Real0ne
Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline
|
For those who have not read it the basic idea is:
The power comes in the ability for the people to act immediately and with recall power so nothing can slip through. Add to that a 3 or 4 times vote over the course of say 12 years before it becomes concrete (allowing for court case review), and once it is voted in 4 consecutive times, (it is found to be absolutely constitutional), it would require a 3/4 vote to repeal it as we are already set up to do.
It would be a real bear trying to corrupt 2500 people that can be voted out in 3 different ways by the people simply calling it to a vote when ever they please.
First by the local community who voted for them in the first place.
Next by a state wide vote.
Finally by a national vote.
With a vote called for at any time and only a 51:49 "mob rule" ratio. Warburg, rothschild and morgan n ilk simply will not be able to compete with that kind of power.
So to stay in service as a regulator these people will need to be next to godliness.
If the people let them stay 6 or maybe 12 years in their position then give them a lifetime benefit package, otherwise a good salary and standard benefits like anyone else etc. and there will be plenty of other government jobs they will be very qualified for even if they get fired.
The main thing is to set it up so there is no enterprise money to be had here, where there are more benefits in being good boys and girls than by cheating the system in the first place.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
okay, so the way I see it, you're talking about an auditing branch. To audit legislation, treatise, monitary policy, executive orders, and court rulings with regards to precident, intent of the law, and maybe even some good old fashioned logic proofs. Maybe even throw in some good old fashioned budget auditing to gaurd against empty, unfunded mandates.
If I understand the extents to which you mean that precisely correct. These people would only have veto and or strike power based on the boundaries of the constitution. They can literally "gut" a bill before or after the president signs it and send it back to the other 3 branches for rework.
This way with these delays the legalities are argued out before it comes law, not 100 years later when all the data is so scewed no on knows which end is up anymore.
They however would simply insure the other 3 branches comply with the test of the "Supreme Law" of the "Union" the constitution, "in its original intent", not this slicing and chiping away as we have now.
by my way of thinking it would strip out fraud, would strip out pork, pac money is now worthless, lobbyists all worthless, the federal reserve gone, 16th and about 3 more appealed, our country and our legal system would begin to look like the founders wanted. It would not longer be a government based on who has the most money.
This would force us as a governemnt and a people to work within and keep the constitution as a building block for the laws of the republic as was the initial intention.
In other words now we have people gaurding the chicken house.
I dont think we would want to extend it beyond the 3 other branches of government but neither would we want to opt out of the ability to police other areas if need be.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
I see where you're coming from-try to keep them independant by taking a large cross-section of americans who don't have a either a vested finacial interest or careers as politicians. Throw in something like a parlimentary style no-confidence vote on the part of the citizenry. I'd try to keep them independant by saying they could only serve one term, ever, or like one term every ten years maybe, and that this term would be exceedingly short-like six months to a year. Kind of the oppisite of the judge for life non-bias, or have to be re-elected so vote on behalf of constituants objectivity we supposedly have now.
Yes long enough to get to understand the system well enough to do some good but not long enough to become career politicians themselves and fearful of non other than the "people" as it was designed to be.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
Where to get these multitudes of auditors who can be quickly educated procedurally and with background knowledge with regaurds to the task at hand ?
Well we now have a need to teach this in school as any one of these kids who are citizens are eligible to be a regulator some day. So this would get our kids government minded and place it as a priority at a ver young age instead of something the other guy worries about.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
What about the school systems. I know you hate public schools. But if each school district elected one representitive (perhapse two or three or even ten for the nyc/la sized districts), you'd have a diverse cross-section of relatively educated americans. Basically, you'd elect them through PTA's. Some reps would come from very rich areas, some from very poor, but a great many would represent areas with mixed wealth, race, class that you often dont find with jerrymandered electoral districts.
Well i do nto hate public schools per se'.
i hate education by omission. That is how i see the public school system. We are poorly educated by asian and indian standards and sinking lower not improving. We cannot have a strong country with idiots at the voting boxes.
You are bang on correct in that I feel we need a very large cross section so there frankly is "plenty of fighting!!!!" with a vote ratio of 51:49 so we accomplish something anyway. Accomplishing nothing is better than accomplishing the wrong things.
