It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Thoughts on Overhauling the American Government

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   
ive been thinking lately...what is the people of the united states actually had a say in how things were run for once. what would happen if we got rid of our so called "represenatives" and let the people make the decisions...true demoracy for once. think about it...we have the lazist people running our country...they dont even work for an entire year...they can vote to rasie their own salaries...they hardly represent their constituents)sp)....its all about the party. what if this were ended

heres the plan:

President gets elected and restructures congress so they work all year and have a set salary of 250,000 a year which cannot be changed. senators and represenatives will write up bills, and revisions will be voted upon by both houses of congress with signature by the president confirming that this is how the bill will be written.

now the bill is voted on by the people at polling places or through the telephone thus letting the people make the laws and run the country and giving people more incentive to get out in vote

senators and congressmen will still be elected the way they always have. supreme court justices will be apointed by the people.

the president will still be commander in chief and will have to of least enlisted in the armed forces serving at least one full term of enlistmen (each branch has different legnths of time) and have a spotless service record.



my other plan is an armed uprising against the rich people but this way is much more cleaner

feel free to add your own ideas and let me know what you think




posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

my other plan is an armed uprising against the rich people but this way is much more cleaner

feel free to add your own ideas and let me know what you think



But what about people who are not rich now, but plan to be later?

The best way to overhaul government is to get people more involved.

Notice I did not say more people involved.

There should be some sort of test that you have to pass to vote.

One of the main questions should be...Name both of your Senators and name your State Representative.

You should also be a High School Graduate, GED's would also be accepted.



posted on Oct, 9 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
now the bill is voted on by the people at polling places or through the telephone thus letting the people make the laws and run the country and giving people more incentive to get out in vote

You and Thomas Paine ["Common Sense"] would have got along swell.
You and John Adams ["Thoughts on Government"] would have had conflicting issues.

What you are suggesting would be close to what Thomas Paine thought concerning government.

John Admas, on the other hand, would have felt the purpose of elected officials, such as Senators, Congressman, House Representatives, etc., is that they represent the will of the people. Allowing the people to vote on every bill and piece of legislation proposed by the House, Senate, or Congress would defeat the purpose of electing such representatives. It is through their elected representatives, that the people speak. Either choose one or the other, but to have both making laws, etc. is redundant and a waste of money, IMHO.




my other plan is an armed uprising against the rich people but this way is much more cleaner

Class difference and conflict has been with man for ages. You starting to sound like Karl Marx.

The inherent problem with getting rid of rich people is twofold: there will be a tragic side-effect of trickle-down economics, and they will be ultimately replaced by another class who will become rich....unless of course, you believe in Marx's utopian-like socialism, which will never take place, other than in Hollywood and Star Trek.







seekerof

[edit on 10-10-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 09:42 AM
link   
And just remember Animal Farm:

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.


As my husband likes to say, the oppressed often become the oppressors.



posted on Oct, 10 2005 @ 05:00 PM
link   
I don’t have as much time to put into this post as I would like, so I’ll keep it short and update it once I have a chance.

Like it or not, there will always be a ‘class system’ in society and I am a socialist through and through, yet I am able to admit that. The problem is not that people can earn more money but is the fact people become ascribed as better. Status needs to be achieved.

I suggest you have a look at this article; en.wikipedia.org...

A lot of the things you already speak of do in fact exist, however a large problem is the fact people do not bother to ‘learn’ what they are able to do.

As for a violent revolution? Welcome to the club my fellow terrorist. It won’t happen, it at best would result in a ‘Civil War’, which isn’t good for society as a whole. The best way to change things is through a ‘top down’ revolution.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 03:54 PM
link   
1. Eliminate the Electoral Vote.
2. Mandatory two-term limits in Congress.
3. Bring back the paper trail to the voting process.
4. Eliminate the legalized bribery of lobbying (who represent the views of special interest groups, NOT the people)
5. Seriously regulate campaign contributions and the campaign process
6. Hold elections at all levels (city, state, national) in the same timeframe.

Just a few for starters.....



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 04:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
6. Hold elections at all levels (city, state, national) in the same timeframe.


Actually, I'd disagree with having them all happen on one year that way you are stuck with them for longer.

It's better to have them spaced out, so after two years of ruining things it is possible to 'slow' the 'damage' they do down by voting in a senete [for example] who disagree with them.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 04:41 PM
link   
Too much money is spent on campaigning. Switch over to monarchy or a dictatorship so that this money can be spent elsewhere.



posted on Oct, 11 2005 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
1. Eliminate the Electoral Vote.
2. Mandatory two-term limits in Congress.
3. Bring back the paper trail to the voting process.
4. Eliminate the legalized bribery of lobbying (who represent the views of special interest groups, NOT the people)
5. Seriously regulate campaign contributions and the campaign process
6. Hold elections at all levels (city, state, national) in the same timeframe.

