Forum Post: Vote for a new constitution on the internet
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 10, 2011, 5:59 p.m. EST by pozdnychev
(36)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Hi people of America.
May not be conscious of it, but the world is watching on you. If a worldwide movement starts, it's from where you are and struggle. Even if our histories are different, they are now linked by globalization. Here in France (that's from where I am), we have a long past of social looting, but we sleep upon it. During the French Revolution, there was a big set of propositions coming from all over the country. Local, then general assemblies. A proposition for a Constitution was born. And then you know how it ended.
In America, as well as in Europe, we need a new Constitution, taking into account economical, social and environmental challenges that we have to overcome. We have to RE-THINK everything. From the start. Just like in 1776 in the US. Don't forget that OUR revolution was inspired by YOURS (don't you remember LaFayette ?).
This is my proposition: why not elaborate a new constitution on the internet ? A constitution that everyone would be able to vote for ? I don't know if this is electronically possible. I don't know much in this field. But I say: WHY NOT ?
Exactly, a new constitution is needed, and although I'm all in favor of taking down today's ineffective and inefficient Top 10% Management Group of Business & Government, there's only one way to do it – by fighting bankers as bankers ourselves. Consequently, I have posted a 1-page Summary of the Strategic Legal Policies, Organizational Operating Structures, and Tactical Investment Procedures necessary to do this at:
http://getsatisfaction.com/americanselect/topics/on_strategic_legal_policy_organizational_operational_structures_tactical_investment_procedures
Join
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/StrategicInternationalSystems/
if you want to support a Presidential Candidate at AmericansElect.org in support of the above bank-focused platform.
A constitution should only address the powers of government and the rights of individuals.
A positive change for the good of the people:
http://www.the99amendment.com/
Very good beginning indeed. Let's keep in mind the example of Iceland.
The only thing wrong with the Consitution is that the 1% have been paying all the politicians to ignore it for at least 80 years,
We don’t have to go that far, just repeal all the nonsense articles after the original ones.
A world constitution? How do you propose the citizens of this planet determine it, adopt it, and then enforce it without violence?
Just like the Universal Declaration for Human Rights. Creating revolutionary councils in each country, and then vote at an international level (international council of the 99%)...?
I would first suggest a planetary Declaration of Independence for all citizens of Earth.
Understand that those is power will not surrender it without a fight. Not only in America but across the globe.
You are talking a populous world uprising which I doubt anyone has the real courage & fortitude it takes to make it happen.
It's one thing to sit in a park. It's entirely different to replace every single government on the face of the earth.
A Planetary Bill of Rights?
Not all the world has access to the Internet as you and I do. How do their voices get heard?
This is the weak point. Maybe a combination of internet collected propositions and locally collected propositions (on old fashioned paper) could be an answer. Maybe a planetary bill of Rights is too ambitious. But we shall keep in mind the remarkable example of the Icelandic Constitution, and how it was quite democratically elaborated.
How about this instead... put the USA's governmental budget online and let people divy up the budget as they think it should be administered. I'd be interested in how the average American would budget things. Would they reduce the deficit? Increase it? How much funding would the military get? What about public health?
I think it would be a very worthwhile experiment
This IS possible!! Iceland did it; it's just that the media didn't cover it (wonder why) http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/08/01/1001662/-Icelands-On-going-Revolution - for more info.
