Can ANYBODY fix our political system?

[Anagram]

This is precisely why I am against term limits. One, why do we think honest and pure politicians would magically appear out of the woodwork? Two, even if they did, would we know which ones they are? And three, even if we knew who they are, would we vote for them, or would we still vote for the ones who promise us everything for nothing?

Collective "we", of course.

100% agree.

 

[radcen]

Right now elections are dictated (Rigged) by money and the power of the two party one agenda system.

Without that influence elections would go differently.

As for restricting who can vote, I'm torn, while I think everyone should get a vote I also think those that do not contribute to society, only live off of it, should not have a vote.

I agree elections and the system are rigged... to greatly favor the system... but it still comes down to the voters. If voters ever comprehend that they actually do have the ultimate power...

 

[blaxshep]

This is precisely why I am against term limits. One, why do we think honest and pure politicians would magically appear out of the woodwork? Two, even if they did, would we know which ones they are? And three, even if we knew who they are, would we vote for them, or would we still vote for the ones who promise us everything for nothing?

Collective "we", of course.

If the ones we have are already corrupt, and they are, what do you have to lose?

 

[blaxshep]

I agree elections and the system are rigged... to greatly favor the system... but it still comes down to the voters. If voters ever comprehend that they actually do have the ultimate power...

Since we are talking about the people who gave us Trump vs Hillary, I'm not feeling like that is going to work out.

Now if everyone suddenly votes Johnson or writes in Bernie maybe... Right now the closest thing to rebellion against the system would be a Trump win. Hillary IS the system.

 

[Anagram]

Right now elections are dictated (Rigged) by money and the power of the two party one agenda system.

Without that influence elections would go differently.

I'm skeptical that there's anything that can be done to prevent this type of influence.

As for restricting who can vote, I'm torn, while I think everyone should get a vote I also think those that do not contribute to society, only live off of it, should not have a vote.

I definitely disagree with this. There's no good way of deciding who contributes to society and who doesn't. I don't think it's right to just use who pays taxes and who doesn't, or who's on SNAP and who isn't for example because there are legitimate reasons to do those things. And we all have skin in the game, because the laws affect all of us, and not just the tax laws.

 

[radcen]

If the ones we have are already corrupt, and they are, what do you have to lose?

Damn! That's actually the best argument I've ever heard for term limits. Seriously.

Ok, I do think it'd still be worse, though. At least without TL, politicians could theoretically be held to answer should the electorate ever get it's collective head out of it's collective ass. With TL, there's no incentive whatsoever for the politician... get what you can while you can, knowing you won't be around to answer for it.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Damn! That's actually the best argument I've ever heard for term limits. Seriously.

Ok, I do think it'd still be worse, though. At least without TL, politicians could theoretically be held to answer should the electorate ever get it's collective head out of it's collective ass. With TL, there's no incentive whatsoever for the politician... get what you can while you can, knowing you won't be around to answer for it.

Also knowing that if you were to help make the place better you could not possibly stick around to enjoy it.

 

[Anagram]

Damn! That's actually the best argument I've ever heard for term limits. Seriously.

Ok, I do think it'd still be worse, though. At least without TL, politicians could theoretically be held to answer should the electorate ever get it's collective head out of it's collective ass. With TL, there's no incentive whatsoever for the politician... get what you can while you can, knowing you won't be around to answer for it.

That's the thing though. A term limited politician answers definitely answers to no one. Our current ones at least in theory answer to the voters.

And I think there would probably be something good to be said about having some experienced politicians rather than constant turnover, as long as they were actually held in check by the electorate.

 

[blaxshep]

I'm skeptical that there's anything that can be done to prevent this type of influence.


I definitely disagree with this. There's no good way of deciding who contributes to society and who doesn't. I don't think it's right to just use who pays taxes and who doesn't, or who's on SNAP and who isn't for example because there are legitimate reasons to do those things. And we all have skin in the game, because the laws affect all of us, and not just the tax laws.

The only way to eliminate this type of influence is to remove money from the system. No private donations of any kind campaign or otherwise. No lobbyists paying any money of any kind to any politician. Remove taxes from any and all businesses and remove the corporate rights as a person. No subsidizing and private company. Simplify the tax code and remove all loop holes and deductions. Remove anything and everything that can be gotten through cronyism of any kind. I don't know the answer but I'd start along those lines.

I think you are right in that there are different types of laws, but allowing the masses with their hands out to win by majority will only end badly. We are $20T in debt now and it simply can not continue forever. If you think we can sustain endless debt why pay taxes at all?

 

[Hawkeye10]

The only way to eliminate this type of influence is to remove money from the system. No private donations of any kind campaign or otherwise. No lobbyists paying any money of any kind to any politician. Remove taxes from any and all businesses and remove the corporate rights as a person. No subsidizing and private company. Simplify the tax code and remove all loop holes and deductions. Remove anything and everything that can be gotten through cronyism of any kind. I don't know the answer but I'd start along those lines.

