Posted on 04/30/2015 7:14:43 AM PDT by Michael van der Galien
If we do indeed lack leadership, then it’s another fulfillment of Isaiah 3:1-4.
Oooo, but I was told last night I’m a hypocrite, so I can read Scripture, since I’m not allowed...
(:spit:)
*can’t
We need rid of the Uniparty period. Both need to go as they are not fit to run a brothel.
I hate to say it but we need a Cromwell or the republic is doomed. Neither party will change, they are corrupt to the core and beyond redemption. No one is looking out for the country or people just their own bank accounts and personal positions.
Yeah; that’s why they have the Colombians do that for them. Or at least for the DEA.
Levin and Palin supported Hatch during his last election over the primary challenger. Dunno why Levin is upset or expected anything different.
Everyone’s gettin’ theirs before the collapse. For sale or for blackmail, they’re almost all in on it.
Cromwell? As in Oliver? He was a failure. The Puritans ended up dispersing into continental Europe after he fell, and when ejected from there, ended up in the New World, where they died out due to their bloodlust.
“We need a third party”
“We”, as in the United States’ political system or conservatives?
Or we simply blow up the Republican and Democrat Parties and replace them with real parties.
The Republicans will get there a little more slowly. That’s the only real difference.
You haven’t even touched on the group of independents that will be with the Conservative party. And they are a very serious number.
We need a second party.
Sorry Mark, I stopped listening you when you backed your good friend Hatch in his last election. Told you so.
This is why I favor a secret ballot in Congress. The same reasons why open ballots are bad for unions and the general public are reasons why open ballots are bad for congress.
The problem I see with a secret ballot for Congresscritters is zero accountability. They will be able to lie and tell us they voted one way when they really voted another. At least now we know when they vote against us.
I agree on gerrymandering. Computers are used today to create partisan districts which divide communities. Move to system where the demographic center of each urban area is determined then draw a circle around it to represent the number of constituents represented by a Congress person. That becomes district #1. If the metro area has a population the size of 3 Congressional districts, draw a circle and divide it into thirds. Once the urban areas are covered, divide the rest of the state into districts moving east to west.
The advantage is that there will be no “black” districts or “white” districts. There will be no Democrat or Republican districts. Distinctive communities will not be divided. Congressmen will have to balance the needs of a variety of constituents instead of representing only narrow interests. This will push representation toward moderation instead of extremes.
Term limits are a double edged sword due to the size and permanence of the Congressional staffs. If terms are limited, Congressmen cannot develop expertise and become even more reliant on staffs. Capable representatives would be booted just about the point they are beginning to have a positive impact. I would suggest a six part alternative to term limits:
1) An age limit of 65 years. From what I see, as politicians see the end of their lives coming they have less at stake with respect to the country going to hell. Force them to retire, just as most large corporations force CEO’s to retire at 65. With a life expectancy of 15-20 years at retirement they may be more concerned about their votes impacting them for the rest of their lives.
2) End the practice of allowing Congresscritters to take the money remaining in their campaign kitty for personal use when they leave. Require excess campaign funds to be turned into the US Treasury. No more shaking down of lobbyists to fill a campaign kitty for a last campaign they will never run.
3) Term limits on Congressional staffs. No more than 6 years.
4) A permanent ban on lobbying the government after leaving office.
5) All bills must relate to one subject and be limited to no more than 10 double spaced typewritten 8 1/2 x 11” pages. This would effectively end the thousand page Christmas tree bills loaded with unrelated issues and pork for everyone. Force them to take up and down votes on single issues instead of telling constituents I wanted to vote against xyz but the bill contained abc which you want.
6) Build college style dormitories on Capitol Hill. Require all Congressmen and Senators to live in the dorms while Congress is in session. Prohibit all Congressmen from having other residences within 150 miles of the Capitol, except of course the representatives from the states adjacent to DC. If they can’t have a luxury home inside the beltway, and they have to live in dorms when Congress is in session, they’ll want to be in session less.
I do agree we need more representatives. Without an end to gerrymandering at the same time, I’m not sure that increasing the House from 435 to 1000 members would do much more than increase total federal spending.
What about prohibiting lawyers from serving in Congress?
The problem I see with a secret ballot for Congresscritters is zero accountability. They will be able to lie and tell us they voted one way when they really voted another. At least now we know when they vote against us.
You are not thinking this through. They currently have zero accountability to us and complete accountability to the parties, the donors and the special interests. There is currently no relationship between the will of the people and the votes of congress.
If you take away the ability of the criminals to know how the congressman votes, you are taking away any incentive for him to lie. He can tell his blackmailers and bribers that he has voted a certain way but he would be unable to prove it. This would be even more effective with more congressman.
The trick would be to devise a system that prevented anyone from ever knowing how a person voted. This should not be too difficult though. There are number of low-tech ways that have been proposed. You would need to make it a serious felony to attempt to discern how they voted or for a congressman to try to obtain proof of how he votes.
Ask yourself this....Would the vote for Speaker of the House would have gone down differently if it were held in secret? If you are interested in hearing a pretty good summary of the arguments on the secret ballot, HERE is a commentary laying out the logic behind it. (Warning - it is long) The guy mentions something that I didn't know before I watched it. Congress did have a secret ballot inside the committees until the 1970's. Only floor votes had a public record. Lots and lots of bill would go to committee and die because they couldn't get bribed through the committee process.
Time for a third party.
Or, in reality, a second party.
He set the pattern for direct elections and parliament answering to the people not the elites. Of course we could continue down the current road into serfdom. Neither party is going to change.
When was this?
Cromwell dissolved the Rump Parliament and replaced them with an oligarchic Bare-Bones Parliament. This in turn was dissolved and left Cromwell an autocrat advised only by the Council of State, a sort of predecessor to the Politburo in many ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.