Support Revolution 2.0 - Their idea restructures the government to where the people oversee the actions of the government – even overturn governments’ decisions when the majority deem it necessary - true representation. We just have to want it badly enough! http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_intro.aspx Overview: Welcome to the beginning of the second American Revolution. The purpose is to educate and to move the United States and the rest of the world forward. We all know that something is terribly wrong with our country but we don't have a clue what to do about it. But we do know we cannot continue to sit around and do nothing. We are so confused, we don't realize how dangerous it is to continue voting for democrats and republicans. We've become mentally crippled and dependent on two parties and our current form of government. They can't help you. The best people to help the people are the people. Until you figure that out, you will remain lost. Welcome to the Revolution. Revolution 2.0 is a revolution in ideas and technology along with a vision to move this country forward. Read common sense 3.1 and the rest of the pages on the menu. This will give you a clear understanding of what the problems are, what we need to do about them and most important, how to proceed by taking real action. Our government didn't create itself and it can't fix itself. Problems never solve themselves… Common sense 3.1 is a call to action to address the problems of the nation. http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx The second bill of rights are the baseline expectations and goals for Revolution 2.0 http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_billofrights.aspx The Declaration of Dissolution and Termination (DDT) is a formal and legal declaration of grievances prepared by the people of the United States to be served to the government of the Untied States. The declaration is also a formal and legal order by the people to the government of the United States to cease and desist specific government operations in accordance with instructions laid down by the Execution of Dissolution and Termination. http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Intro_DT.aspx The Execution of Dissolution and Termination (EDT) is the formal process and rules for dissolving parts or all of the old government and then terminating the old government after the new government has been fully implemented. http://www.osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Execution.aspx Yes, you guessed it - this ain't no tea party. What I do like about this movement, is that it gets the job done without violence. If violence breaks out; the government can and will impose martial law and the rest of your rights will be stripped from you. With your rights gone; your vote; your signature; and your opinion are irrelevant. With the frustration that is building in America; I can envision this possibility. Revolution 2.0 sidesteps this pitfall. If you like what you see at this site; please vote here and let them know of your support: http://www.osixs.org/Vote.aspx When the representative body have lost the confidence of their constituents, when they have notoriously made sale of their most valuable rights, when they have assumed to themselves powers which the people never put into their hands, then indeed their continuing in office becomes dangerous to the State, and calls for an exercise of the power of dissolution.
I may vote for this, even if I am not an american citizen. In France, we need a Sixth Republic, with a new constitution. This will permit to separate government from its financial influences. This will give clear goals: respect of our environment, social issues, technology and so on. Keep up with the American Revolution.
Pass the word my friend!! All support is welcome. We are in this together so your gain is our gain too and vice verse.
Exactly.
We can't even vote here. Talk about revolution is pointless without a means to vote on issues. It's just squabble now.
NO! Our constitution has made us a great nation and will continue to do so. It is Wall Street that needs to be made anew. It is this kind of bullshit that will tear us apart. Keep your hands off of MY constitution!
Uh, excuse me, but I believe pozdnychev said RE-THINK. I'm in California and am certain I can document more personal violations of constitutional right than you can. They are violations of civil right where I am the plaintiff trying to get government to follow laws by asking courts to recognize, follow and uphold laws. Guess what? No due process, no equal protection of law, and my fellow Americans can hardly distract themselves from the evening news. Therefore if Frenchie wants to suggest that we RE-THINK, I welcome that, because the French people actually exhibit a large degree of common sense. NEW CONSTITUTION however, I don't think so. RE-THINK and repair, reform, adjust, amend, YES. Now, right NOW! When RE-THINKing from the start, we begin at the Declaration of Independence. Particularly the principles it serves. RE-THINK means reknow natural law, because that is where the principles come from. All humans share those which is why America inspired France. A lot more than wall street needs to change, media needs to serve citizens supporting and defending or we go after it for working to create a society that cannot support and defend the constitution. A form of treason. We need an ARTICLE V convention. Only 2 mores states need to apply.
You cannot change the financial system without reforming the political one, as far as I'm concerned. Only a new, uncorrupt government can tackle away Wall Street.
Well at least this idea is stimulating some kind of debate. As gawdoftruth said, nothing may come from the chaos of a forum where every single person can make a new proposition, never reaching any kind of agreement. Anyway, what is important is: willing to change, and the idea that it MAY BE POSSIBLE. Just this is revolutionary. The rest is a question of organization, assemblies, democratic vote. What comes from it has to be consensual, so it can be accepted by the largest number. But this movement will not survive without DEFINITE AND CLEAR GOALS. That's what the rest of the 99%, working everyday, watching TV, saying goodnight to their kids, having beers in the bars, paying their bills, are waiting for.
What is the point of having a new constitution when the government doesn't follow the one we have already?
Because a new constitution means a new government.
Yes, we legally get to restructure our government and the mandates it operates under. Use of an Article V amendatory convention is an absolute need to defend the constitution. After we amend, and amendment that addresses the supreme courts violations of the constitution must be included in amendment to find maximum effect with all of this, or any of it perhaps.
