Relatively simple solutions to fixing America

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Whether you are conservative, liberal, or somewhere in between you probably agree that the American political process is broken because special interest groups have bought the politicians. Two relatively simple solutions to this problem are (1) expanding the legal definition of bribery to include the current practice of special interest groups making campaign contribution in exchange for favorable legislation and (2) putting conflict of interest rules in place barring politicians from acting when a policy conflicts with or favors the interests a politician takes money from.

For example, if a Senator takes money from the oil industry, the Senator would be barred from voting on any legislation that involves oil industry interests. If lobbyist offers to donate money to a Senator with the understanding the Senator will vote a certain way, the lobbyist will be guilty of bribery.

Stiff penalties that include hefty fines and prison time should be in place to act as a deterrent. There are obviously a lot of fine details to work out, but if new rules were in place with these guiding principals, the American system would be dramatically improved. Legislators would act in the public interest, not the special interest. Legislators could focus on legislating, not fund raising.




posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 07:31 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Those are really interesting suggestions, but I beg to differ that you can solve a complex problem with a simple solution.

I on the other hand have offered a complex solution to the complex problem. Because right now its not just the politicians thats the problem.

That solution is called a Resource Based Economy and I have written about it in a post I linked in my signature.




"Politicians were good 100 years ago. Today politicians have no ability to solve problems, because they are not students of behavior, agriculture, oceanography. So, they say things that people want to hear, that’s what gets them elected.

Now scientists on the other hand are not concerned with public approval. What they do, even if everyone on earth believed the earth was flat, they would say you’re wrong. This is the evidence to support the fact the earth is round.

What they don't say is the earth is a little flat and a little round. That’s politicians!"

- Jacques Fresco Founder of The Venus Project




[edit on 6/11/2010 by chrisrand]



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   
reply to post by chrisrand
 


The solution is relatively simple. We could think of a long laundry list of patches to put in place to fix the American system, or we can start of with these two solutions.

If these solutions are in place, politicians will not be legislating with one eye fixed on the campaign war chest. Politicians may actually spend their time talking to experts like engineers and economists, rather than hitting up donors for donations.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 08:03 PM
link   
Solutions are not answers, and problems require answers. The answer is to do away with all entitlements. Whether it be welfare programs for either the poor or rich, or legislative acts that empower one industry over others, or subsidies, it all has to go. It is not the responsibility of government to ensure that people succeed in life. The only responsibility government has is to protect the rights of individuals, and succeeding in life is not a right, unless that right is in the pursuit of success, and the myriad acts, bills, codes and regulations currently in place do more detriment to the majority of peoples pursuit of success than they do good. Further, you speak of Congress as their only responsibility is to legislate, ignoring that repealing legislation is also within the bound of their jurisdiction. If Congress is ever to get back to acting in the public interest, repealing much of the legislation they have shoved down the peoples throat would be a good place to begin.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 08:07 PM
link   
I personally like the solutions. I think something has to be done about the legalized corruption in our government.



Legalized corruption is widespread and that's the job of 35,000 Washington, D.C., lobbyists earning millions upon millions of dollars. They represent America's big and small corporations, big and small labor unions and even foreign corporations and unions. They are not spending billions of dollars in political contributions to encourage and assist the White House and Congress to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution. They spend that money in the expectations of favors that will be bestowed upon them at the expense of some other American or group of Americans.

www.washingtontimes.com...


If lobbyist offers to donate money to a Senator with the understanding the Senator will vote a certain way, the lobbyist will be guilty of bribery.


Wouldn't this be difficult to prove?



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


I do not necessarily agree that entitlements are bad per se, but even if they were, there is more that needs to be fixed than entitlements.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


We would require politicians to create a paper trail of all the funds they receive, as is the case today. If a politician and/or lobbyist is suspected of bribery, wires can be tapped and such.

If there is anything suspicious going on, the US attorneys can prosecute politicians. Even if the prosecution does not have enough evidence to convict, it will have enough evidence to convict in the court of public opinion. It does not bode well for a politician to be involved in a bribery trial.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


Doing away with entitlements will eliminate a large portion of legislation on the books. Of course, this is not what you are advocating and instead seem to be advocating even more legislation. Entitlements aren't bad per say, if you...oh say, are all for plunder.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Entitlements are not always bad. Yes there are abuses, but in principal it seems reasonable that the government can act as a safety net in limited circumstances.

