Apparently our congress people are a bit fuzzy on the differences between a pure democracy and our American system of representative democracy.  Of course, it's also possible, perhaps even likely, that they just don't have the courage to cast a vote that is contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of their constituents.  I fully respect that some have fundamental differences with the bailout proposal.  They can and should vote their conscience.  However, there undoubtedly are a nontrivial number of house members who agree with the bill, but are scared silly to cast a supportive vote when 90% of their constituent telephone calls are strongly against the measure.  It is important to listen to the people; however, in certain circumstances, it is difficult for the general population to fully understand the intricacies of a particular issue.  They simply don't have access and/or exposure to the same range of information.  A tough vote is required in those circumstances.  Otherwise, we might as well set up a voting mechanism on the Internet so each issue can be decided on purely democratic terms.  Regrettably, the majority doesn't always do the right thing.  Our representatives are supposed to use their judgment and do what's best for the country.  They are charged with acting in the best interests of their constituents, not as their proxy.  Many important reforms would never have occurred if it were only a matter of following the majority.  Southern state politicians, for example, certainly wouldn't have bucked the will of the overwhelming majority of their citizens to pass civil rights legislation.  So, house members, if you really believe that the rescue package is good for America, stop hiding behind the calls that are coming into your office.  Stand up, cast a tough vote, and be accountable to your conscience.