+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0)
+--- Thread: Broken Government (/Thread-Broken-Government)
RE: Broken Government - BmorePat87 - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How many posts in and not one example of how the government needs to be changed?
Direct election of Presidents.
Add more members to the House
Give the House the power to confirm appointments.
Constitutional Amendment requiring bipartisan redistricting panels in all states
RE: Broken Government - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 01:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Eh, I had a thread trying to get that kind of thing a while ago and most people didn't play ball, there, either.
Ahaha, fair enough.
RE: Broken Government - bfine32 - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How many posts in and not one example of how the government needs to be changed?
(09-23-2020, 01:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Eh, I had a thread trying to get that kind of thing a while ago and most people didn't play ball, there, either.
State EC awarded on a percentage basis
Elimination of Gerrymandering
Maximum age/service limit on SCOTUS justices
Replace SNAP coupons with a federal program of food warehouses/outlets/ delivery services
Relook Roe v. Wade to consider rights of all parties involved
Mandatory Government/Military service in exchange for College benefits
RE: Broken Government - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 01:17 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Direct election of Presidents.
Add more members to the House
Give the House the power to confirm appointments.
Constitutional Amendment requiring bipartisan redistricting panels in all states
Ahh, finally someone willing to put their money were their keyboard is!
Don't like the first as I prefer the states having individual say in the election of the POTUS.
As to the second expand it by how much?
The third? That's a hard hell no for me. The upper chamber being in charge of that is infinitely preferable as they are elected statewide and thus less susceptible to pressure. As inane as some senators are they look like Rhodes Scholars compared to many House members.
The last? I don't dislike the idea, but there's no way you'll get an Amendment passed on it.
RE: Broken Government - PhilHos - 09-23-2020
(09-22-2020, 09:26 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Time for a redo?
I'm sorry. But I don't think the framers intended it to be this way.
Guy who the majority of Americans that voted DID NOT vote for appoints 1/3 of our Supreme Court to life time appointments...
LOLz no. That is called broke.
This government is broken. It may be time to tear the whole thing down and start over.
Before I read through the rest of the thread and other's replies, my first questions to you is:
What do we do to fix it?
With that said, I personally wouldn't have a problem in changing how justices get on the Supreme Court. I think I would first institute term limits (not only to the Supreme Court but to all branches of government). And considering that the SC is now pretty much partisan, I don't see why we just don't elect them. I know this opens up a can of worms, but at this point, why not?
RE: Broken Government - PhilHos - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 11:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The Framers did not want a standing army. What do you think about that?
They didn't want an income tax either.
Just sayin'.
RE: Broken Government - BmorePat87 - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 01:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Ahh, finally someone willing to put their money were their keyboard is!
Don't like the first as I prefer the states having individual say in the election of the POTUS.
As to the second expand it by how much?
The third? That's a hard hell no for me. The upper chamber being in charge of that is infinitely preferable as they are elected statewide and thus less susceptible to pressure. As inane as some senators are they look like Rhodes Scholars compared to many House members.
The last? I don't dislike the idea, but there's no way you'll get an Amendment passed on it.
But in this system, every voter from every state has a say, not just the voters of the candidate who wins the state. I'd be willing to compromise on outlawing winner take all in the EC. Deal?
For #2- Ideally i'd like to see us a little higher than we were when we set 435 in 1911 (1 per 200k residents). We're around 1 per 760k. 1 per 350k or 400k would be my ideal, but 800-900 may be too many. 1 per 500k is 662. That's reasonable.
My argument for #3 is that population trends will make the Senate an increasingly less representative body and certain powers should be given to the far more representative body.
And I agree that #4 won't pass.
RE: Broken Government - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 02:12 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: But in this system, every voter from every state has a say, not just the voters of the candidate who wins the state. I'd be willing to compromise on outlawing winner take all in the EC. Deal?
Ehh, I still prefer the winner take all system. As I've stated in the past, the US is not like other western countries in that the states are seen as almost of equal importance to the Federal government. Statewide elections are winner take all, as it were, I see no reason that the POTUS should be different.
