“This isn’t what we had in mind.”
A conspiracy theorist might suggest that the debt ceiling crisis was created simply to implement this dictatorship-smelling thing. One can only wonder at how big-business/special-interests will salivate over such a system given how easy it is to influence politicians now with bribes… er, um… campaign contributions.
Debt ceiling negotiators think they’ve hit on a solution to address the debt ceiling impasse and the public’s unwillingness to let go of benefits such as Medicare and Social Security that have been earned over a lifetime of work: Create a new Congress.
This “Super Congress,” composed of members of both chambers and both parties, isn’t mentioned anywhere in the Constitution, but would be granted extraordinary new powers. Under a plan put forth by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and his counterpart Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), legislation to lift the debt ceiling would be accompanied by the creation of a 12-member panel made up of 12 lawmakers — six from each chamber and six from each party.
Legislation approved by the Super Congress — which some on Capitol Hill are calling the “super committee” — would then be fast-tracked through both chambers, where it couldn’t be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who’d have the ability only to cast an up or down vote. With the weight of both leaderships behind it, a product originated by the Super Congress would have a strong chance of moving through the little Congress and quickly becoming law. A Super Congress would be less accountable than the system that exists today, and would find it easier to strip the public of popular benefits. Negotiators are currently considering cutting the mortgage deduction and tax credits for retirement savings, for instance, extremely popular policies that would be difficult to slice up using the traditional legislative process.
If we want a representative government, we’ll have to create it.
The first thing we do is change from an elected to a selected form of government.
Pick names out an eligible citizen pool and they’re stuck with doing the job for one, and only one, four year term.
There is no such thing as a career in politics. (The only thing worse than getting stuck with some idiot who didn’t want the job is getting stuck with some idiot who did.)
Eligibility requirements are:
• were you born here or are you a naturalized citizen?
• are you a permanent resident in a village, town or city within our borders?
• are you above the age of 25?
• are you healthy enough? (you don’t suffer from any clinical health issue(s) or mental impairment(s) which would prevent you from fulfilling your duties?)
• have you never served on the government before?
• have you never been found guilty of a violent crime?
• have you never been found to be clinically insane?
Answer yes to all of these questions, you’re eligible for selection.
Don’t want to be bothered?
Go live elsewhere!
That would get rid of all PACs, K Street lobbyists, a lot of graft, waste and expense that WE’RE all paying for.
Rule by fiat, closer and closer every day.
Now I’m going to address a point raised by the article.
If something is shown to no longer work, viz: the two party system, how would creating an ubercongress made up the same two parties possibly work any better.
That is like saying: I’ve got a headache from hitting myself with this hammer. I know, I’ll switch to this bigger hammer.
The problem is the parties (which immediately demand that you switch allegiances from the country to the party,) it is not the house or the senate or the presidency. It is not even that this political system is an oligarchic republic.
It is the party system that is at fault.
Throw it out…
In #2 Mextli, Brother, Can You Spare a Dime? said: Rule by fiat …
Nah. Fiat is a lousy car for American roads.
(If you think the German autobahn is hot shit, try the Italian autostrada. That sucker has miles and miles of straightaways that just beg you to floor it. Lamborghini is Italian for “get the fuck out of my way“.
msbpodcast==I agree. Not on your solution but in your identification of the problem. Parties also not found in our Constitution wherein the House was supposed to represent more closely the interests of the people, and the Senate the interests of the States. A check and balance of a type.
Instead we have two parties excluding all third parties AND the interests of the people AND the interests of the States.
Its silly to recommend action that violates the Constitution and in short will never happen. Calling it only silly is being very kind. Put some effort into your ideas? You know—-think, modify, change, rinse, repeat.
VOTE ALL “NO NEW TAXES” POLITICIANS OUT OF OFFICE!
TEAD, your prejudice (not to say you blinkered thinking,) is showing…
Having the Democrats at the Republicans’ throats is the same as having the Republicans at the Democrats’ throats.
They’re too busy trying to score points off of each other that we end up geting nothing done.
“this dictatorship-smelling thing”
and “influence politicians now with bribe… er, um… campaign contributions”
Gee, I am surprised that Uncle Dave would be so frankly honest about the Obama administration. Maybe there is hope after all.
JB–as long as too many think like you that anyone was talking only about Obama, the problem will continue.
Partisanship is for shills.
Super Congress? Special powers? The right to change Social Security and Medicare? Over my dead body!
