News:

If they treat education like a product, they can't very well bitch when you act like a consumer.

Main Menu

CHANGE you can believe in

Started by tyrannosaurus vex, September 24, 2008, 05:18:37 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

AFK

Quote from: VERB` on September 24, 2008, 09:27:54 PM
Quote from: vexati0n on September 24, 2008, 09:18:20 PM
Further, election "day" should be expanded -- polls should be open for a few days, and always a full weekend, to allow for the maximum opportunity to cast a vote. Also, elections should be fully certified by an outside election certification body such as the UN has for many developing nations.
The polls require a lot of manpower to open, and keeping them open longer will be costly.

Not really.  Many public schools and colleges require or have some program for students to perform community or public service.  That resource could be tapped and cover quite a few polling places in urban areas.  yeah, you might have to pay the little old ladies in the rural towns a little more, but I don't think it would really be that big of a deal. 
Cynicism is a blank check for failure.

Requia ☣

If you want to scatter the parties, you could forbid them from cooperating across state lines.  Though you'd have to redo the electoral system before undoing the two party system, that only works the way it does because the parties control the electorate, and forbid them from voting for anyone but the party candidate.
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

tyrannosaurus vex

for party reform i'd propose ---

- parties are not allowed to run, endorse, or contribute to specific candidates
- no rule requiring party registration of any kind for any public event or election
- no rule limiting the number of parties a person can belong to

that effectively lets parties exist, but keeps them from doing anything except as a more limited form of Political Action Committee. then we'd have to come up with new ways to narrow the field for elections, like only allowing candidates on a national ballot after being cleared for it in a certain percentage of state primary elections first. but i'm sure castrating the political parties would allow lots of other problems to be solved indirectly.
Evil and Unfeeling Arse-Flenser From The City of the Damned.

Requia ☣

Maybe just have primaries run by the state, instead of by the parties, top candidates (2, 3 or 4?) from all parties get the spots on the ballot.

Won't work as well for presidential primaries though at least not withotu *heavily* favoring high money high status candidates (the primaries soften this blow a bit since some states run early, and campaigning can focus on just one state at a time, which means they need less money, Jimmy Carter could never have gotten elected otherwise)
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

East Coast Hustle

Quote from: Felix on September 24, 2008, 06:45:36 PM
Oh, this is something I've given thought.

Dissolve the Military Industrial Complex. 

Politicians to be fed, clothed, boarded, and provided for to a high quality of life, but not allowed personal possessions or money.

Reverse most of what Reagan, Bush jr. & sr.  and Nixon have done.

The military spending budget redistributed over ten years into schools and students, research grants, urban development, health care, nonprofit environmental agencies, and low-income aid.


I hope you're trolling.

If not, I want no part of your country.

1) umm...and how would you propose to both defend the country from external threats and project hard powerto back up our soft power? Or do you think we're the lone true global superpower because we're so nice?

2) not allowed personal posessions or money? WTF are you even thinking? this is AMERICA, son.

3) Name me one specific thing that Nixon passed into law that you would refute, without looking it up. Otherwise, I call knee-jerk inclusion.

4) see #1.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

Jenne

Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on September 24, 2008, 09:02:59 PM
Quote from: Jenne on September 24, 2008, 06:57:45 PM
I'm a lobbyist.  I'd prefer to NOT be offed for it, kthxbye.

I'm assuming when the word "lobbyist" is bandied about in such a manner, folks are meaning those who get paid and pay out $$$ through big corporations like oil and high finance.

Grassroots people such as myself who lobby for education, health care and civil rights are doing the general tax payer the luxury of fighting for their causes.

Also, dissolution of political parties would not be the catchall solution a lot of people seem to hope it would be.  Who is going to listen to you and back your platform if you don't have another force backing you to vouch for who you are?  Proving who you are and what you do and how much integrity you possess becomes increasingly difficult if you don't have organizational clout.

I do some lobbying work as well.  Advocating for programs and initiatives to help keep kids off drugs, etc.  When people are passionate about a cause they will volunteer their time to do so.  they do not need to be paid big bucks.  In fact, I daresay, and I think Jenne will back me up on this, they are probably more effective, because they aren't speaking out because they will be getting a fat check afterwards.  It's more from the heart and more rooted, I believe, in some core beliefs and convictions. 

Yeah, I see a trend where folks want to use "advocate" for the non-paid, volunteer flat-footer, as opposed to the "paid" lobbyist.  But truly, they are one and the same.

