration is good.  These Rasmussen polling results are not even noticed, because D.C. wants us at war with each other, so they ignore our desires and try to manipulation our emotions.

How?  One way is they make promises they don’t intend to keep.

Remember that much discussed wall that candidate Donald Trump talked about at every rally?  Since he constantly brought it up, it seemed we’d finally found a Republican with a backbone… someone who’d do what he said.  Ask any Trump voter why they liked their candidate and the wall would inevitably be one of the top reasons.  (Another popular selling point was that many conservatives really wanted to see Hillary Clinton held accountable for her crimes.  The “lock her up” chants were not necessarily mean-spirited tantrums, but rather pleas for justice after years of Democratic abuse of the power.)

Yet, here we are in 2019.  No wall, and Hillary Clinton is still at large.

Trump immediately said he wouldn’t really put his former rival in jail, which was largely regarded as the right move.  In America, locking up the defeated candidate would not be good optics, and likely bad precedent.  But, come on.  Surely we can all admit that not seeing wall built is a huge disappointment?

Even though Republicans held both houses of Congress and the Promiser-in-Chief sat in the Oval Office, they didn’t fund the wall (or significantly increase physical border barriers) because they just didn’t prioritize it. Then, when the Democrats offered the president the chance to make good on his promise, with a plan that would have given significant funds for wall construction, the president squandered an opportunity he’ll probably never get again.  In this case, the “art of the deal,” resulted in no wall…much to the national detriment.

We the people clearly make our desires known, yet the politicians do the exact opposite of what they know we want.  They do not seek or even care about obtaining our consent.  They hear our plainly stated wants and regularly ignore us.

But we’re onto your game, D.C.  All respectable citizens must be able to stand up to their elected politicians.  You talk a lot about consent for others, but now’s your chance to stop acting in ways that plainly go against the best interest of Americans.  

When we say “no means no,” we mean it.  We do not consent to your spending, your hyper-partisanship, and your acrimony.  And when we say “build the wall,” we mean that too.  Time to start listening, and governing according to our consent.

In other words, slow down, government.  We don’t like where you’re taking this Great American experiment, and you don’t have our consent. 

Image Credit: PXHere

About The Author

Mark Meckler

Mark was a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, and served as the national coordinator. He left the organization to work more broadly on expanding the self-governance movement beyond the partisan divide. Mark appears regularly on television in outlets as diverse as MSNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Bloomberg, Fox Business and the BBC. He’s highly sought after for the tea party perspective from print and electronic media outlets, from the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, L.A. Times, Washington Examiner, Politico and the The Hill. Mark blogs at MarkMeckler.com, and his opinion editorials regularly run in many of the leading political newspapers both on and offline. Mark has a BA in English from San Diego State University and graduated with honors from University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in 1988. He practiced real estate and business law for almost a decade. For the last eleven years of his legal career he specialized in Internet advertising law. When not fighting for the future of our nation, Mark is an avid horseman, and lives in rural northern California with his wife Patty and two children.