Current Topics
The Boogaloo Bois
by pondering_it_all
Today at 05:38 AM
RoundTable for Summer 2020
by pondering_it_all
Today at 05:27 AM
Is it too soon to be talking 2020?
by pondering_it_all
Today at 05:12 AM
Do both sides really do it?
by pondering_it_all
Today at 05:05 AM
Ruth Bader Ginsburg Has Died
by pdx rick
Today at 02:30 AM
How much do police really cost?
by pdx rick
Yesterday at 11:24 PM
Bloomberg raises $16M to pay fines of 32K former felons so they can vote
by pdx rick
09/24/20 09:42 PM
Portland. A Turning Point?
by pdx rick
09/23/20 12:22 PM
The Republican Platform
by pondering_it_all
09/22/20 09:22 PM
Global warming predictions
by pondering_it_all
09/20/20 09:04 PM
Half of troops have an unfavorable opinion of President Bone Spurs
by CPWILL
09/20/20 07:42 AM
West Coast Burning
by NW Ponderer
09/19/20 06:57 PM
Bob Woodward's book details Trump's chaotic and dysfunctional White House
by Greger
09/19/20 06:57 PM
Coronavirus: The Plague of The 21st Century?
by pondering_it_all
09/18/20 05:18 AM
How the world sees U.S. and Trump
by jgw
09/16/20 09:01 PM
The Trump campaign is broke
by pdx rick
09/15/20 12:20 PM
Barr is acting as ‘personal henchman’ of Trump
by Greger
09/13/20 09:33 PM
Covid Long Haulers
by jgw
09/07/20 06:23 PM
A post, on facebook, by my granddaughter that covers it all pretty good!
by pondering_it_all
09/02/20 07:27 PM
The Democratic Fight
by jgw
09/02/20 06:09 PM
Forum Stats
6292 Members
60 Forums
16997 Topics
302987 Posts

Max Online: 294 @ 12/06/17 12:57 AM
Google Adsense
Page 1 of 15 1 2 3 ... 14 15 >
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#316148 - 09/30/19 11:44 PM Are both "sides" equally corrupt?
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 10355
Loc: One of the Mexicos
If they are, what is the proper and realistic course of action to fix the problem?
_________________________
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.”
– R. Buckminster Fuller

Top
#316150 - 10/01/19 12:48 AM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: logtroll]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1655
Yes, they are. A realistic course of action is concentrate on where the corruption is the worst and most entrenched. That place is CONGRESS not the White House. Whoever is our President is only in office for four to eight years, whereas members of Congress are there for decades. Why is Congress the place to concentrate on? Because Congress writes the laws that we live by. The source of the corruption that is a problem is when members of Congress write laws with help of lobbyists. There two things that can be done to reduce the corruption that flows out of Congress.

1) Don't vote for any incumbents.
2) Start a bipartisan organization to repeal Public Law 62-5.

You can't solve a problem until you know what it is and what caused it. The problem of bipartisan corruption started when Congress passed an unconstitutional law that froze the number of members of the House of Representatives at 435. If Public Law 62-5 is repealed the House of Representatives could be as large 10,300 members. With that many members they couldn't all meet in Washington, D.C. they would have to stay at home in their much smaller districts and be more accessible to the average citizen. Also there isn't a lobbying firm that has the staff or the money to lobby that many people.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#316152 - 10/01/19 02:17 AM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: logtroll]
chunkstyle Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 10/02/07
Posts: 2356
Yes

Top
#316155 - 10/01/19 02:50 AM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: logtroll]
pdx rick Offline
Member
CHB-OG

Registered: 05/09/05
Posts: 43319
Loc: Puget Sound, WA


Mebbe getting money out of campaign finance and undoing Citizen's United. Hmm
_________________________
Contrarian, extraordinaire



Top
#316172 - 10/01/19 02:57 PM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
rporter314 Offline
veteran

Registered: 03/18/03
Posts: 7281
Loc: Highlands, Tx
LOL ... I found your comments humorous for a couple of reasons.

First I semi-agree with the million representative theory. I have always been a strong believer in the city-state model i.e. very local government. But of course I am also a pragmatic realist and realize it would never work in a modern world, unless ... [you can fill in the rest depending on political taste]

Your misdirection away from the WH is more than somewhat disconcerting. Why would 4 or 8 years of real corruption be better than the perception of corruption in Congress? No man is above the law, especially the occupant of the WH .... and I don';t care if that person is right wing, left wing or chicken wing ... Congress has an obligation mandated by the Constitution to root out corruption.