Congress is very afraid of an Article V.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution "Congress acted preemptively to propose the amendments instead. At least four amendments (the Seventeenth, Twenty-First, Twenty-Second, and Twenty-Fifth Amendments) have been identified as being proposed by Congress at least partly in response to the threat of an Article V convention."
Our first right in our contract is Article V, the right to have congress convene delgates when 2/3 of the states have applied for an amendatory convention.
Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.
Lots of facts here about Article V. http://algoxy.com/poly/article_v_convention.html
so what do we do when the new government doesn't follow the new constitution, like the old government doesn't follow the old constitution
Then you may not need a constitution.
then how do the states work together with out some agreed upon laws
Well.. here's something which you may be interested in. When Egypt and Libya were undergoing their revolutions, I decided that what we needed was a way to crowd source a constitution which emerging countries could adopt. Most of these net-organized revolutions were basically airing their frustrations, without having some kind of ideological backbone to work from. Therefore I set up a web site called openconstitution.net. It's purpose is to have anyone in the world contribute to a constitutional document which would be fair, equitable, and truly support society for the better good of the citizens of their country, not the few who are in power.
If people think this web site can be of any use, let me know and I'll open it up and get it going. Its basically a wiki...
I don't know much of wikis. For what I know, seems quite a good idea. The problem is : who will be moderating ? And why this person, and not another ? No movements without leadership, unfortunately.
WE definitely need a re-write. For one thing our Gov't is NOT truly representative. The Senate has to go or be neutered the way the English neutered their aristocracy's House of LORDS. The Senate is just that a House of AMERICAN LORDS.
agreed, but to do that we need serious organization to support it, otherwise it will be half assed and brainless. we need a wiki, and sub forums, and science centered problem solving process, thats not going to happen in a single forum scrawl like this- so we will have to move any serious to work to some wiki and etcsite... i have given up any hope that this site will come through like that and am now actively seeking anybody we can trust to put up a wiki and a real forum with sub forums and a detailed sub forum organization .
http://occupywallst.org/forum/thetruth-socialismcapitalismcommunismmarxism/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-versus-corporatism/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/no-war/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/help-me-understand/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/capitalism-a-love-story/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/sociology/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/energy-101-solution/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ethics/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/break-your-left-right-conditioning/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/nader-kucinich-and-paul/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/5-facts-you-should-know-about-the-wealthiest-one-p/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/i-am-homeless-joe-jp-morgan-chase-accidentally-for/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/can-we-end-the-fed/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-end-the-federal-reserve-and-what-do-you-replac/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/teaching-the-occupation/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-forum-needs-structure/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-not-your-personal-billboard-for-your-politi/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/systems-theory-primer/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/organize-inform-take-action-effect-change/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/better-website-needed/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-playing-the-devils-games/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/nonviolence-the-only-path/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-not-against-capitalism/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/this-is-not-about-political-stripe-it-is-about-bas/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/national-initiative-for-democracy/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-third-political-party-the-movement-of-the-middle/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/300-fema-camps/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/ows-is-a-false-flag-operation/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/why-this-will-not-work/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/paradigm-shift-now/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-proposal-for-focus/
http://occupywallst.org/forum/stop-the-bullshit-posts-and-get-organized/
Sure you need strong organization and strong wikis. Is it possible ? I don't know. Internet is a powerful tool. But maybe dangerous in under experimented hands. Internet will not replace human assemblies anyway. As the movement grows, there is a strong need of thinking : how should we organize in order to all go in the same direction ?
i do know, and i do know how to organize such things further given an understanding of sociology, psychology, and systems and game theory. We need a wiki and sub forums, since this site has failed to provide them and is leading me on rather than giving me a time frame, i must assume they have no intention of doing that, so its up to those who do have the intention and the lucidity to do it immediately.
it would be bust and dangerous if obama did it.. he wouldn't know how to organize it. I do know how to organize it, so there it is.
and how would this voted on Constitution become enacted?
You and I are on the same page: http://www.JeffBlock2012.com
also, Iceland citizens just wrote their Constitution this year.
here's Iceland's new Constitution, currently being reviewed by their Parliament: http://stjornlagarad.is/other_files/stjornlagarad/Frumvarp-enska.pdf
It's fascinating. I like the part where only 10% of the citizens can call for a national referendum on any law passed. Only 10% - now that's true democracy in action!
