If you could Change One Law, which one and why?

[PatekPhilippe]

Lobbyists are ok, but they should all be unpaid and only reimburseable for actual expenses.

I can hear them now...

"What's the point of being a lobbyist if I'm not getting billions from the taxpayer?"

 

[bodecea]

as the op says, if you could change one law, which one would you change and why? This doesn't mean bill, but rather a single law.

I'd be interested in hearing the answers.

doma

 

[Immanuel]

You want to know something I just found funny?

I just realized that there are people on here that know me from my early days of political chat boards who will be damned surprised that I did not say "Roe v. Wade".

My how times have changed!

Immie

 

[Avatar4321]

I would ban any and all lobbiests and force our politicians to work only for the people of this nation..

Yeah heaven forbid people talk to their politicians. We need to ban people from talking to their politicians so our politicians can do the peoples work.

Because clearly the people interfere with the "people's work" way too much.

And you guys still dont understand why marxism is bad.

Only if joe average guy has the same level of access as the lobbyists do.

They arent that difficult to get ahold of. Well unless they are Democrats. then they dont want to deal with you.

 

[uscitizen]

You want to know something I just found funny?

I just realized that there are people on here that know me from my early days of political chat boards who will be damned surprised that I did not say "Roe v. Wade".

My how times have changed!

Immie

times and some people to some degree. I happens with time and life.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I'd make a law that says congress has to have support from 20% of the other side for any bill to pass and combine that with a one item per bill law.

 

[Modbert]

Any of our silly drug laws. The people should have freedom of choice, especially with their bodies. The government has no right to intervene.

Pure Food and Drug Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Harrison Narcotics Tax Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Controlled Substances Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And if you could choose one out of that list?

 

[Modbert]

I'd make a law that says congress has to have support from 20% of the other side for any bill to pass and combine that with a one item per bill law.

Would that include both houses needing 20% of support or just one?

 

[Zoom-boing]

I'd make a law that says congress has to have support from 20% of the other side for any bill to pass and combine that with a one item per bill law.

Would that include both houses needing 20% of support or just one?

Both, bipartisan on all bills. I don't think either side understands what compromise means.

 

[Dr Grump]

I would ban any and all lobbiests and force our politicians to work only for the people of this nation..

Yeah heaven forbid people talk to their politicians. We need to ban people from talking to their politicians so our politicians can do the peoples work.

Because clearly the people interfere with the "people's work" way too much.

And you guys still dont understand why marxism is bad.

And you think lobbying is good? I think lobbying is for the scum of the earth. Illegal in NZ....the govt is not for special interest groups, it's what's best for the people...

 

[Dr Grump]

Requiring all bills in govt to be single subject only.
That way each item would live or die on it's own merits.

I was dumbfounded when I first found out about that (that in the US you could attach totally unrelated pieces of legislation to another)...and it is one of the reasons I believe that the US is one of the less free nations in the western world, no matter how many times the righties say otherwise....

 

[Avatar4321]

I would ban any and all lobbiests and force our politicians to work only for the people of this nation..

Yeah heaven forbid people talk to their politicians. We need to ban people from talking to their politicians so our politicians can do the peoples work.

Because clearly the people interfere with the "people's work" way too much.

And you guys still dont understand why marxism is bad.

And you think lobbying is good? I think lobbying is for the scum of the earth. Illegal in NZ....the govt is not for special interest groups, it's what's best for the people...

I think people are entitled to speak and lobby their representatives. If they didn't there would be no representation going on.

 

[Modbert]

People and special interest groups are two different things.

 

[uscitizen]

Yeah heaven forbid people talk to their politicians. We need to ban people from talking to their politicians so our politicians can do the peoples work.

Because clearly the people interfere with the "people's work" way too much.

And you guys still dont understand why marxism is bad.

And you think lobbying is good? I think lobbying is for the scum of the earth. Illegal in NZ....the govt is not for special interest groups, it's what's best for the people...

I think people are entitled to speak and lobby their representatives. If they didn't there would be no representation going on.

People yes, paid professional lobbiest groups no.
They are hired guns. And most of them are ex legislators and military types.
Using the connections they developed while working for our govt to benefit private corporations and such.

How can anyone be for paid professional lobbyists and be against earmarks and pork?

 

[Dr Grump]

And you think lobbying is good? I think lobbying is for the scum of the earth. Illegal in NZ....the govt is not for special interest groups, it's what's best for the people...

I think people are entitled to speak and lobby their representatives. If they didn't there would be no representation going on.[/QUOTE]

I think you are right...but in practical terms it seems that lobby groups are rarely after peoples' interests, but corporations. Take the pharmaceutical lobby or oil lobby. It's never about what's best for the people or their environment, it inevitably comes back to "how much money will it cost/save us". The bottom line is the mighty dollar, not necessarily what is right.