There are plenty of bad laws and regulations on the books that have nothing to do with entitlements. There are laws and regulations that effectively protect some industries at the expense of others. There are numerous tax credits and deductions that are clearly the product of lobbyists. Don't get me started on military spending.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


Nope, sorry my friend I am going to get you started on the military, as that expense seems to be nothing more than empire building at the expense of the American people for the purposes of an elite few.

As to entitlements, I respectfully disagree and do not see government as a safety net for economic disasters. I firmly believe the economy would be much better off without the governments intrusions.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   
The first thing we should do is give billionaires more tax cuts so they can create jobs in China.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Or, we could do away with income taxation all together so that every person could keep all of their income for their own purposes, but then what would happen to everyone's precious entitlements? Not to mention the O.P. would either have to start practicing a different field of law or change careers all together.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Wow, we kind of agree on something tonight. The military is largely a waste of money...and why does Congress spend so much money on the military?

Because lobbyists from the Defense Contractor industry pay them to vote for all sorts of useless junk. If Congress were not getting bribes and kickbacks from the defense industry, would they waste all the money they waste on military spending?



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Wow, we kind of agree on something tonight. The military is largely a waste of money...and why does Congress spend so much money on the military?

Because lobbyists from the Defense Contractor industry pay them to vote for all sorts of useless junk. If Congress were not getting bribes and kickbacks from the defense industry, would they waste all the money they waste on military spending?


If Congress wasn't collecting the income taxes they collect could they afford the military industrial complex they have shoved down the worlds throat since World War II?



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Even if you paired the government down to its bare bones, the government would need some money to run. It would need to build and maintain roads, have a military, and perform other functions. Even though I might be put out of a job, some tax system would need to be in place.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint
 


I agree, and you would never even get to the phase of ending government subsides or other protections for business unless and until we fixed the electoral system.

Its not all the fault of entitlements. Its that we have bought and paid for politicians, and no free media that will allow anyone not bought and paid for enough air time to get their message out broadly.

I like the suggestions, mine has been to outlaw ALL campaign contributions, and to force ALL candidates to use a public access channel only for their advertisements, and time on that channel should be parceled out equally among contenders. IMHO money should have no part in who we elect. Somehow it has to be totally eliminated, or we will always end up in the same position.

If it CAN be bought, it WILL be bought.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


Even if you paired the government down to its bare bones, the government would need some money to run. It would need to build and maintain roads, have a military, and perform other functions. Even though I might be put out of a job, some tax system would need to be in place.


Gee, how did the federal government ever manage to run prior to 1913 when the current income tax scheme was passed? Frankly, the Constitution does not mandate a standing military in perpetuity anymore than it mandates income taxation in perpetuity. Eliminate income taxation and taxes will be in place, but they will be defeatable taxes, assuming they remain indirect taxes, and people can either choose to engage in the taxed activity and pay the tax, or to not engage in the taxed activity and defeat the tax, not to mention that they won't have to file a return each year.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


This sounds like a good idea, but there is one problem. The Supreme Court says the First Amendment protects one's right to spend money on campaign advertising. If some billionaire (like Carly Fiorina or Meg Whitman) wanted to spend millions of their own money on advertising, the Supreme Court says the First Amendment protects this. Your proposal seems to fly against Supreme Court precedent.



posted on Jun, 11 2010 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 





Or, we could do away with income taxation all together so that every person could keep all of their income for their own purposes, but then what would happen to everyone's precious entitlements?


What precious entitlements are you talking about? I'd actually be for reforming our income tax system.....but not before raising tariffs....otherwise it is pointless.

You cannot lower taxes enough to fix our problems and save the middle class...which is the real engine behind this economy. We could drop taxes back to zero and we still could never compete with slave labor.

There was a time when most of our taxes were collected from tariffs...but that has been completely blown up because apparently to many here that is protectionist...even though it was American policy for over 200 years.

Protectionist is just a word used by Globalist...whether it be by Transnational corporations or ones who want a unified world government.





new topics
 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join