I think you are right in that there are different types of laws, but allowing the masses with their hands out to win by majority will only end badly. We are $20T in debt now and it simply can not continue forever. If you think we can sustain endless debt why pay taxes at all?

We cant do this till re fix the SUPREMES.

Money is free speech these idiots claim.

:screwy

 

[AGENT J]

IMO, short of another revolution against the existing government, the only way to break the iron grip of the political class regarding every aspect of our lives is a constitution amendment that would specify something like:

1. Every President, Congress, or any person employed in any capacity, elected, appointed, hired or contracted in the federal government will be prohibited from using taxpayer funds or obligating the taxpayer in any manner to provide a benefit to any person, group, demographic, or entity that does not provide benefit to all. All programs that benefit some but not all will be phased out or transferred to the states as quickly as possible in a manner that is of least consequence to those made dependent on government programs and no later than 10 years from the passage of the amendment.

2. All persons employed in the federal government in any capacity--elected, appointed, hired, or contracted--will be paid a salary sufficient to fund their own reasonable retirement and health plans. The taxpayer will not be obligated for this during or after such employment. Whatever funds they contribute to their retirement or health plans will go with them when they leave the government.

3. All federal budgeting will start with a blank page and as much as reasonably possible, all budgeted items will be a line item that the legislator or department head must be able to justify. Baseline budgeting will be discontinued.

4. Other than general appropriations bills to run the necessary standard government services and extreme emergency legislation such as declared war, all federal expenditures must be presented as a stand alone bill to be passed by a 2/3rds recorded majority vote.

5. No member of Congress may go back after the fact to change his/her vote or to revise and extend his/her remarks in the Congressional Record.

6. No rule or regulation or law that includes punitive measures for non compliance or that compliance requires an expense may be issued by any federal government department or department division that is not first presented to Congress that will approve or disapprove it by an up or down recorded vote. No more laws and regulation will be issued by faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrats.

7. No unfunded law or regulation requiring more than minimal expense for compliance may be forced by the federal government upon the states or private citizens without the citizens having opportunity in a general election to vote on the matter.

Do this amendment and we break the back of the permanent political class who can no longer profit from their government positions above and beyond their authorized compensation. Taking the money out of the system takes a huge lion's share of the graft and corruption. And we would almost certainly start electing public servants to high office again instead of the professional opportunists we now mostly elect.

Some good ideas in there that i could definitely stand behind! especially 2,3,4,5

 

[Gaius46]

That remains to be seen. Don't think it will never happen, no nation that has every existed in all of human history has not eventually collapsed. This one will be no different, its only a matter of time.

Unless you think miraculously the USA will be the first ever nation to exist from now on without every collapsing or having another civil war. (Notice I said another).

Oh I'm well aware that all nations and empires eventually crumble. It's just a matter of when and considering all the nukes floating around who they take with them.

I just finished reading a history of the American Revolution and what stands out to me is really how difficult the British had it. Not to take anything away from Washington, who displayed superlative generalship, or any of his capable subordinates, but the Brits had a huge problem on their hands in that they had to reconquer a huge landmass with limited troops, they were facing a large and and organized resistance, they had military obligations elsewhere, we had financing to actually fight a war and assistance from France and Germany. If the British really understood what they were getting into - the crown more or less thought they were dealing with a small mob of rioters - they probably would have granted us independence.

None of that really pertains to the modern world where the US military would be suppressing a revolt in their own backyard. Of course american soldiers firing american citizens would bring about it's own set of problems but my point is that you really can't say that because one American armed revolution worked you could have another one succeed because the conditions today are radically different.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Greetings, AlbqOwl. :2wave:

Excellent! :thumbs: It's a disgrace this wasn't done many, many years ago, since we probably wouldn't have most of the problems facing us today, IMO.

Thanks polgara and absolutely. This is what the Founders intended the federal government to be in the first place. But we were warned that as soon as those in government found they could vote themselves benefit using our money, it would start going downhill fast. I can't imagine what kind of grass roots pressure would be necessary to get such an amendment passed, but I sure would be willing to lead the charge in my area.

 

[AlbqOwl]

I mean, we can actually vote for whoever we want right now. The colonists had no say who was in the government. But we do. We might be re-electing the same people over and over again, but it's us whose electing them. The colonists needed the revolution because they had no say. Unless you're suggesting changing the people who vote, I don't see why we'd vote any differently after another Revolution. That's why I don't think the two situations are comparable.

