A modest proposal: All laws must have an expiration date

[frigidweirdo]

Then no one would ever do any work at all. Running for reelection would start at the moment of election.

Perhaps make it a body appointed by each state legislature, like the US Senate was before the 17th Amendment. Or just repeal that "progressive" amendment altogether so that the adults run the asylum rather than fat turds who vote for hand outs.

Just trying to think back in the box I guess.

How about this. Instead of voting FPTP, change to PR, this will increase the number of political parties, increase the effectiveness of a person's vote, take away the control of the main two parties some what, allow for coalition government.

And for the president have a French run off system, vote twice, (or have a number system, 1 for your preferred candidate, 2 for the next etc.) and therefore the people's will be found in voting again.

Then the law makers will be ore interested in THE PEOPLE and not corporate nonsense.

It's really the only solution.

Disagree.

Real change can occur only at the very local level, not the top down, and not by rearranging the governmental deck chairs.

The people alone are responsible for the good – or bad – government they get.

Our current form of government is perfectly appropriate, that the people are incapable – or unwilling – to use it as designed does not warrant its abandonment.

I'd say go look at the German system of voting and see the difference it makes. I'll post something later to back up what I'm saying, right now I don't have time.

 

[there4eyeM]

All laws? Including this one?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Then no one would ever do any work at all. Running for reelection would start at the moment of election.

Perhaps make it a body appointed by each state legislature, like the US Senate was before the 17th Amendment. Or just repeal that "progressive" amendment altogether so that the adults run the asylum rather than fat turds who vote for hand outs.

Just trying to think back in the box I guess.

How about this. Instead of voting FPTP, change to PR, this will increase the number of political parties, increase the effectiveness of a person's vote, take away the control of the main two parties some what, allow for coalition government.

And for the president have a French run off system, vote twice, (or have a number system, 1 for your preferred candidate, 2 for the next etc.) and therefore the people's will be found in voting again.

Then the law makers will be ore interested in THE PEOPLE and not corporate nonsense.

It's really the only solution.

Disagree.

Real change can occur only at the very local level, not the top down, and not by rearranging the governmental deck chairs.

The people alone are responsible for the good – or bad – government they get.

Our current form of government is perfectly appropriate, that the people are incapable – or unwilling – to use it as designed does not warrant its abandonment.

Back to the German system.

In 2009 Germany had a Federal Election. 6 parties got into government. Make that five as CSU and CDU are basically the same party. I actually saw Angela Merkel walk into the Rathaus of a Bavarian city when the CSU conference was on there. That's how close they are.

The CDU won. They got 31.2% of the seats (and the CSU got 7.2% of the seats to make 38.4%).
The SPD got 23.5% of the seats.

Then you had the FDP (center right more or less) with 15% of the seats, Alliance '90 and die Gruene on 10.9% and die Linke on 12.2%

So, no one party could waltz into the Bundestag. This led the CDU/CSU having to organize a coalition with the FDP.

This means that they have to talk about what they want, to do deals, to come to a consensus, to get rid of the stuff that neither wants. The people know this and they vote accordingly.

While the CDU/CSU got 38.42% of the seats, they received 27.3% of the PR votes and 32% of the constitutional votes. In other words when it came down to it, people felt they were able to vote for other parties with PR, when they voted CDU or CSU when it came to the constituency vote.

6.3 million people, or 14.6% of the people voted for the FDP, even though they knew the FDP would not get into senior government. Those who would otherwise vote CDU or CSU because they don't want the left to get into power, could vote FDP knowing that their vote would count, and it might count towards a coalition between these two parties.

9.7 million people voted for Alliance '90/die Gruene or die Linke, left wing parties, while 9.9 million voted SPD, the main left wing party. They knew a vote for these lower parties wouldn't hard the SPD.

So, people can make tactical decision. Less people voted FDP, Alliance '90/die Gruene and die Linke in the constituency election than in the PR election.

All in all the voice of the people is more or less listened to.

The last election was slightly different, you need to get 5% of the PR vote to get seats in government. Two parties, the FDP and Alternative for Germany got 4.8% and 4.9% which seems a bit harsh, but thems the rules.

At the very least, Germany's government is far more willing to listen to the people. Yes, Merkel has got strong because she's a very competent leader and there's been issues with immigration. However I doubt it's Merkel's fault. A lot of this is to do with issues surrounding WW2 and Germany dealing with this problem, or not dealing with the problem in East German (or Austria) and the number of far right parties in the East outnumbering those the west massively now.

In the US, people don't feel they have a choice.

In 2012 Obama got 51.1% of the votes and Romney got 47.2%.

That means less than 2% of the population felt they could vote for another party. In Germany that was 40%. See the difference? Democracy in Germany, in the US, well.....

 

[kaz]

Do you know how many 10's of years it would take for a congress to renew every single law ever?

Yes, it would be fantastic. Think of how little time that would leave them to create new laws

 

[J.E.D]

A modest proposal: All laws must have an expiration date

That's a terrible idea

 

[Jack4jill]

One generation said Jefferson. Otherwise you were being ruled by dead men and laws you didn't consent to.

 

[Jack4jill]

A modest proposal: All laws must have an expiration date

That's a terrible idea

You can always renew them, if they work out.

 

[rightwinger]

Do you know how many 10's of years it would take for a congress to renew every single law ever?

Congress can't do their job now

They want them to have to debate them every two years?

 

[DiazedandConfused]

Do you know how many 10's of years it would take for a congress to renew every single law ever?

That would be awesome, it would give them something to do and keep them from doing any more damage.

And then we could all complain more about how Congress gets nothing done! Forget this, let's just elect hookers to Congress. We know how to get the job done!

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I have a better idea. Make Congress a 3 month job and brohibit the creation of new laws all together. Why do we need new laws every damn week? WHY? As children our parents didn't create new rules every week. Why does Congress treat us like mentally challenged children? Why do we allow it?

 

[TheOldSchool]

I have a better idea. Make Congress a 3 month job and brohibit the creation of new laws all together. Why do we need new laws every damn week? WHY? As children our parents didn't create new rules every week. Why does Congress treat us like mentally challenged children? Why do we allow it?

I'd settle for term limits.