There is a persistent impression in Washington by those fortunate enough to have been elected to represent us that the populace at large in the US needs to be governed. I’m here, as a red-blooded member of the at-large masses, to tell the governing class that we don’t need or want to be governed. We are sentient adults, and we can take care our ourselves if we’re allowed to do so, thank you very much. We are OKAY with representation and leadership, but if you aim to govern us then just get the hell out of the way.

The past hundred years or so in our country’s history have been punctuated by a staggering amount of governance emanating from Washington, and as a result we modern Americans lead highly regulated and restricted lives. In fact, there isn’t a single instance of our lives where the ubiquitous hand of the federal government doesn’t push or prod our allegedly free choices. All of these interventions and curtailments of our rights, freedoms and liberties are allegedly done with our very best interests in mind (I’m sure), however the our personal costs far outweigh the benefits we reap, perceived or otherwise.

To me, governing is the province of rulers. The monarch says “Jump,” and we serfs ask “How high?” But I cannot see where the role of the elected representatives that we send to Washington is to govern us — at least in light of the prose contained in the Constitution.  That divinely-inspired document is light on governance and heavy on representation. This situation is by design: The Founders had had enough “governance” from a despotic ruler (King George III) and they sought a new way for a society of freeborn citizens to conduct their national business.

Average citizens are a pliable lot. We’re told that we need this or that regulation or law to curtail this or that harmful activity, and we accept the consequences even if they inconvenience or frustrate us. Or if they infringe bit-by-bit on our Constitutionally-guaranteed liberties. But there comes a tipping point where we have definitely ceded more in terms of our rights than we have reaped in terms of societal stability or erstwhile improvements. What good have we accomplished if we had to relinquish to other men many of the rights that only God could give us or take away from us? In the end, is not our quest for “fairness” and egalitarian sameness via legislation and governance counter to the precepts of the Constitution? After all, the Constitution guarantees an equal starting line…it does not guarantee outcomes. But the checks-and-balances in the Constitution does not give our elected representatives the right to govern us…regardless of their noble intentions.

The Constitution does allow for our elected politicians to do two things as agents of the federal government — represent and lead the American people. Each of those actions is a collaborative affair for the representative: You need to have a sense of the vox populi before you can authentically represent their interests and you need to get a sense of the direction that those who you purport to lead wish to go. Simply doing things for the self-serving “it’s in their best interests” reason just doesn’t cut it. After all, it should be remembered that it is OUR government and OUR interests and OUR prospective debt and OUR affairs that are being represented.

We need representatives who actually represent US. Perhaps with all the dissatisfaction being voiced towards our politicians and with the rise of the nascent Tea Party movement that incumbents and challengers will remember this simple fact in the upcoming mid-term elections.

I guess we’ll find out in November.