No they didn't and to remedy that they fought a bloody war to wrest the power from the English monarchy. And they gave us a Constitution that was intended to make government subservient to the people rather than the other way around. But beginning with the Teddy Roosevelt administration and coming forward, government has been seizing more and more power and they found they could get away with it by bribing the gullible and people willing to be made dependent. And it was such a slow creep it never seemed quite important to rise up and object. And now we really can't. They mostly choose who we will be allowed to vote for and they make sure it is somebody who already is or is eager to be a member of their permanent political class that no longer serves us well but mostly exists to increase its own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Some good ideas in there that i could definitely stand behind! especially 2,3,4,5

Number #1 is absolutely essential to break the tyranny of the super pacs and other legal ways they funnel money to themselves for their benefit, and also to remove their ability to bribe and extort money from big business. It also provide complete liberty for anybody to contribute whatever they want to political campaigns, but it won't matter because the donors will not be able to benefit in any way from those donations unless it is benefit to the entire country.

 

[AGENT J]

Number #1 is absolutely essential to break the tyranny of the super pacs and other legal ways they funnel money to themselves for their benefit, and also to remove their ability to bribe and extort money from big business. It also provide complete liberty for anybody to contribute whatever they want to political campaigns, but it won't matter because the donors will not be able to benefit in any way from those donations unless it is benefit to the entire country.

Oh sorry, let me be clear, just cause 1 wasnt on my especially like list doesnt mean i dont like it or think its bad. I do like it, it just seemed rather vague and way to subjective to me and would need more work, but its "premise" im fine with

 

[AlbqOwl]

Oh sorry, let me be clear, just cause 1 wasnt on my especially like list doesnt mean i dont like it or think its bad. I do like it, it just seemed rather vague and way to subjective to me and would need more work, but its "premise" im fine with

Good. That makes two of us. Now we just need to convince some 2 or 3 hundred more Americans and we might have enough clout to make it happen.

 

[AGENT J]

Good. That makes two of us. Now we just need to convince some 2 or 3 hundred more Americans and we might have enough clout to make it happen.

Unfortunately a lot of that stuff would never happen in my life time BUT people have to start somewhere. I picked my changes based on the ability that in my life time i could at least see the visual see the shift. It might not be finished but I could see its start.

I said it many times thats the ONLY think good I think would happen in a trump presidency. I think that it would accelerate the demise of the stronghold the two party system has and Id see it weaken in my lifetime BUT at the same time IMO its no where near the risk. WHo cares who has the keys to car if it has 4 flat tires, broken windows and a locked up engine

 

[radcen]

IMO, short of another revolution against the existing government, the only way to break the iron grip of the political class regarding every aspect of our lives is a constitution amendment that would specify something like:

1. Every President, Congress, or any person employed in any capacity, elected, appointed, hired or contracted in the federal government will be prohibited from using taxpayer funds or obligating the taxpayer in any manner to provide a benefit to any person, group, demographic, or entity that does not provide benefit to all. All programs that benefit some but not all will be phased out or transferred to the states as quickly as possible in a manner that is of least consequence to those made dependent on government programs and no later than 10 years from the passage of the amendment.

2. All persons employed in the federal government in any capacity--elected, appointed, hired, or contracted--will be paid a salary sufficient to fund their own reasonable retirement and health plans. The taxpayer will not be obligated for this during or after such employment. Whatever funds they contribute to their retirement or health plans will go with them when they leave the government.

3. All federal budgeting will start with a blank page and as much as reasonably possible, all budgeted items will be a line item that the legislator or department head must be able to justify. Baseline budgeting will be discontinued.

4. Other than general appropriations bills to run the necessary standard government services and extreme emergency legislation such as declared war, all federal expenditures must be presented as a stand alone bill to be passed by a 2/3rds recorded majority vote.

5. No member of Congress may go back after the fact to change his/her vote or to revise and extend his/her remarks in the Congressional Record.

6. No rule or regulation or law that includes punitive measures for non compliance or that compliance requires an expense may be issued by any federal government department or department division that is not first presented to Congress that will approve or disapprove it by an up or down recorded vote. No more laws and regulation will be issued by faceless, nameless, unelected bureaucrats.

7. No unfunded law or regulation requiring more than minimal expense for compliance may be forced by the federal government upon the states or private citizens without the citizens having opportunity in a general election to vote on the matter.

Do this amendment and we break the back of the permanent political class who can no longer profit from their government positions above and beyond their authorized compensation. Taking the money out of the system takes a huge lion's share of the graft and corruption. And we would almost certainly start electing public servants to high office again instead of the professional opportunists we now mostly elect.

Excellent list.

3) Question: How would you handle things like the CIA budget?

6) This is a big one with me. ALL laws and regulations should be approved by people who are directly answerable to the voters via direct election. No bureaucrats making rules. Their job is enforce, not enact.

