Trusting the People's Voice In the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence, it reads, "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed." In the course of deciding how the government receives its powers from the governed the choice is given, let the people legislate, or let the government legislate with permission from the people. The reasonable choice would be to let the one's versed in law, being the government, make the decisions. In his response titled "Brexit Vote Showed How a Referendum Can Reflect a Nation’s True Feelings," Richard Ekins discusses the referendum that lead to the United Kingdom leaving the European Union, or as the media called it, the Brexit. To represent his general …show more content…
He acknowledges the benefits of having the people decide by then strikes these ideas down by explaining that the choices given to the popular vote don't allow for complex decision making. By addressing the opposing side and disrupting its argument, Ferwerda is able to support his position in the matter. He addresses the political effectiveness of referendums and their ability to bring a policy to the public eye. Ferwerda then goes through and picks apart the idea by pointing out that referendums fall short of their main goal as he puts it, "They fall short precisely where they are designed to succeed — as an accurate measure of citizen preferences," (Ferwerda). By addressing the shortcomings of the opposing argument, he gains the ability to either shake his readers who support the opposing argument or further solidify the part of his audience that holds the same position as …show more content…
In all of their responses, Ferwerda, Llorente, and Ekins made reference to the dangers of a referendum as a vehicle for passing legislation, but only Ferwerda was willing to view it as purely ineffective due to sparse numbers in regards to voter attendance. In his response, Ekins views the use of a plebiscite as a necessary evil, but he is, consequently, contradicted by Ferwerda ideas, because they are supported by the example of the Hungarian plebiscite. In a similar manner, Ekins expresses an idea that suggests a lack of representation of the people in congressional power. Discussing similar ideas, Ferwerda refutes Ekins's ideas, by judging plebiscites as a way of "rubber stamping" or pushing legislation through without fully thinking, as was the case of the British exit from the European Union. In a similar context, Llorente is able to take the middle ground, by using the Columbian plebiscite as an example, on the whole, she expresses how partisanship in congressional powers can be cause for a struggle in bringing policy into law, an idea similar to that of Ekins. In their article on the concept, both Ekins and Llorente viewed plebiscite as necessary in national progression, but Ferwerda was willing to take his own position and viewed them as a system to be avoided. Plebiscites are a poor choice in deciding on policy and whether it should be made into legislation. The framers of the Constitution