SmokeaJoint

Every governing system is flawed, if not in ideology then in the people appointed to run it. However, I think there are ways to improve upon the system, either by limiting potential human flaws or by amending the flaws in ideology. This thread (since none of us live in socialist countries I assume) is dedicated to ideas that may help improve upon the democratic system. Please, keep it constructive. I welcome an intelligent refuting of ideas, but just saying "thats stupid" doesn't help anything.

In 2008, I got to go to Austin, TX to lobby for youth and student rights. During my discussions with the various Representatives, I learned that their position was an non-paying one, meaning it was considered a volunteer position. I think that the nation, federal government not excluded, should switch political positions to volunteer status like they have in Texas. The reasoning behind this being, if there is no monetary gain to be had by holding a government office, the people that run for those positions will be running because they want to do some good, not to earn a nice paycheck.
However, I'm of the opinion that this practice wouldn't work for the President, as that position is more than full time and he wouldn't be able to support himself with other means. In the case of the President, I think that his needs an the needs of his family be taken care of, but there should be no lifetime payout, no huge cash-in at the end of their service.

Not to mention they are given funds to help them transition back to their private life.
I can't be the only one who sees this and thinks "If I could get elected to Prez, I'd pretty much be set for life." and therein lies the problem. Correct me if I'm wrong, but every president in my memory, even back to the esteemed George Washington, were independently wealthy. If the pension is cut, its not like we will have former presidents begging for change on the street.

Another thought that has occurred to me, I have heard complaints an complained myself about how we hear these wonderful campaign promises that are rarely followed through with. I propose that every time the President (or anyone running for an office for that matter) gives a "promise" or a public address where he/she says they're going to do something, they be put under oath like in court. That way, if the promises the public expects aren't being fulfilled, the government officer in question can face impeachment for perjury.
This would basically force honesty into the government, or at least it would allow for rapid turnover in the case of promises not being fulfilled.

Finally, (and this is from the Unions thread) I think that every person should be able to put their vote forward, for everything. With modern technology it is totally possible. Having just this one change would eliminate the need for "the middle man" and the public could have their wants and needs addressed directly.

So, any thoughts, comments, additions to this list?

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

The Rev

I dig the idea of forcing candidates to back up their campaign promises with something criminally prosecutable (an oath taken in court, as you suggest) or civily actionable (an actual contract, leaving them open to class action suit by the American people). The problem is, they never actualy make meaningful promises. They just allude to things. For example, here in California, Meg Whitman is running for governor. She doesn't say, "Elect me and I will create new jobs!" She says, "I have what it takes to get Californians back to work!" So, even if there were a means to hold her to what she said, it's so subjective that there'd be no way to say she lied or decieved the public.

The fact is, the only way to improve the government is to improve the people in those jobs. And the only way to improve the people in the jobs is to improve the savvy of the voters. Every 4 years (Every 2 if you count mid-terms) we get a huge pile of bullshit vomitted up on us by politicians trying to convince us to vote for them. It's bullshit every single time, and always has been, yet it continues to work. So, the problem isn't the politicians, it's the idiots that keep falling for the same old line. If you ask me, the American people are getting exactly the government they deserve.

This truly is Idiocracy.



The Rev

__________________

SmokeaJoint

I agree that the people need improving. Put someone in power though, an they are likely to become at least somewhat corrupt. Such is life I suppose.

As far as making promises that are non-specific, I was thinking along the lines of a court trial. If someone comes to the stand being all vague like politicians do, the lawyer yells his/her objection which the judge sustains. Then the witness or whatever has to rephrase more specifically. This is kinda what I had in mind but I also have to wonder if that upsets the balance of power in favor of the judicial system.

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

mothernature

I'm not sure you could hold anyone totally responsible for a failed campaign promise. It's supposed to be that one person doesn't have that kind of power. Even the perfect elected official can't do much if congress is against them. I don't see where it would matter anyway. The politicians would just add the word 'try' to everything they say. No promises made.

As far as the pay for president goes...theoretically , having no pay would exclude the working class from being able to become president. Realistically, we know that only rich people become president. So, how about minimum wage? If it's good enough for the rest of the people...

badgoalie85

well your first idea is terrible. if we make all elected positions non-paid, you're opening up the door for even more massive corruption. if your average rep isn't paid a salary, he's going to vote according to who provides him with the most kickbacks.

volunteer systems can work in local jurisdictions, but absolutely not at the national level. we already have enough corruption.

i haven't read the rest of the post yet.

__________________
Pursue happiness.

To each his own.

badgoalie85

okay your second idea is terrible too. it can be dismissed simply by pointing out that it would be impossible to prove whether or not a promise had been attempted to be fulfilled in good faith and that it is quite common for different people to have different opinions on whether or not a promise has been fulfilled. it's too subjective, it wouldn't work in a court of law.

if you could prove that someone outright LIED then that's a different story, but that's different than, say, promising to turn the economy around, or promising to end a war. things aren't that simple.

