It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

How to fix the "madness".

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:24 PM
Let me say from the start that I am nothing more than an average person, with an average education that is perhaps better read than most, but nothing more.

Putting aside the political differences, the conspiracy theories, the vested interests. Leaving the accusations for another thread, is there a fix to this mess, assuming it is fixable and that there is sufficient time to do so?

Let's also assume that it's systemic. That it undercuts political ideology, number of "parties" or whether or not parties should even exist.

Perhaps if one takes the view of what would the founding fathers would do if they somehow were consulted for their opinions??

I also assume that this must come from the people, grassroots via a party that openly uses them as a platform as part of their "promises", if elected.

As these are initial thoughts, feel free to debunk, modify or add to them. I'm sure I'm naïve/idealistic to need correction.

I would support a Party/Presidential candidate who would:

1. Ban/heavily restrict Presidential pardons.

There's not much point in reinstating the Constitutions when the good old boys have automatic "get out of jail" cards passed around to each other, their successors and anyone that comes to mind. fear of consequence is the fundamental of our system and without it NOTHING is safe from perversion.

2. Ban Party Whips.

This restricts the party elite from enforcing not mandated/hidden agenda/policies and allows member to vote based on belief and conscious. New ideas are necessary in a changing environment and almost always meet with resistance initially.

3. Bans withholding of campaign financing to any member of their party and gvies them their monies/support, based on a pre-calculated ratio no matter there political views/support.

This one is obvious. Just another elite tool to enforce conformity.

4. All political donations from any source corporate or private fully publicized with oversite, down to the penny.

Personally, I feel restricting monies is unconstitutional AND is selective leaving the remaining conduits (media etc.) even more powerful/dominant than before...the lesser of two evils is full disclosure.

5. Violation of mandate penalty...( how? I don't have the foggiest) a recall option for senators/congressmen with the last opponent for the post awarded to the "runner-up"?

6. A campaign promise to prosecute any in either party or gov't employee/elected official who violated law.

The mere threat of this would make future "violators" break into a cold sweat at the thought of being caught. Actual prosecution would straighten out most elected officials/appointees post haste.

It's almost a given that our elected officials stray from or outright ignore the campaign promises that elected them. The last President based his campaign on "change". A little vague, LOL. Those "changes" aren't in the least bit funny now.

I'm sure none of these are complete fixes and there's more that others can suggest, but these would sure make the good old boys more accountable and a lot tougher to mess with the system.

Okay, tell me I'm wrong...LOL.
edit on 6-5-2014 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:41 PM
Sure I'm with you on those.

But the problem is much easier to fix. We could simply... follow the Constitution.

And in so doing we'd trash the Federal Reserve, dismantle the bloated federal government, get on the path towards abolishing the IRS, close down the NSA, and return power to the states and the people.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 02:06 PM
a reply to: JonButtonIII

On the surface of it, I'd agree with you. However, if you don't make violating that Constitution tougher, what's the result?

More of the endless loop.

How it's violated is already a common practice, refined over time to a point of "what Constitution?"

I'm betting the founding fathers would amend it big time.....

Not being anywhere near as smart as them, I'm tip-toing with consequences and restraints.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:09 PM
a reply to: nwtrucker
maybe during the Article 5 by states add things similar to these ideas.

2 four year terms for house and senate. basically, the only long term employees of the government are agency bureaucrats.

at end of term can't leave house or senate with more money than you had when you were elected. excess turned over to treasury.

the peoples general welfare comes before corporate welfare.

business has to put the public and employees before profits and share holder returns.

no business or city is to big to fail.

public sector employees can not be unionized.

abolish federal reserve.

nationalize the internet. provide low cost high speed unrestricted unencumbered anonymous connections to every home.

nationalize wireless phone network. any phone will work to make calls pretty much anywhere.

only agencies with police powers are FBI, ATF and SS. no other agencies will have their own police force nor will they hire a contractor that is more than a plain old security guard. they can dial 911 like the rest of us.

will not sell, give away or in any way turn over military equipment to law enforcement agencies and recover and/or destroy any previous items.

anyone in any agency circumventing data retention requirements, like private email accounts, will be sentenced to prison for a minimum of 25 years.

the fifth amendment is not available when questioned by a committee of congress.

photography, videography and voice recording in any public setting is allowed. it is not against the law to capture law enforcement in action.

copyright is life plus 25 years of the original work. a derivative of a previous work does not reset the clock.

patents have to be non obvious and actually create, improve or advance something. not like rounded corners, slide to turn on.

there are not such things as software patents.

copyright and patent infringement are civil court matters unless done by a corporation of more than 50 employees.

if you don't provide copyrighted works to the public in the manner reasonably demanded by the public, you lose copyright. dinosaur business models must die. all markets are global.

an address such as ip is not a person as far as civil and criminal proceeding are concerned.

law enforcement will not be used to enforce copyright and patent infringement unless done by a corporation of more than 50 employees.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:37 PM
a reply to: Bramble Iceshimmer

Most are cool. I'd have a problem with "nationalizing" anything. A sure bet your phone and internet, already a joke, would be "fouled up beyond recognition" if a Gov't ran it.

Likewise, corporate welfare vs general welfare is way too loose a statement and general welfare before profits would kill business left and right. I.E. what's the point of having a business if there's no profit?

Other than that, I'd be on board.

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 05:26 PM
Wow! My wife and I were talking about this same topic over coffee this morning. Our biggest conundrum is HOW do you find someone to come in and take charge of the mess, while keeping politics out of the solution. I can probably find 100 people that will PROMISE to do good for the people, but what happens when they hit that brick wall we refer to as Congress?

I so want to see a change for the better in our country, but can we find the right people to lead us to this 'Promised Land'? I feel very strongly America would be better off without the FED and IRS, as well as some of the other agencies that regulate businesses and citizens to death. I'm stumped. I want to see change for the better, and I don't know what to do to help along this path.

new topics

top topics

log in