Not a new constitution. Maybe an amendment or two: http://www.getmoneyout.com/
I think we need to focus on a more attainable and more central goal (campaign finance reform and cleansing the American representation of corporate influence in my mind) before we even start talking about things like this.
This movement is in it's infancy. We need to take firm, walking steps before we can run.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Sorry...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The founding fathers got it right. There is a reason why this country, one of the youngest in the world, has become the greatest country in the world in under 250 years. The constitution is not the problem. It is the laziness of this generation.
our system of government was designed in the 18th century. This system of government is part of our Constitution, the part that needs changing. Our founding fathers debated over several different systems - the one we ended up with has no particular "magic" to it. Here's a few others who also believe the system is broken:
"Politics is broken" ~ Senator Bill Bradley's public statement, 1995 when he announced he would not seek re-election, after serving 18 years as a Senator.
and 16 years later...
"The system is broken and dysfunctional...and everyone knows that." ~ Senator Tom Udall, USA Today 9/29/2011
"We Have Lost The Ability To Execute Even The Basic Functions Of Government" ~ Robert Gates - retired Secretary of Defense speech at the Constitution Center
"I think we have a very poor constitutional and political system for the 21st century. We have a system which was marvelous for 13 independent, loosely-tied states..." ~ Paul Kennedy, Professor of History (Yale) on CBS Sunday Morning (1/2/2011)
"People often note that America's political system is broken. Perhaps the truth is more awkward: America needs radical change, and it has an 18th century system determined to check and balance the absolute power of a monarchy. It is designed for gridlock at a moment when quick and large-scale action is our only hope." ~ Fareed Zakaria in Time Magazine "How to Restore the American Dream" (10/21/2010)
(the "awkward truth" is our Constitution is preventing a "more perfect Union!")
"Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (And How We the People Can Correct It)" ~ book (title) by Sanford Levinson, University of Texas (Austin)
"A More Perfect Constitution" ~ book (title) by Larry Sabato, University of Virginia Center for Politics
"A non-cooperative game lacks a higher authority to impose agreements on both sides. In Washington, no politician is bound to reach a compromise to solve any long-term problem. Everyone, however, is playing a game called "election" and the only possible goal in that game is to win the next one. If you hear someone in Congress say, "Senator X is just playing politics," a perfectly legitimate response is, "She has to. Those are the rules of the Constitution." If we grumble, as voters, that we need to throw the bums out, all we're doing it subjecting a new set of bums to the same game. Anyone who promises to fix or change Washington is merely attempting to impose a cooperative game on a town that, by design, can't play one." ~ Brendan Greeley in Bloomberg Businessweek, "The Debt Ceiling: The Case for Caving" 8/3/2011
The problem is not the framework...it is left wing radicals like all of the professors you cited who keep trying to pile on the regulations.
How can you honestly say that our system of government is not special? Look at china, russia, even the more successful nations in western europe...none of them even come close to the success that we have seen. If you think our wealth gap is bad go visit those countries and you'll have a real idea about what poverty is like.
And it is no secret that voting numbers among protesters and non protestors is embarrassingly low...so if you are so upset about the way things are get to the polls and change it. Saying we should come up with some new constitution on an internet blog is laughable. The system is changeable but people have proven themselves (in the form of low voting numbers) to be too lazy to get to the polls and change the status quo.
our system of government is broken. Who we vote into a broken system makes very little difference. It's like a NASCAR crew chief calling for a replacement driver when the car has a blown engine.
our success like you say is "success that we have seen" - it's history. We're on the decline side of the mountain now and we need a functional system of government that can make long-term decisions for the future benefit of "We the People".
you cited my citations of professors - what do you think of the quotes from a retired Senator, a seated Senator, and the recently retired Secretary of Defense?
THOSE quotes are about EXECUTION of governmental functions, which I agree with.
If you don't care enough to get out and vote then you do not deserve anything in return from the system. Americans fix things by voting. Coming up with some internet constitution is a complete joke.
GET OUT AND VOTE
You are in the majority who believe it's a "people" problem, not a "system" problem. You believe if we only put different people into the system, then the EXECUTION of government functions will operate smoothly.
