Up to this point, we have a laughable Republican Party as the opposition of the current power. Although I recognize there would be no one else to oppose the Democratic majority, it is pitiful to think that is all there is to the entire opposition.

However, to claim they are would be foolish. The people have had to rise up on their own and take matters into their own hands. The Republicans saw this and believe these people are those ordinary people who will now back them.

The Republicans once again are wrong. These people see the lack of an appropriate opposition to the majority.

Looking into our history, as we should do more often, we see blunt examples of opposition. As we formed our Constitution, we have seen the battle with the anti-federalist states’ rights supporters opposing the accepted Federalist conception of the Constitution. In the end, we see the Bill of Rights becoming the most important part of the Constitution.

We see perhaps the most evident example of opposition in battle between states’ rights and centralized government. We had a government attempting to take control of the society and economy of numerous states, and, as expected, there was an opposition to these actions.

Of course, I am speaking of the Civil War.

We then witnessed a large opposition in the conduct of the World Wars. Prior to World War I, there was a strong opposition to President Woodrow Wilson’s entry into the war, in addition to isolationists.

Leading up to World War II, the isolationist opposition to President Franklin Roosevelt’s consistent interventionist policies might have been the only thing in the way between America and all-out intervention in the European war.

Many would claim it would have been better for the world had America entered and fought Hitler sooner than we did. I am not writing this to argue that point, nor do I have an opinion on it.

My point is that it is crucial to have opposition to the majority. Without an opposition, the majority would be able to run the table and pass whatever reforms they wished, regardless of their benefit to the country. The opposition forces them to work within the means of the Constitution.

Another example that we can remember more vividly is President George W. Bush’s interventionism in the Middle East. The opposition was present, but, let’s be honest, it was a joke.

The opposition is supposed to be able to alter legislation, or at least cause some kind of concessions from the majority. Bush had no threatening opposition. Once the Democratic Party became the majority in Congress, they did nothing to curb our overreaching president.

I wouldn’t claim the Democratic majority to be an effective opposition mainly because they were unable to reach out to those who were not Democrats. They alienated independents who were against Bush’s actions. To have an effective opposition, you must have a force reaching beyond parties and into ideology.

President Barack Obama’s health care bill is a clear example of the need for opposition. Although the majority attempts to shovel this bill down our throats without reading it themselves, the people are saying, “No.”

Being in opposition in this situation does not mean one is against the idea of universal health care; rather, they understand the importance of realizing the full consequences of these actions.

We should hold our leaders to a high standard and demand they stop playing party politics. They must form a true opposition that will act as a check and balance to the president and majority motives to turn them into benefits for America.

Eric Thieleman is a State News guest columnist and political science senior. Reach him at thielem4@msu.edu.