Just a few for starters.....



1. Great, that way politicians just have to campaign in a few major cities. Forget the suburbs and rural areas.

2. This would be terrible. A "lame duck" congressman not accountable to his constituents. This is law in Louisiana and it shows.

3. No problem here. Still won't eliminate Democrat boo-hooing after elections though.

4 and 5. This has serious freedom of speech issues here. Alot of people don't feel that as an individual they have a voice. But if they band together on certain issues they can be heard.

6. I agree with Odium. Spaced out elections are much better.





[edit on 11-10-2005 by Carseller4]



posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4

Originally posted by Gazrok
1. Eliminate the Electoral Vote.
2. Mandatory two-term limits in Congress.
3. Bring back the paper trail to the voting process.
4. Eliminate the legalized bribery of lobbying (who represent the views of special interest groups, NOT the people)
5. Seriously regulate campaign contributions and the campaign process
6. Hold elections at all levels (city, state, national) in the same timeframe.

Just a few for starters.....



1. Great, that way politicians just have to campaign in a few major cities. Forget the suburbs and rural areas.

2. This would be terrible. A "lame duck" congressman not accountable to his constituents. This is law in Louisiana and it shows.

3. No problem here. Still won't eliminate Democrat boo-hooing after elections though.

4 and 5. This has serious freedom of speech issues here. Alot of people don't feel that as an individual they have a voice. But if they band together on certain issues they can be heard.

6. I agree with Odium. Spaced out elections are much better.

[edit on 11-10-2005 by Carseller4]


1. Both of you make good points on this issue, the electoral system we now have is fundamentally flawed. We need to return to the days of proportional representation, where electoral votes are divided according to the states popular vote. The way the EC is currently weighted there would still be more value to the rural areas. But this makes the EC more representational of the populous.

2. Agree w/Carseller. This would only lead to there being a less qualified person being in office because a more qualified person couldnt work anymore.

3. Agreed

4. disagree. Lobbyist groups are a necessary evil in America's political system. They're the best way for the american people to be heard.

5. Agreed. No campaign funds can come from a publicly traded company. No one can contribute over $10,000 (2004 value). The gov. will place a spending cap on the presidential election of $80 million (2004 value) and give $25 million to all parties that are on ballots in at least 80% of the states

6. Spaced out elections are better.


I would also;

Hold a national vote of confidence on all of the Supreme Court justices who've served at least 4 years every 8 years.

Grant states the right of Nullification.

Hold a national referendum on all amendments to the Constitution.

Move election times to the 2nd weekend (Sat & Sun) of May and November.

Allow for citizens to chose how their tax dollars are spent on the federal tax forms.



posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Class difference and conflict has been with man for ages. You starting to sound like Karl Marx.




i dont want the communist/socialist thing. i want to see the people have control of the country. just cause the people who run things are called "representatives"(sp) doesnt mean that thats what they actually do.



mod edit to fix quote

[edit on 12-10-2005 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   
I would not eliminate the Electorial College.. it is part of the origional consitutional system.

I would support two term limit to senate/house membership. I was very dismayed when Washington State passed the referendum mandating this.. The Senator Sued.. and won..

I would not be sure of what you mean by paper trail in voting elections.

Eliminate the legalized bribery of lobbying? Ok.. I am a member of the American Legion, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States and the Air Force Sergeants Association.. you mean to tell me that I am not part of the people and therefore would loose the influence afforded by all the other special interest groups? They are now limited on how much money they can donate now.. so your going to eliminate that. Hmmm.. bears thought.. not that I agree with you as such.

Campaign contributions in the politcal process are already regulated.. just how much are you going to keep people from donating their hard earned money if they choose to do that for the canidate of their choice?

Holding Elections at the same time.. I do not see that as feasible considering that you have primaries and then general elections for national office.

The one thing I do not understand is the Rich people concept.. What happens if you find a way to become rich.. do you want the lower class folks to place restrictions on your liberty because of your new found income status?.. Just trying to turn around the tables a bit to give other insight into the concept.

[edit on 12-10-2005 by kitanis]



posted on Oct, 12 2005 @ 03:37 PM
link   
Keep the system, fire everyone in it, start fresh.



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 03:40 PM
link   
the only thing i would change drastically, is the EC. there is no need for it anymore. everyone has access to a computer...a true "by the people" vote can be a reality....the trick is finding an unbiased commission to oversee such a system to keep it on the up and up.

just MHO.



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by kitanis
The one thing I do not understand is the Rich people concept.. What happens if you find a way to become rich.. do you want the lower class folks to place restrictions on your liberty because of your new found income status?.. Just trying to turn around the tables a bit to give other insight into the concept.

[edit on 12-10-2005 by kitanis]


There is a point when being rich/having so much money, means the majority of people have little influence in society compaired to the massive influence you have.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join