The real corruption in Congress would be abdication of their responsibilities. So, for that, certainly vote them out or impeach them for failure to do their duty given by oath of office.

It is not essential to solve a problem by making it worse. Why wouldn't the simple fix be to regulate lobbyists in a manner agreeable to YOU personally. The major problem is of course lobbyist represent the expertise of whomever they represent. Without that expertise we would be subject to academic expertise (and I have to suspect you hate the academics) or be subject to ignorant Congressmen. How would you like 75 year old Congressmen who don't understand modern technology write law about new technology?

How about something like no personal individual contact with lobbyists and no campaign contributions from lobbyists? otherwise subject to penalty by law.
_________________________
ignorance is the enemy
without equality there is no liberty
Get off the crazy train!!! ... dump Trump

Top
#316175 - 10/01/19 03:39 PM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: Senator Hatrack]
Ujest Shurly Offline
journeyman

Registered: 10/16/16
Posts: 663
Loc: Sterling Heights, MI, USA
Originally Posted By: Senator Hatrack
2) Start a bipartisan organization to repeal Public Law 62-5.


Why repeal a lawfull law, passed by a bi-partisan congress exercising their constitutional duty for apportionment resulting from a census? There is no requirement for congress to pass another apportionment law after a census, though they did since 1792. The only requirement in the Constitution is the setting of a baseline for apportionment of one (1) Representative per 30,000 persons (excluding Indians not taxed), note "Persons" not citizens, not whites only, not non-catholic Christians, not only voters, but just Persons.

Now, since there is another census in 2020, the congress can again pass another apportionment bill, though there is no requirement to do so, and change the number of representatives so long as each representative has the same number of persons to represent and that all persons (citizens, aliens, permanent residents, tempory workers, migrant workers, men, women, children, LBGT&Q in the United States are counted. This naturally excluded any citizen of the US not residing in the United States (expats).

Of course the above also includes those persons residing in Washington D.C. They also should be represented in congress by a full empowerment of their representative(s).

So why repeal a bi-partisan law that seems to have worked so well for the last 108 years?


Edited by Ujest Shurly (10/01/19 03:40 PM)
_________________________
Vote 2020!

Life is like a PB&J sandwich. The older you get, the moldery and crustier you get.

Now, get off my grass!

Top
#316180 - 10/01/19 09:06 PM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: pdx rick]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1655
Originally Posted By: pdx rick
Mebbe getting money out of campaign finance and undoing Citizen's United. Hmm
Since advertising and campaign literature isn't free money will always be necessary for political campaigns. Implementing these suggestions will reduce the amount one campaign will need but will increase the number of campaigns that need money.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#316181 - 10/01/19 09:43 PM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: rporter314]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1655
Originally Posted By: rporter314
LOL ... I found your comments humorous for a couple of reasons.

First I semi-agree with the million representative theory. I have always been a strong believer in the city-state model i.e. very local government. But of course I am also a pragmatic realist and realize it would never work in a modern world, unless ... [you can fill in the rest depending on political taste]
Why wouldn't it work? Because of our modern world members of Congress could meet, debate issues, and vote the same we are having this discussion, online.

Originally Posted By: rporter314
Your misdirection away from the WH is more than somewhat disconcerting. Why would 4 or 8 years of real corruption be better than the perception of corruption in Congress? No man is above the law, especially the occupant of the WH .... and I don';t care if that person is right wing, left wing or chicken wing ... Congress has an obligation mandated by the Constitution to root out corruption.
The real corruption is in Congress not the White House. Congress writes the laws and the money that flows to their campaigns is to influence what those laws are. If as you say Congress has a mandate to root out corruption, "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" who watches the watchers? That is our job and it is one we have abdicated by reelecting people to Congress for decades.

Originally Posted By: rporter314
The real corruption in Congress would be abdication of their responsibilities. So, for that, certainly vote them out or impeach them for failure to do their duty given by oath of office.

Voting them out of office was my first suggestion. But we don't do that.