I am in the minority who believe we need to fix the system (and old enough (56) to know people are people and will never change). I also believe we have LOTS of good people in the system yet we still get bad results. This is not unique to government. The Challenger disaster has been examined microscopically and the conclusion was it resulted from a bad decision making system - good people (NOBODY wanted the shuttle to explode) but good people in a bad system still produce bad results.
In 2008, 65 million people thought Obama was "the answer" and 55 million people though McCain was "the answer". Watch this John Stossel video and tell me if you agree, that voters are looking for politicians who can do "magic": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Phs6CwnutoY in 2008 100 million people did NOT vote and I figure 75 million of them are like me - did not vote because they feel it makes no difference, our "power of the vote" is powerless.
You should tell the citizens of Iceland that coming up with an internet Constitution is a joke - they took it very seriously
I too believe Americans can fix things by voting. That's why I created my candidacy based on the question "What if voters got to VOTE on a revolution?" I already know who I am voting for in 2012: http://www.JeffBlock2012.com
Well if thats the way it is why don't we vote about it to make changes in the government? Because people won't get off the couch to go vote. Its that simple. I still don't see where some internet constitution comes in to play? We have a changeable system in place > People aren't going to vote to make the changes > Changes don't happen. Where do you see the problem in this?
We have a changeable system in place ??? The only ones who can make change is Congress and they're part of the problem and therefore can't be part of the solution. "You can't expect someone to understand a problem when their paycheck depends on them not understanding the problem."
Check out my candidacy = http://www.JeffBlock2012.com It's exactly about voting to make changes in the government.
So vote out your congressmen...this whole movement comes down to laziness.
you really think different Congresspeople are the "answer"? Why is it we are just so bad at electing the "right" people?
"A non-cooperative game lacks a higher authority to impose agreements on both sides. In Washington, no politician is bound to reach a compromise to solve any long-term problem. Everyone, however, is playing a game called "election" and the only possible goal in that game is to win the next one. If you hear someone in Congress say, "Senator X is just playing politics," a perfectly legitimate response is, "She has to. Those are the rules of the Constitution." If we grumble, as voters, that we need to throw the bums out, all we're doing it subjecting a new set of bums to the same game. Anyone who promises to fix or change Washington is merely attempting to impose a cooperative game on a town that, by design, can't play one." ~ Brendan Greeley in Bloomberg Businessweek, "The Debt Ceiling: The Case for Caving" 8/3/2011
Stop giving me these random quotes from random staff writers. I could find a quote that supports communism and post it here if I didn't want to argue for myself.
I agree politics is screwed up. Putting career politicians into office is the worst thing ever. All I am arguing is that coming up with a new "internet constitution" is completely ridiculous.
I also quoted a retired Senator, a seated Senator, and a recently retired Secretary of Defense.
Go tell the citizens of Iceland that their new "internet constitution" is completely ridiculous.
How about we start with these policies:
I-Addressing current and past Wall Street misbehavior:
Civil suits by DOJ against all the main investment banks, criminal investigations against any and all higher-ups at these banks. Penalties to include confiscation of all assets, physical and otherwise.
II-Preventing further Wall Street misbehavior:
Restoration of Depression-era bank legislation beginning with Glass-Steagall. Breaking up of all financial conglomerates; each division becomes an independent company with a new CEO, directors, etc. Compensation limits on financial higher-ups, including the end of golden parachutes Federal regulation of the derivatives market, either ban CDOs outright or subject them to special scrutiny Expand fraud legislation to include conflicts of interest; no more short-selling someone whom you're financing or advising, no more staple financing or similar practices Full disclosure of asset portfolios to federal regulators, regulators to retain independent analysts to rate portfolio elements and assign value to overall portfolio Leveraging regulations; the ratio of exotic assets (including but not limited to CDOs) to hard cash capped at 5 to 1 Redesignate PACs, political organizations, etc. as for-profit corproations and regulate them as such Eliminate the 501(c)(4) designation and redesignate its current members as for-profit institutions
III-Tax reform:
Uncap the FICA; all income subject to Social Security and Medicare taxation, not just the first $106,000. New income tax brackets starting at $250,000 annual income, $500,000 annual income, and $1,000,000 annual income, taxed at 45%, 55%, and 65% respectively. Restore the estate tax for all estates/trust funds/portfolios over $1 million in value and set it to 70% Set tariffs on all imported goods in order to give companies an impetus to begin manufacturing in America.
