The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

[Plante26]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Weight votes by SAT score. Every election would be between the Dems and the Libertarians. Which actually sounds great.

You're trying to suppress the vote in middle America by excluding ACT scores. Facist.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

And frankly I think a basic test with simple yes/no questions based on what is contained within the constitution as a requirement to vote would be just fine. (No interpretations just direct quotes and whether or not they are in it)

Every polling station would become a live episode of "Jay-walking".

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Weight votes by SAT score. Every election would be between the Dems and the Libertarians. Which actually sounds great.

Heck, why not just limit it that only MENSA members can vote.

(Will I be seeing you in line behind me at the polling station?)

 

[duper]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Oh come on...you and I both know a catchy slogan is usually enough to get someone to pull that lever. Have enough money to plaster it everywhere and the sheep come a flocking!

As for whether unions should be allowed to contribute...no. Individuals who choose to can, but corporations and unions should be left out of this. The Supreme Court basically screwed over everyone by allowing this crap.

Of course unions contribute almost nothing to political campaigns compared to corporations, but I agree; I think only registered voters should be able to contriubute to political campaigns.

 

[duper]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Heck, why not just limit it that only MENSA members can vote.

(Will I be seeing you in line behind me at the polling station?)

Ugh. I know lots of actually smart people are in MENSA, but it seems to me (from purely anecdotal experience) that the people who make sure you know they are MENSA members are seriously lacking in common sense.

 

[duper]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

It does

And frankly I think a basic test with simple yes/no questions based on what is contained within the constitution as a requirement to vote would be just fine. (No interpretations just direct quotes and whether or not they are in it)

This may have been tried before.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Ugh. I know lots of actually smart people are in MENSA, but it seems to me (from purely anecdotal experience) that the people who make sure you know they are MENSA members are seriously lacking in common sense.

I'd only join if the requirement came to pass.
I'm qualified to join (prior testing), but I'm also smart enough to not join and hang onto the annual membership fee for better uses (hockey tickets).

 

[leswp1]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

If the outcome of our elections truly hinge on psychological chicanery and slick marketing, perhaps it is time that we start requiring an intelligence test for voters.

Maybe. But then there were be a few less people at the polls and the Faux news/MSNBC crowd would be out of jobs so I guess that is out because we can't lose jobs

 

[Hopkinja]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

All right...I've seen a lot of suggestions of what might fix Congress. And every last one of them other than civil disobedience require legislation. Or putting it simply, they require Congress to fix themselves. And my basic premise was they are incapable or unwilling to do that.

So as someone else in the thread said so elequently...we're screwed.

I guess I just wanted to be sure.

 

[joecct]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Oh come on...you and I both know a catchy slogan is usually enough to get someone to pull that lever. Have enough money to plaster it everywhere and the sheep come a flocking!

As for whether unions should be allowed to contribute...no. Individuals who choose to can, but corporations and unions should be left out of this. The Supreme Court basically screwed over everyone by allowing this crap.

Under the law, a corporation is a person. Therefore, the law cannot distinguish between $1 from any member of this board and $1 from College Hockey, Inc.

If you don't like it, you have to overturn a 200 year old Supreme Court case.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Under the law, a corporation is a person. Therefore, the law cannot distinguish between $1 from any member of this board and $1 from College Hockey, Inc.

If you don't like it, you have to overturn a 200 year old Supreme Court case.

Yes thank you for telling me what I already know. (hence why I said the Supreme Court failed on this one)

 

[Plante26]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

All right...I've seen a lot of suggestions of what might fix Congress. And every last one of them other than civil disobedience require legislation. Or putting it simply, they require Congress to fix themselves. And my basic premise was they are incapable or unwilling to do that.

So as someone else in the thread said so elequently...we're screwed.

I guess I just wanted to be sure.

If the states would man up and grow a pair they could stand up to the federal government and the numerous unconstitutional programs they have spawned. Not to mention dismantling the dozens of duplicate programs at the state and federal level.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

All right...I've seen a lot of suggestions of what might fix Congress. And every last one of them other than civil disobedience require legislation. Or putting it simply, they require Congress to fix themselves. And my basic premise was they are incapable or unwilling to do that.

So as someone else in the thread said so elequently...we're screwed.

I guess I just wanted to be sure.

The only way to fix it, and this will seem extreme, is revolution. Voting people out wont work because only crooks and deviants will run so either we revamp the system completely or give up and let things go until it all collapses. Either way a major change is needed.

