Replies

It's never going to change, no matter what party is 'in' until voters start fighting the right battles. The US is no longer a country with government of/for/by the people. The whole purpose of our political set up was to keep the power in the hands of the voters. That has become an empty act. And as far as I can see there's no way to change it, because to do that you have to change the constitution and to do that you have to get the congress to make the changes. So you have a catch 22.

IMO, the battles should be: 1. establish term limits, being a politician should NOT be a career, I suggest a maximum of 8 years total with regard the congress i.e. 4 terms house, or 1 term house, 1 term senate, if we keep the popular election of senators - see next item; 2. eliminate popular election of senators, they are supposed to represent their state not the people, that's the representatives' job. I find it incredible that in a country which professes to be established on the idea of States' Rights, the only entity that has no direct representation in congress are those same states. Go back to what the constitution originally had; 3. set up terms so that time spent in office is 3 months DC, 3 home, 3 DC, 3 home. That would sure keep them down home where we, their bosses, are, not in the elitist atmosphere of DC; 4. something has to be done about campaign finance, and the kind of bills they do now are not the answer. IMO, the only real answer is to eliminate any kind of direct campaign finance. So, all contributions would go to one huge fund and that would be divided between all candidates qualified and running for office. Like that would ever happen. But, it sure is one way to eliminate 'influence', since no one would know who contributed to their campaigns, lol. Just getting my frustrations out there....

It's never going to change, no matter what party is 'in' until voters start fighting the right battles. The US is no longer a country with government of/for/by the people.

You're way off.

The problem is that we have too much democracy. People are voting themselves money. It's as simple as that. Anyone threatening restraint pisses off some group that's getting a hand-out or subsidy. You don't win elections without buying votes with tax-payer money.

If you want restraint, the first thing you could do is get everyone to pay taxes. When bridges to nowhere stop being "free" to large numbers of voters, then they might change. But tell me, who's going to vote people into power that are going to tax them?

See, too much democracy. We have voters that pay too little in taxes, but want to be given large amounts of money.

As far as I'm concerned, if you receive government money, or you don't pay taxes, you should have no say concerning spending legislation. But that wouldn't be democratic. "The people" would have less power. Less power to steal from taxpayers, that is.

The truth is that we are slowly crawling toward another revolution. IMO it will be bloody and long and it is less than 50 years away.

"The US is no longer a country with government of/for/by the people."

The US seems to be under the control of childish polititions, aided my the tantrum throwing leftist media.
I am happy not to be there now, and question if I will ever return.
I will be happy to spend my remaining days wandering the world, and ignoring PC and stupid and corrupt politicians.

My home city of Memphis is now run by morons that are so stupid, they do not even know how to get away with their own crimes and corruption.

Agreed, but you can't fight city hall (tho many have tried in Dallas:) and you definitely cant fight Congress and Senate.
WAIT what am I thinking yes we can next year 2006 ::wink::

hmmmm...term limits ay?! Tried that in 1994. Got Newt Gingrich thrown to the wolves, got Bob Dole the presidential nod......

None of your four proposals would solve the spending problem if the spending is for pork.

The problem is that the few people who benefit from port are affected greatly in a positive way while the many whose taxes are increased a little bit on each piece of pork don't notice the incremental affect.

The Constitution was designed to protect us from this with the tenth amendment.

It is the Supreme Court, particularly when they started claiming the Interstate Commerce clause applies to anything done anywhere, that has allowed Congress to spend like drunken sailors.

My suggestion: give money to folks like the Cato Institute that will shine a bright light on the most egregious cases. However, if the economy does not grow faster than the politicians spend our grandchildren will be poorer than our children and our children poorer than us.