A Proposal In Order To Save The Union

If there is one thing that the Left and Right agree on, it’s that government is broken.  The details of why are vastly different, but at least they agree that it needs to be fixed.  What follows are just some of the major changes to government that I would make in an attempt to set right the huge mess we have today.  What you won’t see is a partisan redesign that strongly favors any political party.  I am not a member of any such organization, and I don’t believe there is one that represents my interests.  What you will find is a common theme, one directed by the very principle that our Constitution is built upon, a government for the people, by the people.

Abolition of all political parties.

Political parties have demonstrated consistently that they do not represent the American people.  They represent their own interests, predominantly the accumulation of power and wealth.  The do not govern with the interest of the people in mind, only their own self-serving agenda.  These are the very reasons George Washington himself advised against the rise of political parties at the outset.  His wisdom was ignored, but it’s never to late to take heed and reverse course.  The loss of political parties also means that an elected official must represent the people that elected them, not a powerful special interest group for elitist control.

Public funding for elections.

I know, I know, that’s a very high cost that has to be made up in some way.  While there are details to work out, such as how to pay for it and how much everyone should get, the benefits outweigh the cost.  You see, I’m not talking about additional funding for campaigns.  I’m talking about strictly limiting funding for campaigns to only public funds.  Candidates can not use their own personal wealth.  They can not receive political donations from PACs or corporations.  They can’t be bought by sweetheart deals from powers beyond.  By eliminating the use of private wealth we also severely limit a wealthy elite from seizing control because everyone has the same amount of cash.  A more level field has never existed.

Term limits for Congress.

I propose that term limits for the House be set to a maximum of four three-year terms and the Senate be limited to two six-year terms.  Both Houses would potentially have longer service than any single president and could govern during three different presidencies.  This gives the legislative body more consistency than any administration, but the nature of term limits prevents career politicians from becoming so entrenched that graft and corruption are practically a given.  Also, extending the length of a term in the House by a year slows down the immediate drive to begin campaigning on the first day of the job.  

Elected officials can not accept gifts from lobbyists.

This doesn’t mean that lobbyists are to be banned, only that special interest organizations cannot be permitted to unduly influence the course of legislation by bribing politicians with “gifts” or sending them on trips or other such nonsense.  Additionally, lobbyists can’t be permitted to take them out for dinner or some other private meeting.  When a lobbyist meets with an elected official, it must be in that official’s government office and during normal business hours.  A public log of who they met with must all be kept and published so we, the people, can track who is trying to persuade our representatives.  

Reverse Citizens United decision.

Corporations are not people, pure and simple.  The idea of corporate personhood is preposterous and dangerous.  Unfettered spending sprees by corporations, even indirectly, in support of one politician or another still permits undue influence.  While I do believe organizations, including PACs, businesses, and unions, have a right to publish a statement of support or opposition to a candidate for office, the idea that they can spend as much money as they want in order to produce propaganda to sway the electorate is a terrifying proposal.  We have already limited campaign funding, and now we must limit indirect support.  Organizations are not people and therefore are not subject to the full application or support of the 1st Amendment.  In order to maintain a government by and for the people, actual flesh and blood people need to be the deciding force, not businesses or other organizations.

There are other changes I would propose, but these tend towards operational details like reminding the Senate that their job is to represent their home state and its interests at the federal level while the House is to represent the people of a specific area in that state.  As you can see, these are not small changes.  They are big, big overhauls but I believe they would be the foundation upon which our government would be returned to us, the American people, and taken away from powerful, elite groups that care not one damn bit about what is good for us.  We are the majority,  we are the masses, and this is our country.  It belongs to us and I want it back!

You Want Obama?

Read this and go after him.

According to The New York Times:

"Several hospital lobbyists involved in the White House deals said it was understood as a condition of their support that the final legislation would not include a government-run health plan paying-Medicare rates...or controlled by the secretary of health and human services. 'We have an agreement with the White House that I'm very confident will be seen all the way through conference', one of the industry lobbyists, Chip Kahn, director of the Federation of American Hospitals, told a Capitol Hill newsletter...Industry lobbyists say they are not worried [about a public option.] 'We trust the White House,' Mr. Kahn said."

I don't care if you are a Democrat, Republican, or an Independent. It doesn't matter if you are for or against a public option, or whether you care about health care reform or not. Maybe it's the lousy condition of the roads you care about, or the fact that your utility bills are shooting through the roof (have you forgotten Enron already?). What ever it is, some corporation is angling to make a big buck off of you. They are looking for the law to give them the power to take you to the cleaners. They go to the White House which is open for business (but not for you!) and is making deals with private entities long before the Congress even gets to pretend to deliberate on a bill as if they are making law. They are only going to rubber-stamp the decision made through the Oval Office. That's what they get paid handsomely to do. It has been this way for many years, and involves both parties. Where in this process is there any input from YOU, the voting taxpaying citizen of this nation?

Come November, if you vote for an incumbent, then you are voting to allow this sort of shady back room dealing to continue to erode your quality of life. Have you not lost enough already? Who is to say that this collusion between the public and private sectors won't be extended to limiting more of your freedoms and curtailing your liberty?

Many of you are gun owners. You fear that your guns will be confiscated. What if some corporation decides that you are a threat to them, or maybe decides that they can make big bucks if they convince the government that they can protect you better - For LESS! - than government entities like the police or the military can - as long as you are disarmed? How long do you think it would be before they come for your Glock? How are you going to fight them? And I don't mean with your little 9mm, either. I mean politically.

The Supreme Court just took all limits off corporate political contributions under a tortured definition of free speech, yet can you match the money it takes to turn your Congressperson dishonest if the corporation buys the necessary votes to take your guns away? Most of you don't make enough to have a very good life now, assuming that you are still employed! You know what talks and what walks, and if the last several elections have not yet convinced you that you are not important to the larger scheme of things, then you haven't been paying attention.

Maybe you were too busy trying to prove Obama was not a citizen, or that he was some kind of terrorist plant, or a Muslim. But while you were so distracted, he was at the center of a tug-of-war over which group of corrupt politicians was going to sell you out. He can do nothing without both groups agreeing on how they will divide the swag, nor can they do anything without him. Replace him with Sarah Palin, and what is really going to change besides the face speaking the lies? The purchasers of the law still win no matter which corrupt organization holds the reins. They just shift the money to one group when the other group pisses them off.

It's going on right now with the Wall Street banks now that they got almost $24 trillion of YOUR MONEY. Now that they are back in the plush, they are currently reported to have ceased donating to the Democrats and have shifted their support to the to the Republicans in order to keep what they were given, and using the money given to them from YOUR taxes which was intended to bail them out from their lousy gambling to do so. But you can be sure that YOU will be the loser.

The only way to fix this is to return control of the government to those who are supposed to be the government. That is you and I, the voters. This won't happen as long as a rich private entity representing some business, or industry, or some very wealthy individual can buy the law for their benefit under the mistaken legal notion that money speaks louder than the voice of the electorate. The Supreme Court Citizens United decision must be reversed, or else everything you hold dear about this nation will be taken away from you and sold to the highest bidder - and with your tax money loaned to them to do so. They can't be trusted to repay that loan, leaving you to have to pay the bill with your reduced quality of life one more time.

Are you going to let them?