Few things, such as a *real* war, mobilizes government to act. Our three branch system of government is good in principle for many reasons but very bad in many others.
We elected 1/3 of government to presumably get things done (exec office) but the other 2/3rds of government is run and paid for by special interest groups.
Bad Idea. We already have the Senate which is divided by State where each State has equal representation. A small State can have undue influence there. Now we would have one divided by party? Kind of like dividing the US into two States.
Great another expensive group we have to pay. Maybe if they started cutting all these committees we would not have to cut from the people who need it. Less government please. Leave medicare and social security alone. How about taking it away from the people who don’t need it. Take away from the people who have not paid into it all their lives.
I blame all this unconstitutional talk of a “Super Congress” on Grover Norquist and “The pledge”.
War War War and no money to fund more war. Instead take the money from entitlement programs to pay for the interest on monies owed to keep the country afloat. Does anyone remember war bonds and making sacrifices for a “just” war.
If the war profiteers paid more taxes then the average joe wars may stop or at least the budget could be balanced.
We need civil unrest to give them the message the only thing this world understands now.
#8: I’ve said a number of times that I think he sucks. Not getting out of our wars immediately, not closing Gitmo, creating a for-the-insurance-companies health care plan instead of for-the-people one, siding with big business interests too often, going along with propping up wall street, and many other things. As many have said, he’s scumbag Bush in sheeps clothing.
United States of Sociopaths.
@17 Uncle Dave,
Agreed. Hear hear. Bush 2.1 sucks up to the repubs and is a repub incognito.
America needs a two-party saystem where one of the parties isn’t out of their friggin’ minds.
We need about 5 parties to make this thing work.
“where it couldn’t be amended by simple, regular lawmakers, who’d have the ability only to cast an up or down vote.”
Same logic different solution…
Why don’t they just put all the stuff they can’t decide on to a direct referendum of the voting public. Just strike regular lawmakers and insert regular citizens (you can leave the simple.). I’m sure our “representives” would love the results.
Harry,
Multi-party political systems only work if the factions are willing to work together. Otherwise, they can get as stuck as our two-party system.
A one-party system can work too — if there is spectrum of views within that one party but they are willing to work together. Japan in it’s postwar heyday was essentially one-party system.
And our two-party sytstem could work fine, too, if it wasn’t crippled by big-money interests and a wing of crazies who loath the very institution they were elected to lead.
#10 Bobbo, actually I was not just thinking of Obama. Reid and Pelosi are equally culprit in the disaster we are living through right now. They’ve had their hands in the cookie jar even longer than Obama.
The Republicans are trying to pull the plug on the Democrat orchestrated out-of-control spending. We don’t have the money to pay for all the stuff the libs are pushing for.
Great satisfaction for the strong hands in Wisconsin – public unions got their clocks cleaned, education budgets falling line already and employment generation is best in the country.
>> SkippLogic said, on July 24th, 2011 at 9:25 am
>> Why don’t they just put all the stuff they can’t decide on to a direct referendum of the voting public.
California and Oregon have made me HATE the referendum system. Some of our most boneheaded laws were passed that way.
Right near my house, there is a prison that has been sitting empty for years because the referendum that built it didn’t include money to run it!
Good way to circumvent the tea party morons.
GregAllen: Since both major parties seem to be out of their minds lately, and the Libertarians and other minor parties are even crazier, what do we do now?
In #27, Floyd said: … what do we do now?
Read my #1 comment…
We didn’t always have the republicans trying to rip the throats out of the Democrats or the other way around.
Lets try it with a truly representative government for a change, instead of rich lawyers all trying to get richer.
Not every problem needs a radical solution. This is not a radical solution. It harkens back to the founding fathers.
Again, we must abolish the three branches. Remove The Constitution.
Then make a new constitution, with representation from socioeconomic conditions and make those representatives live under a meritocratic system. Limit their time in office and pay them according to work done.
But no one wants to do that because that is hard and Americans are weak.
Cursor_
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) ARE THE PROBLEM. Making them “Super Problems” solves nothing but does consolidated their power.
What full-of-themselves assholes.
Closing loopholes is not new taxes. No one should be able to tax benefits that I don’t.
>> Floyd said, on July 24th, 2011 at 9:59 am
>> GregAllen: Since both major parties seem to be out of their minds lately, and the Libertarians and other minor parties are even crazier, what do we do now?
The Democrats are not perfect but they are not remotely as dysfunctional as the Republicans.