During the 19th century, when the Senate actually earned
the sobriquet “world’s greatest deliberative body,” fewer than 10
percent of the senators “who served the equivalent of at least one term
went on to serve more than two.” Of the three antebellum giants — Henry
Clay, John Calhoun, and Daniel Webster — only Webster served the
equivalent of three full terms. This, suggests that a
senator is able to make a significant contribution to his country’s
welfare within the 12-year limit that I would place on senatorial
service.
Why do we tax Americans at the Federal level, take a cut and return money to the states from the Federal Level. It's not a small amount of money. Federal grants to state and local governments, a category of spending
that has ballooned from $24.1 billion in 1970 to an estimated $640.8
billion in fiscal 2015. Buying votes is an expensive proposition.
Time to end the era of the professional politicians, end the retirement plan and the perks of the office for the true world’s greatest deliberative body that has term limits.
In the midterms, only 36% of eligible voters could be bothered to vote. We have term limits that voters fail to exercise and now you want to make the process even more passive. Actually, I don't believe that's what you want, but that's what I believe will happen. Why get mad and frustrated and engaged if you know you only have to live with a representative for 2 cycles. Same old story for me, we have the government we deserve because the majority of us who can vote can't be bothered to do anything but vote for POTUS.
ReplyDeleteThe very best we do in an election is a 50% turn out.
DeleteA person is elected by the majority, hopefully, and claims a mandate. A mandate of 25% of eligible voters or a claim that the people who didn't vote would have voted for them and claim a mandate.
Rejection is difficult to accept in a popularity contest. So yes we get exactly what we deserve by action or inaction however we still claim the right to bitch about it.
Back to home remodeling. Half the wood floor is in and should be finished next week. Master bath is demo'ed and start putting it back together next week. One thing is for certain, I don't much care for installing wood floors, it hard work but the finished product is rewarding.
"So yes we get exactly what we deserve by action or inaction however we still claim the right to bitch about it."
DeleteFair enuf!
Kill the 17th amendment. Let the State legislatures that YOU vote for pick the Senator to represent the state. Ask Eric Cantor about term limits............
ReplyDeleteI read a rather good article the other day about the 100 years since the 'passage' of the 17th amendment. It seems that all of the reasons that the 17th amendment was passed to solve, bar the consistent selection of a Senator (I.E. corruption, cronyism and partisanship) that once plagued state legislatures, while initially rectified is now so concentrated in Washington and nationally focused that differences in state goals are of little relevance and the ideals of a republican form of government has seeded to its less stable counterpart... the democracy.
DeleteAnd this is what our system of government has degenerated in to:
DeleteCampaign finance records show that Chris Dodd, Democratic Senator from Connecticut, had only five (5) contributors from his home State in the last election. The vast majority of his campaign contributions came from special interests outside his home State. How can he claim to represent the State of Connecticut when he is beholden to other interests?
The conflict that arises in someone trying to serve two masters was why the system of checks and balances was put in place by the Founders, who understood its power as an effective hedge against corruption.
In the view of the Founders, pure Democracy was to be strictly avoided. James Madison, in Federalist #10, writes, “…democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” What was intended to correct the problems of deadlocked state legislatures has created a national Legislature composed of elected officials more beholden to special interests (what James Madison referred to as factions), than to the people they were elected to represent. It would be in the nation’s best interest to have a few states occasionally experience temporary problems choosing their senators, than for the entire country to suffer under the tyrannies of special interests. What’s more, when weighing the temporary loss of a sitting Senator against the permanent, ongoing damage to the Republic brought about by the current “solution,” there is little question which is the better choice.
Maybe we read the same article. A few excerpts.
"In the view of the Founders, pure Democracy was to be strictly avoided"
DeleteBINGO! The founding fathers never intended for the slob on the street (or women or black people) to have anything like an equal say in government compared to men of means. In a lot of ways, we have always had a rule by minority. Regardless of high taxation, we have never brought the wealthy down the level of comrade and there has always been special interests. At best, we have had periods, like after WW II, where there was no chance we were going to deny equality to the soldiers who had actually defended freedom with their lives.
At the federal level, there should be a different focus. I get the 24/7/365 message that there shouldn't be a federal government that has the power to do anything but meet for cocktails, but I believe there are things that are in everyone's interests. None of us here will get what we want. Maybe that's for the best.