Just like being a conspiracy kook and forcing an investigation to "know" there is no wrong doing is always better than being a non-conspiracy kook and letting everything slip by only to find the Duh, the wolves ate all my chickens and i cant figure out why, Duh! LOL i believe that if we are to err lets err on the side of the good guys not the perps.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
that would mean more community attention and pressure would be spent on improving schools as concerned voters attended the meetings in order to know whats going on with their fourth-branch vote. That would mean community leaders would spend time in schools volenteering and donating and such as a way to get elected. It would encourage our teachers and administrators not to get burned out, as they would be well placed with another outlet for meaningful contributions to their community beyond their classroom.
That would mean a pool of voters and canidates with at least some sembalance of an education as well as a school/PTA hierachy to get their words out through face to face campagins rather than a media system that can be sensationalized.
Yes I see it as a plus every where. It would by default force truth in government. and literally put the other 3 branches in the containment cage our forefathers intended them to be in - in the first place!
The best thing is and i totally agree is that it would give people incentive to be involved because they KNOW they now have say so in a big way and yet in the same breath preserve the republic which i firmly believe is absolutely essential.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
Maybe you could split this auditing branch into commitees and each comitte only voted on their expertise-five hundred work on enviromental legislation, five hundred on investment law, and so on-that way you could retain a degree of specialization toward an issue congress and the senate simply do not have.
yeh thats a great idea. Put people where they are best suited to make judgements, keeping in mind their main goal is insuring constitutionality of everything that gets run through.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
the results would be: most all government actions would have to go through citizen review, so most all government actions would be smaller in scale and more realilistic.
Yes the size of our government is enourmous and these people just being in existance would pay for hemselves many times over and who is gogin to quibble about an insurance policy for our constitution.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
Other posters have said that we don't need more government which will ultimately be corruptable, but this would be less corruptable government which would serve to limit to scope of federal actions.
Well they have no idea the scope of changes that would occur as a result of this, we would in the end save so freaking much money to the tune of billions at a minimum.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
other posters have said that this is basically the job of the supreme court, however this would encompass all law (not just constitutional) and not have to wait untill there is a challenge to define legality, as well as eliminate the chance for loopholes or plantiffs winning cases by the letter not the intent of the law: the laws intent would be reconciled with the american people. The courts would still be busy with contradictory laws and unforseen cases.
i would put their scope to all law at the supreme court level, and legislation in both federal and state arenas.
quote:
ORIGINAL: ChainsandFreedom
so...yeah.
I personally ascribe to my own version of your idea, at least.
the problem would be cost, I think. 1,000 legislators @ 10 grand per year: 10 millon. oh. scratch that. my calculator says its relativly doable, in the scope of national budgets...even if you paid, say, an additional fifty grand per legislator in education/assistant/telecommuting/communting costs, it could still be done...
Glad its got ya thinking.
Hey we can pay them well. 3000 at 100,000.oo per year is a mere 300 million i mean that is seriously cheap compared to the savings of keeping our laws and government constitutional.
Another one I would like to add while i am on a roll here.
Militias. I think we need to have an amendment to get citizens militias started back up. Take these kids, many of which end up in gangs and give them a purpose, a real purpose for the betterment rahter than crime.
Take these people who are terrified of a gun and they also will be required to serve a period of time in the citizens militia. Maybe with the regulators we would not need them but i think it would serve to give people a bond to the government in as much that they count and again do way more good then anything.
There is not reason we cant get our taxes down to a reasonable level again of a couple percent. i do know this government is spiralling out of control and if we do not take measures to bring it back with in the boundaries of the constitution we will lose it and it may take several more generations to get it back.
So yes like an auditing crew with teeth! LOL
i was thinking about what you said about auditing etc, not sure if we can go beyond what is constitutional, or they would become part of the legislative branch which imo we shold keep as is. this is really to keep out corruption and all this cgarbage that is being passed off as law today.
< Message edited by Real0ne -- 8/28/2007 5:46:40 PM >
_____________________________
"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile
Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?
Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!
"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session
|
RE: REPUBLIC vs DEMOCRACY - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread