We've got Democrats pretending to be Republicans, Republicans posing as Democrats, both major parties along with Independents, Libertarians, Progressives, the Green Party, the Tea Party, red states, blue states, Liberals, Conservatives and all other cliques and parties in between professing to be comprised of ordinary human beings ... one group blames another for all the world's problems yet offers no solutions, and vice versa ... nobody takes responsibility, and as always the American people are the real losers ... payoffs and bribes, waste and lies influence nearly every decision made by these self-serving career politicians ... the country is being blatantly stripped to the bone with extreme prejudice by these pretentious, unscrupulous power mongers ... we have little or no say as to the actions or lack thereof by our sworn public servants ... we've been hoodwinked and bamboozled, the wool has been pulled firmly and impudently over our blinded eyes, we've all been sold a bill of goods ... we've all been left in the dark holding the bag, an empty bag at that!
I have a solution, a crazy, radical, off-the-wall solution that just might work, but would never in a million years be accepted ... it's a simple solution involving term limits ... the following is how it would work ... since the majority of all politicians spend so much time and money just to get elected to public office, then after taking office spend even more money and most of their time trying to get reelected, with most decisions being made with the thought of gaining favor and approval from the most potential voters, and little effort actually put forth into doing their jobs ... I propose term limits of "one and done" all across the board from top to bottom.
Now what "one and done" means is that any particular person who is qualified, and who has the good of his fellow man at heart would be permitted to seek and to hold just one regular 2 to 4 year term in public office in any governmental capacity during their entire lifetime, all the way from city councilman to President of the United States ... that means if you are elected as city councilman, or dog catcher, mayor, governor, senator or president, and your term in office officially concludes, your career in public life then ends, you return to the private sector ineligible to ever hold any type of public office again for the rest of your natural life ... oh you would still be allowed to offer your expertise, advice or suggestions to your predecessor free of charge and in a limited, unofficial manner if requested, but you would have absolutely no power or authority.
Crazy huh? ... "one and done" ... but that's not all, so as to ensure that elected public servants genuinely have the good of the public at heart, no public funds could be spent on political campaigns ... limits would be set fairly and equally as to the total amount from private sources that any candidate would be permitted by law to accept or spend in their respective political arenas ... each "servant" would only be paid the federal minimum wage while in office ... medical coverage would be provided by the same providers and at the same level and cost as that of any other public employee insurance system in their respective geographical areas ... there would be no pensions or retirement benefits ... in addition, or subtraction, however you want to look at it, elected public officials would not be permitted to hold employment at any other job while in office, they would be required to devote all their time and attention to the duties and responsibilities of their respective offices ... and would be required to provide their own transportation to and from work ... just maybe if our public officials didn't have to spend all their time trying to gain power, money and influence in order to get reelected to multiple terms in public life, and just maybe if public life suddenly became an extremely unprofitable and less glamorous venture, then just maybe all the worthless, self-serving, lying, deceitful, thieving miscreants would get out of the way so talented, capable, well-meaning folks with no motive other than the good of our country could step forward and serve one term in public office with little or no financial gain, their only reward being the satisfaction of knowing they contributed something of substance for the betterment of mankind at great personal cost and sacrifice! ... might reduce the size of government too ... one and done.
--sja
23 comments:
No pensions!
Duly noted ... no need for pension plans under "one and done" ...
I totally agree with this! One and done sounds good to me....but, in today's society with the scales tipped the way they are in favor of power and greed, implementing it is another story. Also, it really pisses me off to see these politicians get all the free rides they get....most of them are already rich, that's why they go into politics in the first place. They can already afford all the niceties of life, i.e. free health care, pensions,free use of government vehicles, etc. etc. etc...."One and Done" seems the only fair way to "weed out" all the B.S. that is going on and put the power back in the hands of real hard working people! So keep fighting the good fight one step at a time, and oneday, "One and Done" can become a reality!
Hear, hear!!