Quote:For #2- Ideally i'd like to see us a little higher than we were when we set 435 in 1911 (1 per 200k residents). We're around 1 per 760k. 1 per 350k or 400k would be my ideal, but 800-900 may be too many. 1 per 500k is 662. That's reasonable.
As long as the minimum of one per state was maintained I'd be fine with this. Were are they going to fit all these people though?
Quote:My argument for #3 is that population trends will make the Senate an increasingly less representative body and certain powers should be given to the far more representative body.
I agree, but that's entirely by design. Seeing as how the entire premise of the thread is that the Framers system is not functioning as intended it seems odd to me to argue for eliminating something that is functioning exactly how the Framers intended. I'm certainly not directing this at you, but all the people who complain about the Senate not being representative and kvetching that Wyoming has the same number of senators as CA clearly failed Civics 101.
Quote:And I agree that #4 won't pass.
Hardly surprising as I don't think there's a single issue that could garner enough support for an amendment at this point in time.
RE: Broken Government - BmorePat87 - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 02:26 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Ehh, I still prefer the winner take all system. As I've stated in the past, the US is not like other western countries in that the states are seen as almost of equal importance to the Federal government. Statewide elections are winner take all, as it were, I see no reason that the POTUS should be different.
As long as the minimum of one per state was maintained I'd be fine with this. Were are they going to fit all these people though?
I agree, but that's entirely by design. Seeing as how the entire premise of the thread is that the Framers system is not functioning as intended it seems odd to me to argue for eliminating something that is functioning exactly how the Framers intended. I'm certainly not directing this at you, but all the people who complain about the Senate not being representative and kvetching that Wyoming has the same number of senators as CA clearly failed Civics 101.
Hardly surprising as I don't think there's a single issue that could garner enough support for an amendment at this point in time.
Ah, but statewide elections are not for one president, they're for multiple electors. There's technically multiple post to be awarded. Not to mention, the reason states began to do this was to help the dominant faction in that state.
Technically the Senate is not functioning exactly as intended. We elect our Senators. The Framers intended for the elite in state legislatures to select the best people, not the masses to select whoever they want.
I also do not think it's a matter of not knowing civics but disagreeing with it. The Framers were no infallible.
RE: Broken Government - Belsnickel - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 01:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Don't like the first as I prefer the states having individual say in the election of the POTUS.
I still maintain that this idea makes zero sense for the POTUS. The president oversees the executive branch of all of the people, not all of the states. The idea makes sense for a confederation, which we are not. The original idea made sense when the general public wouldn't know too much about the candidates, but we are a long ways off from then.
(09-23-2020, 01:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The third? That's a hard hell no for me. The upper chamber being in charge of that is infinitely preferable as they are elected statewide and thus less susceptible to pressure. As inane as some senators are they look like Rhodes Scholars compared to many House members.
It's interesting, because I agree with you, but I still think the House is a far cry from the "citizen legislators" that it was intended to be. Honestly, the only change I want for confirmations, though, is that it be made a requirement for constitutional officers to be elected with a 2/3rds vote. I don't care about lower judges or some of the other political appointees, but constitutional officers (i.e. SCOTUS) should meet a higher bar.
RE: Broken Government - Belsnickel - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 02:36 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Ah, but statewide elections are not for one president, they're for multiple electors. There's technically multiple post to be awarded. Not to mention, the reason states began to do this was to help the dominant faction in that state.
Technically the Senate is not functioning exactly as intended. We elect our Senators. The Framers intended for the elite in state legislatures to select the best people, not the masses to select whoever they want.
I also do not think it's a matter of not knowing civics but disagreeing with it. The Framers were no infallible.
It really is interesting to think about how much has changed from what the framers did, yet changing it to make it a more democratic model would be going against what the framers intended, somehow.