I don't know if the paid lobbyists shouldn't be, well, paid any longer, as I've seen the CTA and PTA lobbyists do far faster and better work than us volunteers ever have.  But maybe if they weren't paid, they wouldn't exist, and the volunteers would have to organize elsewhere.  I do know that the PTA and CTA (Calif. Teacher's Assoc--Teacher's union, i.e.) lobbyists (paid)  are far more effective than Joe or Jill Blow from X County, non-paid parent volunteer.

Why?  It's a whole subculture.  They know who to call, they eat at the same restaurants and visit each others' offices/schmooze a helluvalot.  Shit I can't do.  I write, call, email and visit Sacramento with my fellow parents, paid for BY my fellow parents (about once a year), attend press conferences (and get put on TeeVee for it sometimes)...and that's about it.  Oh, I spread the word via email, phone and face-to-face meetings (oh and fliers) as well.

But the social networking, at this stage of the game, still needs the paid lobbyists for our grassroots efforts because they have access and knowledge we don't...because they get PAID to do it.  Could we do it, if they weren't around?  Yes, but it would take more volunteer $ and time to do so...both commodities that are scarce...

I also cringe at saying X should be a non-paid job when it already is.  Who am I to say that the person doing that job didn't earn that money?  Bullshit proposition.  But I do agree the system is set up to only be greased by the money in its wheels...but not paying lobbyists is not the only answer to that one, most likely.

East Coast Hustle

Quote from: vexati0n on September 24, 2008, 09:29:26 PM
If we can invest $10 billion every month in a useless war in Iraq, but can't be arsed to ensure the integrity of the most fundamental aspect of our self-government, then we deserve to lose the Republic.

I think that ship sailed some time ago.
Rabid Colostomy Hole Jammer of the Coming Apocalypse™

The Devil is in the details; God is in the nuance.


Some yahoo yelled at me, saying 'GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH', and I thought, "I'm feeling generous today.  Why not BOTH?"

Jenne

I dunno, Folks.  Maybe it's from studying political history of the state of the state in the 90's, but I get an itchy feeling when we speak of arbitrarily dissolving parties because they've become so powerful and power-hungry.

The split in ideologies (which to outsiders seems so very narrow a split, really) happened over the course of 200 years.  It took many wars, many economic upheavals, a whole lot of land, and quite a few administrations for it to get to where it is now.

The corporate takeover of our country's most powerful political seat was an inevitability, to my mind.  When the fulcrum to the balance of government was deemed to be market shares and the economy rather than religion or social hegemony...I think the handwriting was on the wall.

Each party has taken its turn as the group that represents the have's and the have-not's.  The lip service paid to their respective constituencies doesn't mean that there isn't the force of a "real" agenda there.  Nor does it mean it's always gone the way of "big money."

But those who run the government are usually the ones who have paid their way there.  There are many ways to do that--education and birth (like the Bushes), or happenstance and hard work (Clinton the Male and Obama).

So if you take the power of the party system away--I'm not sure that will still remove the evils it now perpetuates.  I think it'll breed something else, and the sheep will just stay out to pasture...until a dictator, or another hegemonic rise comes along.  Maybe I'm just kvetching at the wrong thing, I don't know.  But cutting off the balls of the party system so they can no longer organize gets me in my gut, and my gut tells me that's not the answer.

Corporate reform of the "big" companies would be awesome...but what is going to trickle down out of that.  And who makes up those big companies anymore?  They're all world conglommerates now--no longer localized.  The power behind those market shares goes through every major economy in the world now.  Harder and harder to harness, and so their power becomes harder and harder to limit.

Argh.  I'm going to stop now.  Have to get dinner going anyway.

tyrannosaurus vex

Quote from: East Coast Hustle on September 25, 2008, 12:55:21 AM
Quote from: vexati0n on September 24, 2008, 09:29:26 PM
If we can invest $10 billion every month in a useless war in Iraq, but can't be arsed to ensure the integrity of the most fundamental aspect of our self-government, then we deserve to lose the Republic.

I think that ship sailed some time ago.

Well yeah, hence the brainstorming for changes to the system.

What really irks me more than the terrible job the government (any government) does, is the way things have changed in people's minds. So often now, it's like we all see the world as it is and assume that's just the way it is. Like the thought of rewriting the script on a large scale never even enters our minds.

