Is Three Branches of Government Really A Balance?

I just hate the fact that this question keeps coming to my mind. When the talk radio and republican extremists are continuously trashing members of Congress, I don't like asking myself why we need a body of government making MORE LAWS. I don't have anything personally against any of the members of Congress. My state Congressman doesn't represent my views, but that isn't why I'm questioning the value of his job. My concern is this. Congress is supposed to be the legislative branch of our three branch system of government. I'm sure some religious person can tell you that this "three" branch is of course in the image of a Trinity, which by the way, the word Trinity isn't any more Bible based than our Constitution. Now, back to Congress. Historically, since the end of WWII, if Congress and the President were not of the same party, nothing happened. We had it in the Truman days, the Reagan days, the Clinton days, and now, once again, these present sad days. This current Congress is going to cost the tax-payers a fortune. The only thing the current administration will not veto is exorbitant spending on his agenda. And that's not really my concern, either, as there is nothing I can do about it. My concern is this. This third branch of the government isn't balancing the executive branch or the judicial branch, but they are spending money we tax payers haven't yet earned, and they are passing bills right and left to be made into law for whom? The law abiding citizens of this country? How many more laws do the law-abiders need? The law abiding citizens are already burdened and those that aren't law abiding aren't going to worry about it, they already don't. Why can't Congress be used like Internal Affairs in the Police Department? They want to hold all those in the opposite party in some sort of contempt. Why not make that Congress's new reason to be? We don't need any more legislation and the budget is a joke. We, the people do not need any more laws and we, the people don't have any more money. The people who are not law abiding already have enough laws to break, don't they? I'm afraid I see the sham in this situation. The right extremists have a point, although I don't agree with their reasoning for it, Congress is really a non-essential, impotent part of our government, now. Unless Congress gives the President the bill he wants, he vetos. If Congress makes more laws about security, it is only the law-abiding American citizens that will be affected. And the third branch; judicial. Although the right extremists claim that they don't want judges making laws from the bench, that is what they expect of the Supreme Court, on their pet issues. And technically, the Supreme Court is only an extention of the Executive branch, anyway; since it is an appointed position. Actually, since it is appointed and for life, the Justices wield much unelected power over, we, the people, for quite a while. Some of these judges in history have been on the bench for a quarter of a century. And somebody that really wants long term control has realized, young judges appointed for life keeps the "Supreme" decisions leaning the direction of choice, regardless of what Congress tries to implement, and the party of the next elected resident of the White House.

The law of YHVH is perfect . . . Holy Scripture