United States Senator Ben Nelson (D-NE) receives his $174,000 annual salary through payroll checks drawn from the U.S. Treasury but he actually works for the Corporation. The DNC Services Corporation. So, while the U.S. Constitution authorizes his office in the Legislative branch of the federal government, Mr. Nelson takes his marching orders directly from the DNC. And even though the Declaration of Independence proclaims that governments “deriv[e] their just powers from the consent of the governed,” given the choice between following the lead of his constituents back home in Nebraska or the dictates of officials of the Corporation, again, Mr. Nelson defers to them. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/declare.asp
Surely, if the enlightened thinkers who conceived and drafted the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution had intended to transfer any portion of the power of the people into the domain of the major political parties in this way, they would have mentioned political parties somewhere, anywhere in these auspicious documents. But they didn’t. The recent conduct of Senator Nelson points to prima facie evidence why.
Here are the voter registration numbers in the state of Nebraska in 2006, the year Mr. Nelson won his first re-election to the Senate, broken down by political affiliation: Republican Party, 578,888; Democratic Party, 371,110; nonpartisan, 184,150; Nebraska Party, 6,307; and Green Party, 361.
This means, 51% of Nebraska’s registered voters are Republican; and 33% are Democrat. In the 2006 mid-term election, with 99.9% of precincts reporting, the vote for U.S. Senate in Nebraska was
Nelson (D): 371, 777 64%
Ricketts (R): 211, 111 36%
In other words, Republicans voting in that race were underrepresented by 15%; and Democrats were overrepresented by 31%.
But this doesn’t mean that the voters of Nebraska similarly abandoned party lines in the other offices represented on the ballot. Republicans took all other races: Governor, Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, Auditor, and 3 U.S. Representative (3 (three) seats).
Either the overwhelmingly Republican voters of Nebraska really hated fellow Republican Mr. Ricketts or they loved Mr. Nelson.
However, when it comes to expressing support or rejection for this health insurance bill, the numbers in Nebraska become dramatically skewed.
In a poll posted on Weekly Standard on December 16, 2009 taken over the prior 2 (two) days, of 500 “likely voters,” respondents were asked this question:
“As you may know, there is likely to be a vote soon in the US Senate on President Obama’s health care plan. If Senator Ben Nelson votes in favor of this plan, would that make you more likely or les (sic) likely to support Senator Nelson when he runs for re-election?” 26 percent said “more likely;” 61 percent said “less likely;” 7 percent said “unsure;” and 6 percent said “no difference.”
In a poll conducted by the Tarrance Group on December 14 & 15, 67% of Nebraskans opposed the health insurance bill.
In general, do you favor or oppose President Obama’s plan to expand health care coverage to most Americans even if this plan increases the role of the federal government in health care and increases the cost of the deficit?
If Senator Nelson does vote in this way, would that make you more likely or less likely to support Senator Nelson when he runs for re-election?
NO DIFFERENCE 6%
Less likely/somewhat 17%
Less likely/strongly 44%
What do all of these vote totals and polls mean? Well, they mean Nebraskans are overwhelmingly Republican notwithstanding they re-elected Ben Nelson, a Democrat, to a second term in the U.S. Senate in 2006. But these same voters have made unequivocally clear, if Mr. Nelson supports the health insurance bill, they will vote for someone else in 2012.
He is supporting the bill, anyway. After all, the people of Nebraska are not the boss of him; he works for the Corporation.