I'm a hopeless romantic when it comes to most things, though. So when I say I admire what they accomplished in 1776, I'm probably just running low on cynicism and "realism" as most people these days think of it. But fuck, man, what happened to the will to perfect society? Why is it that when we are handed a pile of shit, we forget about the shovel and assume we're supposed to be bathing in it?

The TV and the "stupid masses" and the Con sound more and more to me every day like cheap excuses to do nothing.
Evil and Unfeeling Arse-Flenser From The City of the Damned.

Requia ☣

The CTA and PTA lobbyists are better than Oil and Logging lobbyists because?

I don't think that making a division based on money will help though, the people who don't represent massive orginizations still won't be allowed to talk to the elected officials.
Inflatable dolls are not recognized flotation devices.

wade


voting reform.

I'd rather see people take an entire day or week to vote.

They would be voting for each issue rather then the black cock, white vagina, or old vietnam vet tortured POW.

Send everysingle mother fucking cock sucking eat shitting human a list of issues, each with multiple options and have those motherfucking cock sucking eat shitting humans choose what they want.

Then we put any slob who has the capacity to learn in charge to make sure the shit gets done, and if they fuck around, or get caught taking advantage of their privledged position of authority, WE KILL THOSE MOTEHR FUCKERS ANCIENT ROMAN STYLE.






REALLY real discordians

i wouldnt hurt a fly
:thumb: :kojak:

Jenne

Quote from: Requiem on September 25, 2008, 01:13:53 AM
The CTA and PTA lobbyists are better than Oil and Logging lobbyists because?

I don't think that making a division based on money will help though, the people who don't represent massive orginizations still won't be allowed to talk to the elected officials.

Oh you can TALK...but can you 1) get through the door and 2) be listened to?

But you can always TALK.

Thing is, you have to have the SWAY of some significant majority behind you.  That's not contingent on $$, sometimes...as long as officials are ELECTED, they need votes, and votes that can be SWAYED...well, those are still valuable.

But in order to SWAY, you need organization.  Otherwise you are the lonely voice in the wilderness...till some asshat puts your head on a silver platter, that is.

Jenne

Quote from: vexati0n on September 25, 2008, 01:13:42 AM
Quote from: East Coast Hustle on September 25, 2008, 12:55:21 AM
Quote from: vexati0n on September 24, 2008, 09:29:26 PM
If we can invest $10 billion every month in a useless war in Iraq, but can't be arsed to ensure the integrity of the most fundamental aspect of our self-government, then we deserve to lose the Republic.

I think that ship sailed some time ago.

Well yeah, hence the brainstorming for changes to the system.

What really irks me more than the terrible job the government (any government) does, is the way things have changed in people's minds. So often now, it's like we all see the world as it is and assume that's just the way it is. Like the thought of rewriting the script on a large scale never even enters our minds.

I'm a hopeless romantic when it comes to most things, though. So when I say I admire what they accomplished in 1776, I'm probably just running low on cynicism and "realism" as most people these days think of it. But fuck, man, what happened to the will to perfect society? Why is it that when we are handed a pile of shit, we forget about the shovel and assume we're supposed to be bathing in it?

The TV and the "stupid masses" and the Con sound more and more to me every day like cheap excuses to do nothing.

I agree--which is why I volunteer my life away.

There it goes now--

Jenne

Quote from: wgeorgew on September 25, 2008, 01:31:17 AM

voting reform.

I'd rather see people take an entire day or week to vote.

They would be voting for each issue rather then the black cock, white vagina, or old vietnam vet tortured POW.

Send everysingle mother fucking cock sucking eat shitting human a list of issues, each with multiple options and have those motherfucking cock sucking eat shitting humans choose what they want.

Then we put any slob who has the capacity to learn in charge to make sure the shit gets done, and if they fuck around, or get caught taking advantage of their privledged position of authority, WE KILL THOSE MOTEHR FUCKERS ANCIENT ROMAN STYLE.








I like the idea of educating people on what they should know before they vote.  It's why I chair legislation for my little PTA unit--I put out articles and flyers constantly.

Thing is--this is what I learned:

PEOPLE DON'T READ.

You can tell them over and over, but unless Survivor or American Idol proclaims it, it's a dead issue.

Jasper

Quote from: LMNO on September 24, 2008, 08:44:44 PM
Oh, man.

I totally forgot.

Either line item veto, or no omnibus bills.

This.

And as for the replies to my post, it's more the nation I'd like to live in than a place America could ever be.

Edited to add:  But my stance on approval voting stands as a change America needs.