Or is it here? Well, it ain't there, that's for sure!
Thanks Mysticdave, your comment is truly appreciated ... I do believe something along the lines of "one and done" could go a long way toward bringing or restoring sanity and integrity back into our government ... something has to be done, other than change just for change's sake ...
In the closing paragraph you touched-upon some great points; and much of what you stated dovetail with my own views on the matter. While I believe that serving in government should be of valor and altruistic intent, I'm not sure if setting a time term is a necessary parameter. I think the assumption is that a representative or leader will become ineffective or 'fat, dumb, and happy'; and, yes, this could certainly occur. However, once a meaningful 'group' of representatives is realized or cultured over time, this could be a positive means by which the newly elected should learn. Without indigenous tutelage, I'd be concerned that every 2,4, or 6 years would bring about, or resurrect a learning curve; and, with that, the system would effectually get bogged-down. Any good, solid team needs its share of veterans as well as its rookies; and this mix is what brings success. I do, however, quite agree that the glamor, opulence, and entitlement be edited from the system so as to raise the leadership to represent the masses and not benefit the individual.
Fegger you just might be onto something there ... Barack Obama had absolutely no experience as far as handling the job of President of the United States is concerned ... and he spent most of his time while in the Senate working toward becoming president ... while inexperience doesn't necessarily equate with inability, Barack Obama's inability to advance his agenda and accomplish his goals is glaringly obvious, even with a super majority of "cultured veterans" seated in Congress.
However, when our public servants become too comfortable or secure in their respective offices, becoming fat, dumb, happy, ineffective, corrupt or self-serving is a broad and easy path to take ... the current group of cultured veterans now running the country already have the system bogged down tighter than a tick in a hound's ear ... and when folks begin to believe they are indispensable or irreplaceable, it's time for them to move on.
Indigenous tutelage could be a good thing, depending on it's source ... but indigenous tutelage does not supersede character, morality, honesty, integrity, selflessness, sacrifice, intelligence, wisdom, honor and common sense!
An excellent way for one to begin to obtain meaningful indigenous tutelage would be to study the thoughts, principles and intents of our Founding Fathers, along with as much true American history as possible.
Your point is well-taken and appreciated Fegger ... discussion is the first step toward understanding and progress ... thank you for the comment, visit often ... one and done.
Really? ...
Dang!
Is that Spanish or Italian?
FYI--Just to let you guys know, that guy was ordering 'take-out' and mistakenly keyed the wrong IP. The good news is that he's STILL waiting for delivery.
Thanks Fegger ... I was beginning to think Blogger had been sold to China ...
Enough levity for me, back to the discussion at hand.
There are a few things yet to be explored here. I think we're identifying our Congress, in general, as being corrupt and self-serving; and, in doing so, we're pining for the words and virtue of our Founding Fathers. It may be argued that the Capital, Congress, and Wall St. are responding to the inherent benefits or terms set forth by our 'FF'. The concept was to reap what can be achieved by hard work and self-determination. Certainly it could be stated that these folks are adept at the game, know the rules, and grab as much as they can while in a position to do so; and this may be the premise for which they engage and justify their behavior. In other words, they're pooling their personal aspirations with their 'civil' duties. The difficulty I would have with this theory is that they're inherently granted the position or right to manipulate the rules or system to their advantage; and this is what I find most corrupt.
Another thing to look at is the power, resource and influence of lobbyists, special-interest groups, and big business. These supply a drug, if you will, that intoxicates those members of Congress. I happen to live in the state that sent Chris Dodd to Washington; and I can't think of any Congressman who has benefited more financially or by entitlement than he has via big businesses, SI groups, and influential lobbyists. It's mind-blowing how much money and chattels cross hands to have a Congressman in ones pocket.
