A powerful Democratic group throws its weight behind election reform

[AuburnNTexas 7,179]

I think we should take advantage of the fact that we are no longer in a horse and buggy environment. With modern communication, biometric type security there is no longer a need for Senator's and member of Congress to meet in DC. They should have office in their home states and home districts. Just by keeping them out of DC you already have an improvement. It makes it that much harder for Lobbyist's to access people spread out throughout the country.  It brings our representatives back home where we can see them and talk to them.  It cuts down on the cost of having two offices one in DC and one back home. With proper bandwidth and right security tools  almost all work can be done from home. There might be a few times that need to come to DC  but that can be arranged.

All PAC's must keep a list of all Donors with anything over a specific amount publicized so we know who is buying the election. It is illegal for Foreign entities to donate to political parties or candidates but since PAC's don't reveal who donates there is no way to stop international plays from influencing through use of money. 

During any election cycle where there are declared candidates if a news organization on the right or left invites a current office holder to speak on a subject then anybody running against them should be on the same show to either agree with them or disagree. Without that they are getting free TV time.   No building, park shall be named after any sitting member as that is a freebie for a sitting member. After member has left office things can have their names on it.

Some people are talking about changing the constitution. Whether the ideas is good or bad trying to change the US Constitution is almost impossible so I think we need to find other ways to make changes. 

[SLAG-91 1,483]

That's a whole bunch of "makes too much sense for it to actually happen", amigo. Been a longtime advocate of Reps/Senators actually living and working in the place that elected them, and spending as little time as possible in D.C. 

Place is, to quote Obi-Wan, a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

[DKW 86 7,451]

On 2/7/2023 at 11:55 AM, icanthearyou said:

The neo liberals who started the,,, "government is the problem" mantra,,, highly appreciate you.

Do you think that blind allegiance to a govt doing very poorly is going to advance anything?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

3 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Do you think that blind allegiance to a govt doing very poorly is going to advance anything?

I think your anger is misdirected.  You are playing into the hands of the fascists.  They also want to destroy our government, certainly anything democratic.

I think we should restore integrity, restore the "government of the people".

[homersapien 11,461]

1 hour ago, icanthearyou said:

I think your anger is misdirected.  You are playing into the hands of the fascists.  They also want to destroy our government, certainly anything democratic.

I think we should restore integrity, restore the "government of the people".

First step:  Constitutional amendment giving congress legislative power to regulate campaign spending.  Until you control the influence of money, nothing good will happen. 

Other democracies do this, why can't we?

(The above requirement thanks to our SCOTUS, who have clearly shown such an amendment is necessary.)

 

 

[DKW 86 7,451]

7 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

I think your anger is misdirected.  You are playing into the hands of the fascists.  They also want to destroy our government, certainly anything democratic.

I think we should restore integrity, restore the "government of the people".

And you are going to accomplish that how exactly? Sitting in a circle singing kumbaya? 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

51 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And you are going to accomplish that how exactly? Sitting in a circle singing kumbaya? 

The American people have to demand integrity.  Get money out of politics.  Restore relative equality.  Amend the tax code to be simple, fair, progressive.

[homersapien 11,461]

On 2/9/2023 at 8:02 AM, DKW 86 said:

Do you think that blind allegiance to a govt doing very poorly is going to advance anything?

Where are you seeing "blind allegiance to govt"?   Who has suggested it? 

 

[homersapien 11,461]

18 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

And you are going to accomplish that how exactly? Sitting in a circle singing kumbaya? 

I doubt cynicism is going to accomplish anything either.

[DKW 86 7,451]

On 2/9/2023 at 7:14 PM, icanthearyou said:

The American people have to demand integrity.  Get money out of politics.  Restore relative equality.  Amend the tax code to be simple, fair, progressive.

That is "What we need to do. Not How do we get that done."

[DKW 86 7,451]

On 2/10/2023 at 1:09 PM, homersapien said:

Where are you seeing "blind allegiance to govt"?   Who has suggested it? 

We are clearly seeing "Do Nothingism."

[homersapien 11,461]

3 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

We are clearly seeing "Do Nothingism."

Who has suggested that?

[DKW 86 7,451]

10 hours ago, homersapien said:

Who has suggested that?

Anyone that is okay with the way things are. I am not a radical, but I am a realist. Nothing is going to change in this country without a radical change. But we have many that are totally good with those in charge now staying in charge. That is Do-Nothingism. People dont change ever. Maybe 5% will change. To change a nation's path, you have to be ready to leave the comfort of the pasts gross failures and try something new. Ýou have to VOTE or THROW the bums out. The first thing we would all have to do, IMHO, is throw out the two totally corrupt parties. 

Nothing will happen that doesnt start there.

[aubobo 7]

On 2/3/2023 at 8:05 PM, AU9377 said:

How does expanding the House reduce the power of the Senate?

I didn't say it would reduce the power of the Senate.  I said that having more Reps would cause "the influence of the 2 Senator vote becomes greatly diminished". If for instance there were 1000 reps with 100 senators, then each Senate vote would have half the influence of the current ~500 reps + 100 Senators. 

[AU9377 5,051]

1 hour ago, aubobo said:

I didn't say it would reduce the power of the Senate.  I said that having more Reps would cause "the influence of the 2 Senator vote becomes greatly diminished". If for instance there were 1000 reps with 100 senators, then each Senate vote would have half the influence of the current ~500 reps + 100 Senators. 

I still don't quite follow, but ok.

[aubobo 7]

On 2/14/2023 at 3:39 PM, AU9377 said:

I still don't quite follow, but ok.

The Electoral College consists of one vote for each Representative + one vote for each Senator.  So 435 Reps +100 Senators + 3 electors from DC = 538 votes. Each Senator vote = 1/5.38 of the total vote.  If the number of reps were expanded to around 5,700 (to get the Rep/citizen ratio closer to the original) then the new EC math would be 5700  Reps + 100 Sen + 39 DC = 5839 vote.  Each senator vote = 1/58.39 of the total elector vote.  In this manner the "Will of the people" would regain the same weight as at the countries outset, while the "Will of the States" would still exist, but in a more diminished capacity.

In this way, we could get closer to the results of the "popular vote" without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[DKW 86 7,451]

On 2/5/2023 at 10:25 AM, icanthearyou said:

A failure of government or, a corruption of government?

Really, what is the nickel worth of difference. The govt employees should be blowing the whistle on corruption. It is their job. It is their duty.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

6 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Really, what is the nickel worth of difference. The govt employees should be blowing the whistle on corruption. It is their job. It is their duty.

Unfortunately, most of the corruption has been made "legal".