Ethical Dilemmas Of A Representative

1. A representative should represent the interests of the constituents, despite the own personal beliefs of the representative. Burke told his constituents that a representative owes them “his judgement; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.” Burke argues that by not making decisions based on their own consciences, representatives are diminishing the judgment of the people. However, I now believe that representatives cannot be blinded by their own beliefs and must make decisions that consider the interests of the constituents. In the video, Senator Ron Wyden (Democrat, Oregon) does not support Burke’s principle. Senator Wyden represented the will of Oregon voters, who were pro-assisted suicide, despite …show more content…
If the constituents' views clashes with the representative's, a legislator should consider the views of the constituents. The legislator should do what is right for the people, even if it goes against their own personal beliefs. On the contrary to Senator Wyden’s views, Senator Gordon Smith (Republican, Oregon) went with his own belief that physician-assisted suicide is wrong, and backed those who attempted to undo the law. He argued that it is not the role of a Senator to support whatever the majority of Oregonians say they should support, but rather to do what a representative believes is the “right” thing to do. I believe that Senator Smith failed to recognize that there is a difference between not supporting a piece of legislation because it goes against one’s personal beliefs and not supporting a piece of legislation because it will not benefit their constituents. Representatives, when deciding to support or not support a piece of legislation, must think about whether or not the legislation is good for the constituents, despite one’s personal beliefs. Burke strongly believes that “government and legislation are matters of reason and judgment, and not of inclination”. A representative must use their political knowledge and judgment in regards to a piece of legislation, and not let their personal beliefs get in the way. Representatives should solely focus on their own political opinions, not on their personal beliefs. Personal beliefs should not mix with …show more content…
Although Burke believes that legislators should do what is best for the nation, I believe that legislators should do what is best for his or her constituents. In Burke’s speech to the electors of Bristol, he argued that “Parliament is a deliberative assembly of one nation, with one interest, that of the whole-where not local purposes, not local prejudices, ought to guide, but the general good, resulting from the general reason of the whole”. Burke is saying the representative represents the nation as a whole, not just a particular subset of a nation. He also believes that constituents can also be blinded by their own prejudices. Although I do support his belief that constituents can be blinded by their own prejudices, I do not believe in his first point. Legislators should consider what is best for the nation as a whole, but they also need to be the voice of their constituents. However, I do believe that legislators need to consider doing what is best for the nation. I do not think it is fair for Senator John Boozman (Republican, Arkansas) to endorse disaster relief for snow storms damages in Arkansas just four days before casting his “nay” vote toward Hurricane Sandy relief. Senator Boozman cannot have the best of both worlds. States make up our nation, and representatives cannot want one thing to benefit their state and their state only. They must consider the needs of the nation, while being the voice of their