Lastly, (for the moment)is that there isn't a civilian check system in place. We have a vote; and that's what we have. However, the government is a closed system. Who investigates improprieties in the government? Well, the government investigates such things--shame on the press or the righteous individual for blowing the horn and creating such a petty diversion in the midst of 'good business dealings'. There are civilian driven 'watch-dog' agencies dotted about the States; but these are not centralized and operate independently unto themselves. If such organization can be achieved to monitor the government without prejudice, then I think you'd find that Congress would tend to behave more appropriately; until, of course, the 'leaders' of these organizations get bought-off as well. I'd love, absolutely love to see a band of reputable, honest CPAs audit the government spending practices. I think that would be such an asset to the American people. To do so, however, (given present model), one would have to be a government agent--thereby defeating the purpose of objectivity.
Thoughts?
Notwithstanding my oft sudden yet inveterate bouts of shameless jocosity ... I think a fool uttereth all his mind: but a wise man keepeth it in till afterwards ... thus I digress ...
Corruption results from an immoral and corrupt heart - I suppose what the Founding Fathers had in mind was a government comprised of and conducted by individuals whose attributes consist not only of wisdom and intelligence, but also high moral character, honor, integrity, selflessness and honesty - of which there's little of in present-day government ...
I hear you, sja, but we may need to set the bar at a more realistic height as, I believe, the only one I know of who fits that description is Jesus Christ; and I'm pretty sure He's not up to switching jobs at the moment.
I do understand your sentiments here; and am personally as frustrated as to the lack of integrity and altruistic intent that the majority, if not all of, Congress displays at this time. I'm not convinced that 'flushing the Congressional Toilet' every election year will yield the necessary results. It 'may' keep the ego-maniacs in check to some degree; but may also create a system of figure-heads whereby someone behind the curtain is notably pulling the strings. As you're indicating, however, the need is for a quality leader/voice with an honest, unyielding integrity; and I'm not convinced that these type of individuals exist---at least of those with political aspirations. I believe the contemporary 'model' is broken; and because it is broken, it becomes a festering grounds for the likes of which we are presently experiencing. My suggestion (eluded) to curtail the SI groups, lobbyists, et al. was one means to 'purify' the occupation and keep people on track, so to speak. The government monitoring system, also suggested, would serve to keep those folks honest---even when their personal aspirations detour them otherwise. When these individuals take office, they testify their sincerest intentions, before God and country; and we are 'comforted' by their pledged allegiance to us. They, in turn, have betrayed this oath and our trust. We need a plan to make it worth their while to operate as the position indicates, perform as expected, or face a viable means to be corrected and/or removed.
Not that it matters a whole lot, but I had published an editorial about 14 months ago with regards to some of all this. My ultimate suggestion was to operate in the manner of patriotic colonists of old: Tar-and-Feather these anti-patriots in the public square. I still feel that a modern version of this will be enough of a deterrent that, when employed over time, may yield or give rise and credence to those who are not only capable of representing the public, but have a desire to do so in compliance with the 'original' model.
You're absolutely right Fegger - public scrutiny and humiliation of these unscrupulous opportunists would go a long way toward deterring greed and corruption in government ... the biggest obstacle as to public awareness is the sheer number of so-called unbiased and no-spin-zone voices out there promoting their own agendas and platforms under the guise of fact and truth - it's difficult for the average individual to differentiate between those voices and actual fact and truth ...
Any watchdog group with the aim of effecting accountability and transparency, words bandied about quite a bit these days, would only be effective if made up of individuals of good character and integrity, far from the loudmouth, celebrity snake oil salesmen who now control and manipulate mainstream media with their agenda-based message ... the challenge lies in finding those individuals of character and integrity, and in providing them with the necessary voice and means to man the watchtower ...
I would be interesting in reading your editorial if at all possible, it might be something we could feature here on the blog, a small blog, but growing everyday ...
I love the idea, but suspect we'd have to found our own country somewhere to implement it. And even then, having worked in several co-op type businesses, I'd have doubts about its total success, though I know it'd be a hell of a lot better than what we've got now..