Either that or a great American tragedy will have to happen. If Europe goes to war or another 9/11 happens that could do the trick. (at least for a while)

 

[walrus]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The only way to fix it, and this will seem extreme, is revolution. Voting people out wont work because only crooks and deviants will run so either we revamp the system completely or give up and let things go until it all collapses. Either way a major change is needed.

Either that or a great American tragedy will have to happen. If Europe goes to war or another 9/11 happens that could do the trick. (at least for a while)

We got John Kerry on the Super Congress, think of all the great bills he has gotten passed, what else do you need?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The only way to fix it, and this will seem extreme, is revolution. Voting people out wont work because only crooks and deviants will run so either we revamp the system completely or give up and let things go until it all collapses. Either way a major change is needed.

Either that or a great American tragedy will have to happen. If Europe goes to war or another 9/11 happens that could do the trick. (at least for a while)

Revolutions almost never result in an improvement over the status quo. Or as they said in the 70's, "Evolution, not Revolution!"

All another 9/11 will do is turn us into a police state. When people are scared, they aren't unified, they're just stupid.

 

[bronconick]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

If the states would man up and grow a pair they could stand up to the federal government and the numerous unconstitutional programs they have spawned. Not to mention dismantling the dozens of duplicate programs at the state and federal level.

That's basically a pile of derp.

The States lost the right to really stand up to the feds around 1865, and it was reinforced through integration in the 50's and 60's in the south.

Even if they did stand up, the federal reaction would be to withhold federal funds to said state until they caved, as with highway funds over the increase of the drinking age to 21.

So we're back to the "We're screwed short of revolution" position that Handy and I have already pointed out.

 

[Plante26]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

That's basically a pile of derp.

The States lost the right to really stand up to the feds around 1865, and it was reinforced through integration in the 50's and 60's in the south.

Even if they did stand up, the federal reaction would be to withhold federal funds to said state until they caved, as with highway funds over the increase of the drinking age to 21.

So we're back to the "We're screwed short of revolution" position that Handy and I have already pointed out.

That had crossed my mind. Just gonna a lil' game of "What If":

What if states simply ordered businesses to stop sending federal income taxes to the government? No need for federal funding then--along with a large boost in revenue for the states. Aside from the military, diplomats and the executive/legislative/judicial branches of government, there's not a whole lot that the states couldn't handle themselves.

 

[Tundra]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The States lost the right to really stand up to the feds around 1865, and it was reinforced through integration in the 50's and 60's in the south.

Even if they did stand up, the federal reaction would be to withhold federal funds to said state until they caved, as with highway funds over the increase of the drinking age to 21.

So we're back to the "We're screwed short of revolution" position that Handy and I have already pointed out.

Well there is evolution route: the amendments. And I think we should have term limits for congress AND balanced budget amendment (without debt ceiling).

Oh yeah and change the presidential election to popular.

Amendment 17 - Senators Elected by Popular Vote

http://www.usconstitution.net/constamnotes.html#Am23

17th Amendment
One of the most common critiques of the Framers is that the government that they created was, in many ways, undemocratic. There is little doubt of this, and it is so by design. The Electoral College, by which we choose our President, is one example. The appointment of judges is another. And the selection of Senators not by the people but by the state legislatures, is yet another. The Senatorial selection system eventually became fraught with problems, with consecutive state legislatures sending different Senators to Congress, forcing the Senate to work out who was the qualified candidate, or with the selection system being corrupted by bribery and corruption. In several states, the selection of Senators was left up to the people in referenda, where the legislature approved the people's choice and sent him or her to the Senate. Articles written by early 20th-century muckrakers also provided grist for the popular-election mill.

The 17th Amendment did away with all the ambiguity with a simple premise — the Senators would be chosen by the people, just as Representatives are.

 

[joecct]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

Yes thank you for telling me what I already know. (hence why I said the Supreme Court failed on this one)

Which Supreme Court? Roberts or Marshall?

 

[joecct]

Re: The 112th Congress: Debt ceiling edition

The only way to fix it, and this will seem extreme, is revolution. Voting people out wont work because only crooks and deviants will run so either we revamp the system completely or give up and let things go until it all collapses. Either way a major change is needed.

Either that or a great American tragedy will have to happen. If Europe goes to war or another 9/11 happens that could do the trick. (at least for a while)

There is always the Tom Clancy solution (which could be inferred from your 9/11 reference).