RE: Broken Government - samhain - 09-23-2020
Article on Drudge today says Trump campaign operatives and Republican state-level officials are now concocting contingency plans to bypass election results should Trump lose. The long and short of it entails Trump convincing electors (as in electoral college members) to vote for him in swing states that have close counts in spite of what vote counts bear out. The justification for this will be alleged voter fraud and convincing the electors of it.
He's already laying the groundwork for a fraud allegation, despite little to no evidence of it. Nevada threw the administration's case out due to lack of evidence. Evidence will not matter to Trump loyalists on the authoritarian right. They want an autocrat, and it makes sense to use autocratic means to install/maintain one.
One sad/hilarious quote from the article was (paraphrasing): "While we as a nation are used to deciding who wins elections by popular (at state level) votes, the Constitution in no way says it has to be done that way."
Wow. That's where we are, people.
RE: Broken Government - BrownAssClown - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 12:46 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: How many posts in and not one example of how the government needs to be changed?
Two things that need to change and should've been done a long time ago. 1.) Term limits for everyone. No more career politicians( McConnell, Pelosi,etc.) 2.) Abolish lobbying.
This is a good place to start, there will be no "swamp draining" until these two things are achieved, don't care which party is in charge.
RE: Broken Government - bfine32 - 09-23-2020
LEGALIZE IT!!
RE: Broken Government - samhain - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 03:24 PM)BrownAssClown Wrote: Two things that need to change and should've been done a long time ago. 1.) Term limits for everyone. No more career politicians( McConnell, Pelosi,etc.) 2.) Abolish lobbying.
This is a good place to start, there will be no "swamp draining" until these two things are achieved, don't care which party is in charge.
Agree. I'm not completely sure what the result would bear out, but I'm all for it.
At the end of the day, however, Pelosi's district is still going to elect someone with politics similar to Nancy's if not identical. Same for Mitch. If their constituents hated them nearly as much as people outside their electorate, they wouldn't be there anyway. Without term limits, they're both going to be in there until they either physically can't or just don't want to.
RE: Broken Government - Belsnickel - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 03:24 PM)BrownAssClown Wrote: Two things that need to change and should've been done a long time ago. 1.) Term limits for everyone. No more career politicians( McConnell, Pelosi,etc.) 2.) Abolish lobbying.
This is a good place to start, there will be no "swamp draining" until these two things are achieved, don't care which party is in charge.
Neither one of those things will really change anything for the better. In fact, if you eliminated lobbying we would have an even more ineffective legislature.
RE: Broken Government - PhilHos - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 03:24 PM)BrownAssClown Wrote: Two things that need to change and should've been done a long time ago. 1.) Term limits for everyone. No more career politicians( McConnell, Pelosi,etc.) 2.) Abolish lobbying.
I bet you'd get a massive bi-partisan support for these from your average citizen, but you certainly won't from those in Washington.
RE: Broken Government - fredtoast - 09-23-2020
1. Single biggest reform would be publicly funded elections. If you take money out of the equation suddenly third parties have a shot.
2. Make all (or a large percentage) of State Representatives at large and take the top finishers from the state wide election. For example if four seats were at large then the top 4 finishers would be elected. Again this would help third parties.
3. Have EC delegates awarded by percentage instead of winner take all. Right now my vote is meaningless in Tennessee because a Republican is going to win the state. The main reason voter turnout is so low in Presidential elections is that most states are already decided before the election. Instead we should make every persons vote count.
Our country is so evenly divided that even a small percentage of third party seats would create a situation that forced compromise.
Have all tie votes in the Senate decided by a cage match between each parties champion.
RE: Broken Government - fredtoast - 09-23-2020
I don't know why anyone would be in favor of term limits.
They are in direct opposition to the will of the people. Why should the voters choice be eliminated from the election? Why should the best and most experienced politicians be forced out of office?
RE: Broken Government - PhilHos - 09-23-2020
(09-23-2020, 03:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't know why anyone would be in favor of term limits.
They are in direct opposition to the will of the people. Why should the voters choice be eliminated from the election? Why should the best and most experienced politicians be forced out of office?
So you'd have no problem with someone like Donald Trump being president until they died?