Doggone Nothingprofound - I believe the Founding Fathers were probably thinking the same thing! ...
sja--here is one of the links to the editorial:
http://www.bukisa.com/articles/40240_call-to-revolution-america
Please understand that this was written a few days after Obama was elected and prior to him actually taking office; so, in short, it's a bit dated in anticipatory commentary. You're free to view it, not view it, and/or do with it as you wish.
sja--To locate the true 'leaders' you/we are seeking, I have little confidence that these people ever aspired to be leaders, but were common folk who sought the truth and justice; their leadership arrived by default. If my grade-school history memory is correct, our first President vehemently refused the request to lead several times; yet, subsequently agreed to do so, understanding that a new nation may incur years of civil unrest or war; and he was a military man--thereby agreeing to the position based upon his military wit and uncanny insights and integrity--not to mention abject courage. So, I believe the best leaders may be reluctant leaders--those who aren't politicians--those who want to see the fruits of their labors in the success of the commoner and not of himself.
In reality, I think these folks can be found and could actually find a place in Congress---that seems plausible to me. I do not, for a moment, believe that a President will come from the ranks of the commoner in my lifetime. The system of creating potential candidates is still predicated on personal wealth and/or affiliations; and I don't believe that someone with meager means will have the capacity to topple such an indigenous force. Locating someone with wealth/status and a commoner's head and morals would be a good find for sure. It seems there has to be someone out there! Beyond that, we'd have to take into consideration that the present holders of office don't take kindly to ideals such as ours; but that's a different fight altogether, isn't it?
Our own Revolution started with just a handful of people, here and there--eventually a groundswell occurred. These folks created this country without the communication networks that we know today. So, I would believe that our ability to change things around quickly and with greater efficacy is certainly within our power and our right.
Fegger, you have very good insight and ideas, and express them well ... your editorial, although written months ago is just as relevant today ... as I stated before, this is but a humble blog, few are submitting comments, but several are reading, and traffic does seem to be increasing daily - perhaps you would like to contribute a post/posts here from time to time so as to gauge potential interest from other readers and like-minded individuals ... it could turn into quite the worthwhile effort ... otherwise I seem to do better sticking with humor, rants and satire at the moment ...
sja--Don't downplay or underestimate the value of your endeavor here; but I certainly appreciate your meek and humble stature! In reading your posts, your language system, and how you address the topic, I'm reminded of another American humorist/satirist by the name of 'Mark Twain'. The common sense approach and the candor by which you address the topic and your patrons is not so dissimilar to that of him. In short, I find it invigorating and refreshing; and I fully intend to return, regardless of the topic(s) you may be exploring. I've had occasion to participate in other blogs and have found them to be stale, remedial, thoughtless, and more in-tuned to propagation of the site than having intelligent or whimsical banter exchanged. That's my humble thought on the matter.
With your permission, I'd like to forward this blog to one or two friends who I believe would welcome the interactions as I have. While we may part company on certain finite perspectives, I have the utmost respect for their intellect, maturity, and ability to contribute to a worthwhile discussion or venture. From there, I would hope that they, too, have others that would contribute in a positive manner. After that, we'll have enough of a following to, at least, get you elected Mayor in your hometown---wherever that may be. ;-)
Thank you for having me.
Thank you for the kind words Fegger, it's folks such as yourself that make me feel it worthwhile to write another story or two ... I do hope you'll return often, and please feel free to share this blog, or any portions of this blog with whomever you like ...
More importantly, be careful that your extolments don't cause me to become big-headed - my realistic goal and aspiration as far as entering political life and public servitude were simply that of attaining the office of municipal dog catcher - but mayor? ... come on now! ...
Kind words indeed ... remindful of something on which I can't place my finger at the moment.
Not that I disagree but we should strive to keep things in perspective ... if you are to be restricted to but one term, regardless of the elected office, it should be something of greater consequence, methinks.
As an aside, was Flegger's last comment set a positive or negative response ... or just a non-response?
Post a Comment