Originally Posted By: rporter314
It is not essential to solve a problem by making it worse. Why wouldn't the simple fix be to regulate lobbyists in a manner agreeable to YOU personally. The major problem is of course lobbyist represent the expertise of whomever they represent. Without that expertise we would be subject to academic expertise (and I have to suspect you hate the academics) or be subject to ignorant Congressmen. How would you like 75 year old Congressmen who don't understand modern technology write law about new technology?
Who is to write the laws to regulate the lobbyists? Congress. Since members of Congress rely on the lobbyists expertise any bills Congress writes would so watered down as to be worthless. Currently there are 75, even 80, year old members of Congress writing laws on modern technology. If the number members of Congress were increased they would rely more on academics than on lobbyists. Whether or that would be an improvement is a chance I am willing to take.

Originally Posted By: rporter314
How about something like no personal individual contact with lobbyists and no campaign contributions from lobbyists? otherwise subject to penalty by law.
Again, who will write those laws? Members of Congress? Do you really think they will cut off the gravy train of money that almost guarantees their reelection?
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#316183 - 10/01/19 10:11 PM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: Ujest Shurly]
Senator Hatrack Offline
member

Registered: 08/14/07
Posts: 1655
Originally Posted By: Ujest Shurly
[quote=Senator Hatrack]2) Start a bipartisan organization to repeal Public Law 62-5.


Originally Posted By: Ujest Shurly
Why repeal a lawfull law, passed by a bi-partisan congress exercising their constitutional duty for apportionment resulting from a census? There is no requirement for congress to pass another apportionment law after a census, though they did since 1792. The only requirement in the Constitution is the setting of a baseline for apportionment of one (1) Representative per 30,000 persons (excluding Indians not taxed), note "Persons" not citizens, not whites only, not non-catholic Christians, not only voters, but just Persons.
Is Public Law 62-5 a Constitutional amendment? No, it isn't, therefore it isn't lawful. The average number of people in a Congressional district is around 700,000. That greatly exceeds the number set by our Constitution.
Originally Posted By: US Constitution
The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand,...


Originally Posted By: Ujest Shurly
Now, since there is another census in 2020, the congress can again pass another apportionment bill, though there is no requirement to do so, and change the number of representatives so long as each representative has the same number of persons to represent and that all persons (citizens, aliens, permanent residents, tempory workers, migrant workers, men, women, children, LBGT&Q in the United States are counted. This naturally excluded any citizen of the US not residing in the United States (expats).
Why would Congress pass a law that reduces it's power? By limiting the number of Representatives to 435 the power each one of them has was greatly increased!

Originally Posted By: U jest Shurly
Of course the above also includes those persons residing in Washington D.C. They also should be represented in congress by a full empowerment of their representative(s).

The people who live in Washington, D.C. are represented by delegates with limited voting power.
Originally Posted By: Ujest Shurly
So why repeal a bi-partisan law that seems to have worked so well for the last 108 years?
This unconstitutional bipartisan law has worked well for members of Congress to the detriment of the American people.
_________________________
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity.
I'm a conservative because I question authority.
Conservative Revolutionary

Top
#316186 - 10/02/19 12:31 PM Re: Are both "sides" equally corrupt? [Re: logtroll]
logtroll Offline
veteran

Registered: 04/26/10
Posts: 10355
Loc: One of the Mexicos
Originally Posted By: logtroll
If they are, what is the proper and realistic course of action to fix the problem?

I don’t believe they are. We must allow for individuals who may be more principled, but the trends affecting government are pretty clear. Without a detailed dossier of facts, here are some of my observations (as seen through a lens of scale and relativity):

Gerrymandering - the Righties are definitely on top of this game.

Lying - seems to be SOP for righties, so much so that we can count on whatever they say to actually be the opposite (ConROT - Conservative Rule of the Opposite Thang; see also, “temious”).

Bending of the rules - see Mitch M’s refusal to hold a confirmation hearing on Garland.

Lying Bigly - see Potus’ record of more than 12,000 significant lies in 2-1/2 years, and the rank and file’s apathy about it.

Hyperbole - we need a wall to keep out the Mexican invaders!

Willingness to do anything to win - asking foreign countries to help rig elections.

Rumor milling - HILLARY!!!

I expect a flurry of butwhataboutisms that will depend upon false equivalencies for their strength.

What to do about corruption? I don’t see any clear strategies given the weaknesses of human nature in general. The voters are no less corrupt than the politicians they elect. But limiting the amount of money in elections and torching the Citizen’s United decision would help.
_________________________
“You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.”
– R. Buckminster Fuller

Top
Page 1 of 15 1 2 3 ... 14 15 >

Who's Online
0 registered (), 42 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Superfly, GreatNewsTonight, danarhea, RoughDraft274, CPWILL
6292 Registered Users
A2