__________________
Pursue happiness.

To each his own.

SmokeaJoint

Well, do you have a better idea or did you just come here to tell me my ideas are horrible? The idea here is constructive criticism.

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

badgoalie85

i was criticizing your ideas. you can take it as constructive criticism and think harder about your ideas or you can just be offended that i don't think they're good ideas. take your pick. if you want to talk politics, you gotta take some criticism sometimes.

my idea to improve government? if you're a voter, educate yourself, and vote based on the issues not who you'd like to have a beer with.

__________________
Pursue happiness.

To each his own.

SmokeaJoint

The last line, thats better. I don't mind being criticized, but just saying your ideas suck isn't constructive. Also, I have no response to your above posts but I thank you for giving me something more to think about.

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

yo.

BG thats not constructive at all brother.
all you did was shoot him down.

when he had very good intentions.
so fuck you buddy.

__________________

Kompressor

I'm pretty in line with Rev.

Slash the military budget, focus on defense, and place the excess money in Public Education.

"We don't need a big government, we don't need a small government. We need a smart government."

__________________
Think like a man of action, act like a man of thought. -H. Bergson

badgoalie85

i didn't just say your ideas suck. i also said WHY your ideas suck. that's called constructive criticism. if you don't want to be criticized then don't present your political ideas in a public forum.

__________________
Pursue happiness.

To each his own.

SmokeaJoint

I agree with you Komp. However, it seems to me that a lot of people stay stupid on purpose. I mean, with the internet there is no excuse to be ignorant, but people manage it anyways.

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

SmokeaJoint

Ok man, I really don't feel like getting into a pissing contest over definitions. Thanks for your inputs.

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

John F. Kerry

damn dude i literally was gonna say almost the exact same thing, and about not reading the rest of it too...

funny shit, no offense smokeajoint your post is interesting and def seems likes like a good topic, ill come back and read the rest of that later, but i was gonna make the same point about no salary would make it an elitist position because the only people who would run are those who dont need to work to make a living... ie either rich or looking for kickbacks... i do kinda like the idea about rich people being politicians because it does seem that they would be more out for society then to make (more) money because they already did make money and it probably cost them a lot to run in the first place... it gives then a genuine apperance where they can say i wont be beholden to anybody except my legacy as senator or whatever...

as to the rest of your post ill get back to it

__________________
Nasa under Obama

John F. Kerry

as for the oath for promises... the fact is , im glad they cant fulfil them... because if they could look at how crazy and unrecognizable our country would be after either 8 years of bush , or 4 years of reid and pelosi... each time the party in power would just destroy things from the past.... u gotta appreciate the status quo for being pretty damn good... it needs to be improved but not at the cost of whats good already- so the other party keeps things from changing too much when a new president comes in- even if obama wanted to do all his shit, he couldnt because most americans and moderate dems and republicans didnt want most of it... the thing i might suggest is that with increased education comes less people listening to demagoguery and the bs presidents say to get elected- thats why this tea party that is mostly fairly well educated and white (ok i gues im talking about the northern states tea parties not necesarily those in places like alabama) what are they asking for? not handouts or government programs, not anything really , just for politicians to stop bulshitting people and engaging in the campaign promises and other demagoguery that reasonably educated people know wont ever happen anyway, and dont expect the government to save them , just not drown them...

__________________
Nasa under Obama

SmokeaJoint

That makes perfect sense, I'm kinda surprised I didn't realize that sooner as it seems so obvious now. Hmmm. See, we got a good base system but I still think theres room for improvement. Someone on a chat I was on just now (I put this thread's link up to see what they had to say) put forth the idea that those that are most willing to serve are least able because they feel like they need to have a position of power over people. This is a good observation but it doesn't really help anything, since we can't just force people into office and there's no way of telling who the ideal candidate would be.

__________________
AMERICA: LAND OF THE FREE!
Some restrictions may apply. Void where prohibited

badgoalie85

george washington said that the greatest flaw with our system is that anyone who wants to be president is not qualified to be president. the same can be said for almost any national political office.

__________________
Pursue happiness.

To each his own.

The Rev

One thing that absolutely must change, if we are ever to separate government from the huge boil of corruption seething upon it, is the average person's attitude that the government should provide a solution to every problem a person could have. No job? Call the government. No healthcare? Call the government. Don't like the way prices are going up/down? Call the government. Don't like your neighbor's taste in intoxicants? Call the government.

Every election, politicians make claims that, if elected, they will do everything to make your life safe, secure and happy short of getting you laid. And we all act as if this is appropriate. The government has no defined purpose in our society. If you ask, "Why do we have a government?" what more meaningful answer are you likely to get than, "because we need someone to 'run the country'". And, until we can do a better job of deciding what we really think government should (or even CAN) be in our society, we're going to keep getting more of the same.



The Rev

__________________

Dr. Nick Nasty

__________________