Campaign Reform

27Jan10

It’s painful to see how easily things could be corrected. It’s even more painful to know that it will most likely never happen.  At least not smoothly.  The powers at be enjoy, well, their power.  Makes me believe there is a greater chance of bloody revolution comrades than any intelligent change. But what the hell, I will tell you what should be done.

Yes, yes, the two party system…blah blah blah. No one has a good replacement do they? The Green party?  The Commies? Common now?  Libertarians? Those closet anarchists?   Like most issues it’s a case of everyone bitching about what already happened and still hapless to see what coming.

There are 435 members in the House of Representatives, 200 in the Senate.  All too often their individual  actions are overlooked and are voted in or out merely based on their brand name.  Yes, republican or democrat, stay with me people.   They know this so they vote with the team.  All differentiation that goes on during elections at every level means nothing once the dust clears. Two parties, two homogenized cults, same two in the Super bowl.

A problem yes?

Money.  Only the wealthy and Corporations can make any dent on the costs of running a political campaign.  That gives those two groups a lot of power.  And as power corrupts you know that those two groups will not endorse positions who favor the rest of the people.   By making the lower classes more powerful one makes the upper class and identity with liability corporations less powerful.   Therefore the democratic system quickly becomes an oligarchic society.   Unfortunately, the legislature is a part of this oligarchy and is free to be invested into the corporations and vice-versa.

A problem no?

An abuse of freedom.   Freedom of speech defends the mindless sensationalistic mudsling and slander throughout campaigns clearly cheating the people of honest truth.  The countries integrity has been rusted away by a pure economic, laissez fair type of freedom which repeatedly tosses the fox into the hen house.  In government you are to lead but as a servant of the people.  Hence “Civil Servant” Conflicts of interest here will not do yet  conflicts certainly do seem to arise don’t they? Freedoms must be surrendered otherwise do not take the job.

“ Freedom this, Freedom that”, you tell someone they can’t do something or shouldn’t and they come out with accusations of socialism, you know they are frankly full of it.   It is very simple:  It is no longer a freedom or right when the liberty in question results in the exploitation or oppression of others.  Quote me, take it for your own, don’t care but the fact is too many hide behind that freedom just to take from others.

Another problem.

How do I propose we solve this?

All 635 members have the ability to endorse one person for a presidential election.  To run for President you must get 15% of the endorsements from the legislature.  That’s a minimum of 95 Senators or Representatives.   This gives the representative some choice.  The two big parties could try to beat the system but the party doesn’t elect the Representative.  A much smaller population with a specific agenda does.  Instead of choosing from what the big parties give them, the people can hold their Senator and Representatives directly responsible for their guy not being on the ticket.  It becomes a bit harder for the legislature to choose party loyalty over those who elected them into office.

At most you can have 6 candidates for president.  You have a preliminary election then the top two or three go on to the Presidential election.   No more complicated or expensive than the system we have now.

The caucuses are next to garbage where the parties go cannibal and blackball and destroy the candidates that least tows the party line.  This system will protect such candidates and allow them their fair shot as well as the Greenies, Libertarians etc.

“What keeps the legislature from just buying their way in as usual and the corporations from buying them?  They won’t listen to the people.”

Typical salary for members of the House and Senate is $174,000 with the party leaders making $193,400 and Speaker of the house $223,500.  Plus benefits.

To hold any such office you are to liquefy all investments other than CD’s, land and personal 401k etc.

No cooperate portfolio whatsoever for as long as you are in office and after leaving office your career voting record and portfolio will be held under close scrutiny .

There are already laws that hinder a quid pro quo between the legislature and corporate America, but it doesn’t go far enough.   A former representative or senator may never work as a lobbyist, become a member of a board or CEO of a for profit cooperation.

If these rules are too much for some to bare, good.  It says their heart is plainly not in the right place.  If 174,000 a year salary isn’t enough for these guys to serve their country then they are most definitely the type to put their pocket book before it.

“How will the people know what the candidates are about?”

There will be no soft money, very little hard money.

No commercials. None.  Take money and the propaganda machines out of the equation.

If you’re a broadcasting station that pulls 15% of the market share you must give each candidate equal time during the prime time work week and on Sundays to speak their minds to the people that would equal no less than 10 hours each candidate during the election year.

If these networks have issue with this they can take their entire company and move to another country.   It is their patriotic duty, and would give the people an honest and fair exposure to our presidential candidates that we have never had before.  It’s not like they would not be getting revenue from the ad space sold.

The media would be held accountable to prove any accusations to an election panel and if are proven to be in anyway misleading the public they are to be fined and forced to give an public apology during that  said candidates time on air.  That should scare off the large media companies with their own agenda.

See, that wasn’t so hard.

Filed under: Political   |  Leave a Comment
Tags: Campaign Reform