Ten Ideas to Make Politics Less Rotten

[david890]

Sadly, with the two year election cycle, some representatives spend almost none

Triple the number of reps in each district; a given seat comes up every 6 years.

 

[Bartman]

Include sexual misconduct and you'd get the rest of the Republicans...

/"Family values" my a$$....

Tell it to your Weiner.

 

[david890]

Tell it to your Weiner.

[Look at my lap...."Family values my a$$!!....look up] Okay! Done!!

He and Hastert can argue the issue. Ya know, Hastert, the known pedophile.

 

[HoughMade]

Country before party?

/The horror....the horror....

I shouldn't have to explain this, but don't you think that these people have different ideas about what is best for the country? If you think the other side's ideas are bad for the country, going along to get along isn't putting country before party, it's compromising to the detriment of the country.

I'm headed back to the grown ups table now.

 

[Twangbanger]

I just want people to have to write a check for their taxes. Payroll deduction is the tool of the Devil.

 

[jamil]

1. Scrap the electoral college. End current voting system, replace with ROV for national elections.
2. Replace tax system with semi-voluntary system. Everyone pays flat rate for core constitutional government functions. No deductions. Non-core expenses are funded through voluntary tax. You want public healthcare, YOU pay for it.
3. Constitutional convention to fix some broken stuff. Clarify the legitimate purpose of government. Change the role of SCOTUS to reduce its power.
4. I'm not all that in favor of term limits, but make it easier to remove leaders from office.
5. Nerf Presidential executive authority to use regulation as a substitute for law.

There are probably more, but those are some off the top.

 

[jamil]

I just want people to have to write a check for their taxes. Payroll deduction is the tool of the Devil.

Word/

 

[HoughMade]

I just want people to have to write a check for their taxes. Payroll deduction is the tool of the Devil.

Yeah...this was a fun week.

 

[Leadeye]

Why is it that with you Colt guys it always comes down to a rope and a noose????

It's just how we roll.

 

[Hohn]

[video=youtube_share;uaTRrKOVYng]http://youtu.be/uaTRrKOVYng[/video]

 

[jamil]

[video=youtube_share;uaTRrKOVYng]http://youtu.be/uaTRrKOVYng[/video]

Damn. I want that entire video as my sigline.

 

[Twangbanger]

Damn. I want that entire video as my sigline.

(That video is one entertaining explanation for the proliferation of vacuities like "Voxsplaining" and "Ted Talks").

I want to encourage people reading this thread, to go back and read the OP Link, if you haven't already. It's got everything from Howard Dean advocating Ranked Choice Voting, to Currency-Voucher Voting, to Quadratic Voting...to Karl fricking Rove, advocating that the current Two-Party System and Electoral College system are ideal and shouldn't be changed. It's really rich.

 

[jamil]

(That video is one entertaining explanation for the proliferation of vacuities like "Voxsplaining" and "Ted Talks").

I want to encourage people reading this thread, to go back and read the OP Link, if you haven't already. It's got everything from Howard Dean advocating Ranked Choice Voting, to Currency-Voucher Voting, to Quadratic Voting...to Karl fricking Rove, advocating that the current Two-Party System and Electoral College system are ideal and shouldn't be changed. It's really rich.

I admit to only browsing the article initially, but on your advice I just read it.

People complain that so few so few people vote, but not everyone who doesn't bother is just disinterested. I think if I loved in, say, Los Angeles, I may never bother to vote because it's futile. At the national level, my vote would never count because 100% of the electoral power always goes to progressive/liberal candidates. At the state and local levels conservative candidates don't have a chance. The same is true for states that have a lock favoring conservatives.

Given my past rants favoring Ranked Order Voting, obviously I find at least one thing I agree with Dean. That would be one huge improvement over the current system. Our current system most favors cronies, of either stripe, the primary difference being the industry that benifits. RoV would tend to at least weaken that hold because strategic voting no would no longer appeal (lesser evil, for example). It would eliminate the perception that there should be only two primary parties.

The primary season is also a problem perpetuated by the two-party system. Political parties should be more like private political advocacy associations, but instead the two main parties enjoy a level of government support that they shouldn't have. Primary elections, if we have to have them at all, shouldn't be at the public's expense.

 

[JS1911]

Dang, we'd lose all the democrats and most of the republicans...

Where's the downside?

 

[HoughMade]

[video=youtube_share;uaTRrKOVYng]http://youtu.be/uaTRrKOVYng[/video]

Truth. Occasionally you find it on YouTube.

 

[myhightechsec]

Why would we assume that legislators who have diametrically opposed philosophies should work to gether to just get something done?

SOMETHING needs to be done.

This is "something"

We NEED to do this.

 

[myhightechsec]

Two senators per state is not enough--there should be one from every county. 100 or so senators is not enough representation for 300 million people

You are confusing the function of the Senate, which is to represent the state, with the House, which is to represent the people

 

[jamil]

You are confusing the function of the Senate, which is to represent the state, with the House, which is to represent the people

It's been awhile since that was true. The purpose of the Senate is to keep partisan's senators in power while working to oust opposition party's senators. The purpose of the House is similar.

 

[Twangbanger]

I admit to only browsing the article initially, but on your advice I just read it.

People complain that so few so few people vote, but not everyone who doesn't bother is just disinterested. I think if I loved in, say, Los Angeles, I may never bother to vote because it's futile. At the national level, my vote would never count because 100% of the electoral power always goes to progressive/liberal candidates. At the state and local levels conservative candidates don't have a chance. The same is true for states that have a lock favoring conservatives.

Given my past rants favoring Ranked Order Voting, obviously I find at least one thing I agree with Dean. That would be one huge improvement over the current system. Our current system most favors cronies, of either stripe, the primary difference being the industry that benifits. RoV would tend to at least weaken that hold because strategic voting no would no longer appeal (lesser evil, for example). It would eliminate the perception that there should be only two primary parties.

The primary season is also a problem perpetuated by the two-party system. Political parties should be more like private political advocacy associations, but instead the two main parties enjoy a level of government support that they shouldn't have. Primary elections, if we have to have them at all, shouldn't be at the public's expense.

So what did you make of Rove's dissertation about how anything that threatens two-party rule is bad, because it will lead to Executives which have no "50% mandate to govern," and we'd be full of crackpot parties &candidates like Europe, etc., etc.

The first thing I thought of was, well, didn't the agitation of one such crackpot party allow Britain to get out of the EU?

(...and my second thought was...if we were in something like the EU...would Karl Rove _really_ favor letting us peasants & our pitchforks out of it?)

I think I answered my own question. Mr. Rove, meet Mr. Trump.

 

[HoughMade]

It's been awhile since that was true. The purpose of the Senate is to keep partisan's senators in power while working to oust opposition party's senators. The purpose of the House is similar.

Like I said before, let's get the Senate back to the way it was designed. It's not a fortress against corruption, far from, but it's a return of power to the states and decentralized power is a good thing.