Taking back control of Congress -Buffet style

@maxdancona,

And then there was Bush the younger. Kind of blows your opinion all to hell.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Actually, I believe the minimum qualifications are citizenship and age. Technically, you probably do qualify.

@roger,

Citizenship, age .... and a plurality of votes.

Getting a plurality of votes (or a majority of electoral votes) is a requirement for holding elected office. That getting elected part is a pretty high bar for the important offices. And people who get elected have the right to hold the office which is given to them by voters.

Democracy is about the voters power to choose their leaders.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Democracy is about the downfall of humanity, it is mob rule.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

I am almost afraid to ask... but what would you prefer?

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I disagree with that as well. In an important job there is an advantage to experience.

we'll have to disagree very much as I don't believe being a politician should be considered a job, let alone an important job

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

Right. The concept of public service has gone by the wayside. We no longer have representation "serving" our interests. They need our votes, but they represent the interests of those who finance their next campaign. Campaign finance reform is also high on my list of wants.

0 Replies

@JPB,

JPB wrote:

The following is making it's way around email and social media circles.

And some of it is actually true. Warren Buffett did say that he could solve the budget deficit in five minutes just by passing a law that would prohibit congressmen from being reelected if there was a deficit of more than 3% GDP. The rest is just an old crackpot e-mail that has been travelling around the interwebs for years and got attributed to Buffett -- probably to lend it some legitimacy.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

So,

whadyathink of the list?

1 Reply

I think one value of Term Limits is often overlooked. Term Limits would ensure that there would be at least one term in office in which a congressperson would not have to spend any of their time on getting re-elected.

At present it is estimated that congress as a whole spends over 70% of its time on activities directly related to getting re-elected. And that included constructing legislation which is designed to generate more money from lobbyists which can be used to re-election.

Details related to congressional activity and motivation are contained here:

Skip to about 7:30min in the film to hear about how congress uses tax code law to make money for itself.

0 Replies

@JPB,

Mostly solutions to non-problems. As I've said many times before, we already have term limits. They're called "elections." The problem we currently have is that we've gone from voters choosing politicians to politicians choosing voters. We need non-partisan redistricting, not term limits. Couple that with overturning Citizens United and we address many of the problems associated with an entrenched political class.

Things like limiting pay hikes for sitting congressmen, in contrast, are idiotic. For guys like Mitt Romney, government service is a significant step down the economic ladder. It is the rare individual who seeks political office because of the pay.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

all the more reason it should pay the median income of the country.

if it goes up, it's because we all went up...

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Public service should pay enough so that it attracts people who otherwise would be drawn into comparable private sector work without, at the same time, paying so much that people are only interested in public service for the paycheck. Right now, the average congressmen makes $174,000 a year, which strikes me as reasonable. The federal judiciary is facing something of a crisis because most lawyers who are qualified to serve on the bench are capable of making far more in private practice than they would as judges.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

I guess in principal, I don't disagree.

but it sure seems like we are getting very damn little for that kinda jack in congress.

the house is some horrible dark farce of a comedy performance...

0 Replies

I agree with term limits. Strom was from my state. His later years were a joke. His early years were not. The only repub I ever voted for was a strong proponent of term limits, until he was elected. Bob Inglis.

1 Reply

@IRFRANK,

. . . until he was elected.

Somewhere, maybe even here, I heard of a congressman saying those pacts more or less expired every time there was a new Congress. In other words, every two years.

0 Replies

I've been looking around for a current topic on filibusters, but since this thread concerns congress, would it derail the thread too much to leave this kind of funny little skit I run across on Daily Kos?

Quote:

From the GREAT STATE OF MAINE…

Filibuster: A Play in Two Acts

ACT I
(SENATE MINORITY LEADER walks into SENATE MAJORITY LEADER'S office)

"Good morning, Mr. Minority Leader! Thanks for coming. I'd like to debate the pros and cons of this Senate bill on the floor and then vote on it."
"NO!"
"Well, how about this other bill?"
"NO!"
"This one?"
"NO!"
"Then maybe we can discuss some judicial nominees on the floor?"
"NO!"
"How about just this one, then?"
"NO!"
"But can't we at least…"
"NO!"
"Not even…"
"NO!"
"But…"
"NO!"
"So what you're saying is…"
"NO!"
"But why?"
"NO!"

(MINORITY LEADER walks out, slams door)

[INTERMISSION]

ACT II
(SENATE MINORITY LEADER walks into SENATE MAJORITY LEADER'S office four years later)

"Say, I heard all y'alls plannin' to make some minor adjustments to the filibuster process so our side can't abuse it anymore."
"Yes."
"NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!"

[Curtain]

source

(all was unnecessary with the word "ya'll" but I understand it is a dig on people from KY)

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

There are times when running a deficit is a good thing for the country (for example in time of war ...

Could you point out when these times might have been, Max?

1 Reply

@JTT,

Let's start out with the period between 1939 and 1945.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Let's start out with the period between 1939 and 1945.

That's pretty good, Max, seven years. Any other times come to mind?

1 Reply

Taking back control of Congress -Buffet style

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know