IV-Mortgage relief:
Funds obtained through procedures outlined in Section I against financial conglomerates used to take all struggling mortgages out of the hands of the banks. Fannie and Freddie unwound and replaced by a new government loan/mortgage agency with entirely new staff The new agency takes struggling mortgages and refinances them in such a manner that homeowners can reasonably expect to pay the balances on time. In cases where that is clearly not possible (i.e. both adults in household unemployed), the agency forgives the mortgage.
V-Student loan relief:
Same process for student loans as for mortgages In order to attract talent to the federal government, set up a sponsorship program: high-performing students in qualifying programs of study will have their education paid for by Uncle Sam in return for five years' service in the government agency corresponding to their area of study (i.e. economics and finance majors would do their time in the Fed or in financial regulatory agencies)
VI-Unemployment relief:
Use the funds garnered through tax reform as per Section III to begin actual projects that put people to work No disbursement of the money to states, all relief-eligible projects to be initiated and overseen at the federal level All parts for infrastructure projects to be obtained in America (i.e. a bridge replacement would only purchase steel manufactured in a plant in America) Project staff (excluding federal overseers) to be exclusively hired from the unemployed (where it is possible to find unemployed people with the necessary qualifications), all the way from the construction worker to the project manager.
VII-Campaign finance reform:
Ban all campaign contributions by corporations, for-profit or otherwise. Ban group contributions in general. Cap donations by individuals at $500 per candidate. Personal and family wealth disallowed: you may "donate" up to $500 to yourself and each family member over 18 may donate up to $500 to you, but other than that nothing. Cap total donations at $100 million. Provide a base public fund from tax dollars to each candidate to work from.
VIII-Lobbying reform:
Create an open forum setting in which all interest groups and/or citizens may express their views. All open forum sessions to be taped, and both tapes and transcripts to be made publicly available on paper and on the Internet within 24 hours of such a session. Forbid access to politicians by interest groups and their representatives outside the open forum. Forbid any and all gifts from interest group representatives to politicians. Forbid regulators from working at corporations in the field they were responsible for overseeing for twenty years from end of time in office. Forbid any politician from taking private-sector lobbying or consulting employment for five years from the end of their term. Apply the same rules to lobbyists wishing to enter politics (five year cooldown period, twenty if you want to oversee the same field your company worked in).
all great policy suggestions. How would they be implemented? By Congress?
Or are you suggesting them to be part of my platform?
I would definitely like to see these as part of your platform; if possible I would like to see these brought to the Senate floor and (hopefully) passed! I'd advise advertising the last two policy ideas most prominently because they should be fairly palatable to the standard American voter regardless of party affiliation. Once you're in, then make those two issues your priority.
Assuming you've managed to get VII and VIII through, work on the other six in whatever manner is most politically expedient; if you think you can get any one or two of them through most easily then start there. It should get easier from there on out because VII and VIII essentially neuter the special interest groups most likely to interfere with I-VI and make it easier for sympathizers such as yourself to put our own candidates up for the legislature.
I just printed them. Thanks!
No problem; glad I could be of service. Also, I'd like you to elaborate further on:
a) the Fair Tax; why would you choose to accomplish federal revenue gathering through a flat-rate sales tax rather than a graduated income tax similar to what I suggested in II? I understand the prebate does create some protection for the poor, but what does that approach grant you over what I suggested?
b) eliminating the FICA: What do you propose we do about retirees? I know you want to keep spending down but the mess we're in right now is a testament to the fact that corporations do not even care about their current employees. Why should we trust them to look after people who are no longer making them money?
c) healthcare being an employer-provided benefit: what will you do for people who are unemployed, or whose employers are unwilling to provide them with health insurance? If you're not willing to provide a federal public option then they'll become the states' problem and what's to say the states will do right by them.
d) delegating things to the states in general: state governments today are known for being terrifically gridlocked, corrupt, and unable to serve their citizens. We had cops leading New Jersey assemblymen out of the courthouse in handcuffs all of two years ago, and yet you're willing to place the welfare of our most vulnerable citizens in their hands.
e) acting as a "tax haven" for corporations ( a quote from your website). What exactly do you mean by this, and what exactly do you want to do to corporate tax rates? Are you looking to lower the rates and close the loopholes, or do you want to abolish corporate taxes altogether?
