Major Government Reform is a simple step away
57Massive reform is a simple step away.
A lot of people are unhappy with our government. I sort of take a step back and realize that we are responsible for putting officials into office. More importantly, we are responsible to ensure that they live up to their campaign promises. Even more important is the fact that we are responsible for the system of government that they operate in. I've come to realize that we really do have the power to change corruption and conflict in our government, we simply choose not the utlize that power. Some say we need to vote out the people we feel are part of the problem, however, this simply puts another person into a broken system. The answer to the problem is quite simple and can be done rather quickly.
Whether you support Republicans, Democrats, or Independents, the solution we need crosses all party lines. Our lawmakers spend most of their time raising campaign funds. I have not learned this fact from the media or from some biased website, this has been told to me again and again by various lawmakers I have met with (Senators, members of the House of Representatives, etc). Many of our lawmakers are 'bought' or 'indebted' to large corporations or special interest groups. There is also pressure from their own political parties to raise money. Further, our lawmakers know that if they don't vote in support of the people that fund their campaigns, they will lose funding and eventually lose their jobs. The bottom line is that we only have 1 political party but it is controlled by 2 sides of corporate America. Last I checked, it was "we the people", not "we the corporations"
Now, I work for a large corporation, I'm not here to 'hate' on corporations...I love the company I work for. However, our lawmakers should vote based on their constituents and their own beliefs, not based on who funds their campaign. Here is the solution: We need to remove conflict of interest. While this is pretty obvious and broad, there are some immediate actions we can take to ensure this happens. Here is what I discovered.
Right now, there are several bills in congress, most have a lot of support from democrats but little to no support from republicans. Now I'm not saying one of these bills is the answer, but all of them would be a massive "fix" for a lot of the problems we have in congress, elections, etc. One in particular is the Fair Elections Now Act. The bill would allow federal candidates to choose to run for office without relying on large contributions, big money bundlers, or donations from lobbyists, and would be freed from the constant fundraising in order to focus on what people in their communities want. In summary, the bill allows limits the amount that can be donated to only $100. So no one person can 'buy' our officials. When the person running for office raises a certain amount of small contributions, they qualify for public funding which is split equally among the challengers. Again, the key point is that no one can donate more than $100 dollars, thus keeping our officials from 'owing' a corporation, a special interest group, etc.
How do we get a bill like this passed? The answer is so simple it makes me smile and brings me hope that we can do this. It is an election year. We simply call our current elected official and let them know that if they don't support this legislation, we will not vote for them in November. Imagine if we could get a massive amount of Americans calling on their elected officials and demanding that they vote for this campaign finance reform. Alternatively, there are several grass roots organizations that are fighting to get these reforms enacted. I'm running a bit long here so mayble I'll do another hub that outlines how exactly to get involved. There are several other steps to "removing conflict of interest" that I'd like to outline as well.
Remember 2 key things. 1. We control our future, we have the ability to make positive change, we simply have to 'choose' to do it. 2. We can do this whenever we want to. It is a great feeling knowing that we can reshape our political system to once again be "we the people" and not "we the special interest groups or We the corporations"
CommentsLoading...
I find some agreement with you in this hub.
The problem is the two party system, and the loyal party voter.
They don't vote for the best candidate, they vote for the party candidate.
President Obama's trip to California to hawk for democrat votes to keep CA Senator Barbara Boxer is an abuse of taxpayer money.
The congress spent most of two years pandering for votes and during that time oil prices went high and the economy imploded.
A loyal party voter has their vote cashed and spent by the party the moment that they register with the party.
The party then goes after the real election voters the independents or non committed voters. These are the voters that usually win the election. The loyal party voter just sets the baseline.
Opinionduck I mostly agree with everything you are saying. Fair elections Now Act would eliminate 90% of the time are congress members spending campaigning and allow them to focus on their jobs. I don't think most americans realize that freshman congressman spend 6-8 hours a day just raising money. Regarding voting on party lines, many people do this but again, it is their choice. I agree the best candidates are usually spread between parties.
