This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
What actions can we take to return power and attention to our congress?
We live in a unitary state. An article published by NPR on three realistic alternatives to a single president fully illustrates that. I am extensively irritated that congress wasn't the natural response to the growing problem that the American people look to the president to affect change. As I recall, early congressmen decided to name the head of state "president" as the position was intended to merely preside over the going-ons of our nation's politics. Somehow (possibly inevitably) the president has become a modern-day king, responsible for almost everything our congress once was. So, my question now is: how do we return our attention to congress? How do we re-invest power in the legislative branch of the government?
David Grammer
Mike Colera 10+
Mike Colera 10+
bristol ozturgut
Scot Wilcox 10+
bristol ozturgut
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~Hyper/lippman/cover.html
This is a work by Walter Lippman that definitely relates.
edward long 100+
The CONGRESS: Make, or repeal, national/federal laws in accordance with the expressed wishes of The People.
The SCOTUS: Confirm, as necessary, a law is, or is not, in accordance with the COTUS.
The POTUS: Implement and enforce all standing national/federal law?
bristol ozturgut
edward long 100+
The implication is that power has been lost by Congress. I am ready to refute that, but I don't want to waste my keystrokes or your time (I am retired) if that is not your meaning.
bristol ozturgut
I would like congress to regain that responsibility in the voters' eyes. I believe the majority of voters look to the executive branch - including (or especially) the president - to perform the functions of congress, making congress redundant.
edward long 100+
Grace Greene 10+
Unless and until the American people decide to educate THEMSELVES about the REAL American history and the meaning and INTENT of the Constitution, it will continue until the whole thing collapses (which is not so far away).
I was stunned to tears when I began educating myself. It was an unintentional investigation. I was at the library and I walked past a series of huge volumes called "The Encyclopedia of the American Constitution". As I am not a Christian, and my religion does not enjoy government legitimacy or the right to practice its sacraments, I wondered if it would tell me where my religious freedom went. That's when I took a volume to the table and began reading, with tears streaming. And THAT's when I started searching for original documents that would show me what happened and how this country went so far astray from its core founding principles. Only then could I begin to see how we can fix all that is broken - if only Americans knew what their government is supposed to look like AND WHY.
Americans have been LIED TO about their own history. So now we have 2 parties who appear - on the surface - to b enemies, but in truth, they are great allies. They are each committed to denying the legitimacy of the Constitution, only supporting those parts that they favor, while favoring destroying the parts that they don't like. This keeps Americans outraged, which increases voter turnout, and increases the problem.
When you hear legislators talk about "The constitution", they are not talking about the WRITTEN "Constitution of the United States of America". They are talking about the unwritten constitution that replaced it during a coup d'etat by the Federalists and SOTUS in 1819. (Mc Culloch v. Maryland).
The solution lies is us, even though we didn't institute the problem.
bristol ozturgut
So what I am looking for are real steps we can take to strengthen congress' power. I am not sure I agree with your assertion that it actively rejects that power. The people that make up our state and national congress are just as varying in their desires and intentions as their abounding constituents. But, that aside, it is undeniable that congress doesn't have that power, for whatever the reason.
Ward Williams
You are not an employee of the party. You will work under the guidelines of a job description written by the electorate.
Laws are written for the benefit society, and must be understood by that society. Legislation you write and introduce will be written in plain language and easily understood by the average of the population.
Legislation will be introduced in the form of one bill, one issue, with no riders. If an issue can't stand on it's own merit it will not be hidden in or attached to another bill.
You will be subject to the laws you vote to enact. You will not introduce or vote in the affirmative for legislation that excludes any elected employee from its influence.
You will maintain a website that chronicles your activity. Each bill will be posted along with how you voted, and an opinion piece explaining why you voted as you did, as well as acknowledgment that you read and understood the bill. This will offer context and verifiable reference during your tenure and for each election cycle. After a reasonable viewing period this will be archived for easy viewing indefinitely.
Secrecy's the problem
bristol ozturgut
I also think your fast and hard rules sound great, but are completely unrealistic. So many things bank upon the margins of another issue. Don't get me wrong: I'd love it if bills could be limited by word or page count. As for the scrutiny, I'm right along with you there. However, our "cockroach model" media already watches and pressures politics in a way citizens don't naturally have the time for.
That said, I definitely agree with the idea that the presidency should be hired rather than elected.
In the end, I'm looking for something we can start doing tomorrow. The less we have to institute or change, the better. I'd like to work with that metaphorical table without adding yet another thing to it.
Ward Williams
We all know that hard and fast rules will not always apply, they never do. What they do do is provide a common and understandable starting point. The requirement to write an explanation offers both the employee and us to understand why things are the way they are. I certainly did not suggest bills be written by word or page count, rather by issue count.
The media. The media as you say has a cockroach mentality and is in fact all over our politicians. That fact by itself says absolutely nothing about what they're reporting. I contend that most of the media are editorializing, and not simply reporting. If that's true, what we are getting is their spin of politicians spin, or nearly worthless information.
As for my my resolute assumption that the government is one coherent body, I would suggest that I've said exactly the opposite. We, the citizens are the single largest part of the body politic. We are out of sync with each other and with our employees who are out of sync with each other. If we were one coherent body there would be no need whatever for any of the things I've suggested.
Our employees operate in secret a great deal of the time, and I think we should do what we can to mitigate that. I'd be all in for doing nothing if there were any demonstrable evidence that it might work.
george lockwood 20+
Grace Greene 10+
bristol ozturgut