7) Not sure. I'm leery of popular referendums. This a big reason why California is so hamstrung, the people, over the decades, have backed the state legislators into a financial corner. I'd prefer no unfunded mandates, period.

 

[Anagram]

No they didn't and to remedy that they fought a bloody war to wrest the power from the English monarchy. And they gave us a Constitution that was intended to make government subservient to the people rather than the other way around. But beginning with the Teddy Roosevelt administration and coming forward, government has been seizing more and more power and they found they could get away with it by bribing the gullible and people willing to be made dependent. And it was such a slow creep it never seemed quite important to rise up and object. And now we really can't. They mostly choose who we will be allowed to vote for and they make sure it is somebody who already is or is eager to be a member of their permanent political class that no longer serves us well but mostly exists to increase its own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth.

If we, as a whole, wanted to pick other people we could. I do think our electoral system could use a few changes to reflect more of what we want, (Instant Runoff Voting), but we ultimately do currently have the power. The fact that we don't exercise it may be a shame, but then that's on us. I don't think that there's anything you can do to make us less gullible, less easily persuaded by simple rhetoric, and less willing to fall for baseless attacks. That's all part of the human condition.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Unfortunately a lot of that stuff would never happen in my life time BUT people have to start somewhere. I picked my changes based on the ability that in my life time i could at least see the visual see the shift. It might not be finished but I could see its start.

I said it many times thats the ONLY think good I think would happen in a trump presidency. I think that it would accelerate the demise of the stronghold the two party system has and Id see it weaken in my lifetime BUT at the same time IMO its no where near the risk. WHo cares who has the keys to car if it has 4 flat tires, broken windows and a locked up engine

That is why I will vote for Trump. I know he is a flawed candidate, but so is Hillary And Trump is the ONLY one left standing who has any chance at all to shake up the status quo. And that is exactly why both major parties are trying to derail him even if it means electing Hillary. They care much more about maintaining their power and the status quo than they care about us.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Excellent list.

3) Question: How would you handle things like the CIA budget?

6) This is a big one with me. ALL laws and regulations should be approved by people who are directly answerable to the voters via direct election. No bureaucrats making rules. Their job is enforce, not enact.

7) Not sure. I'm leery of popular referendums. This a big reason why California is so hamstrung, the people, over the decades, have backed the state legislators into a financial corner. I'd prefer no unfunded mandates, period.

So would I re the unfunded mandates. But if they want to require one, they should give the states and people a say in it.

The CIA budget would be like everybody else's. They start with a blank piece of paper and figure out what they need to run the department for the fiscal year. And they should be able to defend every item they submit for approval.

 

[Perotista]

Could you name someone you believe actually could fix our political system and get things going back in a positive direction?

Can be somebody running, somebody already in office, a former politician, someone who has never run and/or served... the field is wide open for this question. In an ideal world, if you could pick the one person capable of doing good (must be alive and not so old that they are not mentally capable, is the only restriction), who would that person be?

None that I can think of. But all it takes to fix the system is the folks in Washington D.C. to reverse putting the good of the party ahead of the good of the country, for those folks in Washington D.C. to show more loyalty to this nation than their political party. As long as political party is number one in their hearts with America far down the line, no one can fix it.

About the only thing that can fix it is if the voting public stop voting for the R and the D and begin putting a bunch of different third party candidates in Washington. As long as the R and the D have a monopoly on our political system, nothing is going to change.

 

[Casper]

Could you name someone you believe actually could fix our political system and get things going back in a positive direction?

Can be somebody running, somebody already in office, a former politician, someone who has never run and/or served... the field is wide open for this question. In an ideal world, if you could pick the one person capable of doing good (must be alive and not so old that they are not mentally capable, is the only restriction), who would that person be?

The somebody is We The People, problem is far too many have become We The Sheep. So there will be no savior, no magic pill or button that can be used, eventually a new system will arise from the ashes, whether it will be better is for future generations to decide.

 

[AlbqOwl]

If we, as a whole, wanted to pick other people we could. I do think our electoral system could use a few changes to reflect more of what we want, (Instant Runoff Voting), but we ultimately do currently have the power. The fact that we don't exercise it may be a shame, but then that's on us. I don't think that there's anything you can do to make us less gullible, less easily persuaded by simple rhetoric, and less willing to fall for baseless attacks. That's all part of the human condition.

But look what is happening at the Presidential level. The Democrats had a choice or did they? The Party bosses had already picked their candidate and assigned all the super delegates to her and underminded all the others with everything they had. The GOP had a choice but they don't like the one the people chose and they are doing their damndest to undermine him. We honestly don't have much say in the process or who governs us at all. Most newcomers are shut out early on and the Party operatives make sure they gain no traction. And they pretty well hand pick those they intend to allow into the club.