LRC
Apprently, we have better agreement than Congress :)
Good blog, and I totally support your view, as I am sure everyone except the rich and powerful do. Maybe not, though. I understand that the Supreme Court's recent decision to treat corporations as people are not as popular with big business as one would think. I'm sure they get tired of political critters always begging for handouts. I have heard a lot of talk about this reform; right now, as you noted, everyone is trying to get work done while running for the next election. The two main parties could do a better job, too, of picking legislators rather than political hacks.
I, too, would like to second the legislation LRC is informing us about.
Until Obama, I hadn't voted for a Republican or Democrat (at least for the office of the President) in the last 12 years. This protest vote was to no avail, of course, given the numbers registered in the total vote tally - sigh. Now I even begin to doubt the wisdom of voting for Obama.
I think I can see the value of such legislation and am impressed with the means of determining who can qualify for the public financing of campaigns. My concern is for the not-strictly-campaign-support functionaries which may or may not be elements of the legislation. Those folks (and now, thanks to the Bush Supreme Court appointees, corporation who have been conferred the same "free speech" considerations as actual human citizens) represent what may still be significant issues after the actual campaign contribution issue has been addressed. These involve campaign messages (primarily TV based but increasingly online appeals) put out by "unaffiliated" interested parties, many of which are bolstered by huge corporate or union coffers. Match that with $100 donations or even partial public support.
Even if we mandated the process with mandatory public financing of campaigns (for at least national offices), we could influence the subduing of special interest influences and provide a special means of testing whether a candidate can live within a much more restricted and less generous public provided campaign budget. If you run out of money before you run out of campaign time, you'd better chase ambulances, find supermarket openings or hope your opponents makes mind numbing mistakes to your advantage cause when it gone...its gone. Would you think that if there were a much smaller campaign chest available the likelihood of a Presidential campaign lasting a mind numbing two years would be less likely?
Of course, I think the problem of the corruption of money in the political process is a problem with basically only one of the elements in the election circus. As Pogo famously said: "We have met the enemy ...and he is us". That's right. When the common wisdom is that by throwing as much money as humanly conceivable, a measure of influence in how the electorate frames current political issues can be achieved, why wouldn’t entities of all kinds take advantage?
I realize that no "ordinary citizen" can devote their every waking hour to discerning accurate maps of reality about ever issue facing this inordinately complex political culture. The level of considered opinion can often be displaced with clever psychological appeals to leave a particular impression in the minds of potential voters which often is mistaken as true insight. One can doubt that this is actually at work until you count the amount of money spent on political messages and promo stunts. I would assume that the reason large entities spend heavily during election periods (and afterwards as political "advice" concerning issues of concern by constituents - sometimes called lobbing) is that it seems to work. If it didn't they would stop and spend it on executive bonuses.
If we can be shaped by messages of crass special interest bias, then aren't we the fundamental problem? To blame interest groups for doing what makes rational self-interest is missing the point. IMHO, intensive training in critical thinking and Logic of Arguments (Rhetoric) from early on in a citizen's formal education - starting in primary school even - would be a credible expenditure in a time of relatively scarce resources.
But this is surely a step in the right direction.
Kelly, a lot of great and interesting thought. Thanks! I too agree that the ultimate "problem" lies within. I've also written a few blogs that echo some of your points. Regarding Citzens vs United, I know there are several bills in the house and senate trying to lessen or curb the full blown effect this decision will have. I think your last point is the one I most agree with. Build better reasoning and thinking skills from an early age is probably a great use of resources.
I found you in a comment you posted on another blog. You don't seem crazy or stalkerish at all. Actually somewhat lucid (well, from what I read, you are a left wing lunatic, so I could be delusional with regard to your lucidity)
You are correct. It is up to the people to make a change. Unfortunately, politics is money. Without an uprising of the common man, nothing will change, regardless of how many bills we pass. New laws or regulations are not the answer.
Namaste.
Hi Deborah, thanks! I actually consider myself to be pretty moderate although I do lean left a little. I sometimes post and comment on some of the more conservative bloggers hubs. A few of them will attack me for having different opinions but I try to always be open minded in my comments and factual in my replies. Thanks for stopping by!!!
thevoice 2 years ago
God blessed hub vote all new government thanks