I'm sorry if this comes off as confrontational, but these things matter a great deal to me and I want to be sure anyone I may look to as a leader can answer these questions.
feel free to go to my Facebook Page (Jeff Block - politician) or email me at JeffBlock2012@gmail.com. (just finding this thread again took me a few minutes)
First, understand the concept - my candidacy is to be a conduit for those voting for me (I use the figure 65,000,000) to create a platform that is binding. My opinions and thoughts on programs and policies make very little difference, I'm the torch passer. The exception(s) are 1) the Fair Tax 2) All citizens get rights at birth (pro-choice) and 3) Every citizen has the same rights regardless of...(including) sexual preferences (Gay/Lesbian marriages).
@) Fair Tax - as with all changes, nobody knows precisely how things will work out. I'm a huge fan of the Fair Tax because of their methodology, they started with a blank piece of paper. The problem with taxing income lays in trying to define "income". - here's from IRS commissioners:
"... the key question is: can we define 'income' in a fair and reasonably straightforward manner? Unfortunately we have not yet succeeded in doing so. We should repeal the Internal Revenue Code and start over." -- Former IRS Commissioner Shirley Peterson, April 1993
"Eight decades of amendments... to [the] code have produced a virtually impenetrable maze... The rules are unintelligible to most citizens... The rules are equally mysterious to many government employees who are charged with administering and enforcing the law". -- Former IRS Commissioner Shirley Peterson, April 14, 1993 at Southern Methodist University
"I don't like the income tax. Every time we talk about these taxes we get around to the idea of 'from each according to his capacity and to each according to his needs'. That's socialism. It's written into the Communist Manifesto. Maybe we ought to see that every person who gets a tax return receives a copy of the Communist Manifesto with it so he can see what's happening to him". -- Former IRS Commissioner T. Coleman Andrews, May 25, 1956 in US. News & World Report
So regardless of how we tax income, we still have to define income. I also believe it is no business of any level of government to know what we earn and how we earn it (as long as it's legal).
Also about 20 million people support the Fair Tax, it's already a comprehensive plan and bill in Congress (supported by about 70 Congresspeople). It is "shovel ready" to borrow a metaphor. If I'm elected the FairTax.org people will be in the White House on day 2.
I think the Fair Tax is a move in the right direction. Is it perfect? No way.
b) An issue for the new government to address c) From President Obama's first internet town forum: "The problem is, is that we have what's called a legacy, a set of institutions that aren't that easily transformed. Let me just see a show of hands: How many people here have health insurance through your employer? Okay, so the majority of Americans, sort of -- partly for historical accident. I won't go into -- FDR had imposed wage controls during war time in World War II. People were -- companies were trying to figure out how to attract workers. And they said, well, maybe we'll provide health care as a benefit. And so what evolved in America was an employer-based system. It may not be the best system if we were designing it from scratch. But that's what everybody is accustomed to. That's what everybody is used to. It works for a lot of Americans. And so I don't think the best way to fix our health care system is to suddenly completely scrap what everybody is accustomed to and the vast majority of people already have. Rather, what I think we should do is to build on the system that we have and fill some of these gaps."
Huh? "partly by historical accident" and we're stuck with it?
But to answer your question, again it will be up to 65,000,000 people to decide which way to go. I believe health care is NOT a federal issue nor is it something businesses should be forced to pay. It is a personal and community issue, city/county/state issue.
d) Delegating things to states in general. I hear you, but in general a smaller federal government is a better federal government. The more that citizens understand that their local & state government is up to them, the more they will step up to the plate and take responsibilities.
e) The Fair Tax eliminates taxation of businesses at the federal level, completely. An important "big picture" thing to understand, as the Fair Tax presents itself, is there is only ONE taxable entity, and that is a human being, 300 million of us. Even when businesses pay taxes, they don't pay taxes because the tax collected is passed along in the form of higher prices to their customers and/or lower wages to their employees. So yes, abolishing corporate taxes altogether.