[evilgenius]

I have a suggestion for reforming the US Government. I think the Constitution should be amended to change the way the Senate is organized. I believe there ought to be two kinds of Senators. Both types ought to have longer terms than the House of Representatives does. However, in response to the impact that money plays in the system, there should be some changes to the way the Senate is constituted. The two types of Senators should be organized so that they have different length terms. The first, and more publicly answerable type, should have a four year term. The second, and less publicly answerable type, should have an eight year term. The first type should be unlimited in the number of terms that a person can serve. The second type should serve with a caveat that they cannot run for Federal Government office until four years passes from the end of their term. They can hold office if they have been nominated for a cabinet post or some such position and approved, but they cannot run for office. Also, only the second type should be able to vote on or arrange for the voting on the nomination of judges, cabinet members or any other positions which require Senate approval. Otherwise the two types of Senators should have equal voting power. Each state should still only have two Senators, one of each type. Whether the Senator's terms end mid-term for the president or not ought to be up to each state, initially without the need for any other approval. There should be a way to change the timing, but not an easy way. Perhaps any proposed changes by the states should only be allowed with a 2/3 vote of the entire Senate?

Anyway, that's my idea. What are yours? Feel free to share.

[vtsnowedin]

At first glance I think your proposal is too complicated for the voters to understand.
I'd keep it simpler and limit Senators to two six year terms and house members to four two year terms. I would also limit their pay raises to years when the budget is balanced and then be limited to some multiple of the median income. Also their retirement plan would be equal to rank and file Federal workers and their healthcare plan the same as Veteran's.
I would also ban any sixty vote rules as being un Democratic.

[KaiserJeep]

I'd hang all the Congress Critters and Senabores from the trees and lamp posts around Capital Hill.

[Tanada]

You really want to fix things? Make a Constitutional Amendment that anyone with a degree in Law ineligible for Congress in both houses. In two years we would get 33 new Senators and 400 new Representatives who would not be experts at twisting words to shape laws and violate the Constitution.

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', 'A')t first glance I think your proposal is too complicated for the voters to understand.
I'd keep it simpler and limit Senators to two six year terms and house members to four two year terms. I would also limit their pay raises to years when the budget is balanced and then be limited to some multiple of the median income. Also their retirement plan would be equal to rank and file Federal workers and their healthcare plan the same as Veteran's.
I would also ban any sixty vote rules as being un Democratic.

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'Y')ou really want to fix things? Make a Constitutional Amendment that anyone with a degree in Law ineligible for Congress in both houses. In two years we would get 33 new Senators and 400 new Representatives who would not be experts at twisting words to shape laws and violate the Constitution.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'Y')ou really want to fix things? Make a Constitutional Amendment that anyone with a degree in Law ineligible for Congress in both houses. In two years we would get 33 new Senators and 400 new Representatives who would not be experts at twisting words to shape laws and violate the Constitution.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', ' ')but I think you're penalizing people who try harder than you give them credit for. .

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', ' ')but I think you're penalizing people who try harder than you give them credit for. .

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', ' ')but I think you're penalizing people who try harder than you give them credit for. .

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vtsnowedin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', ' ')but I think you're penalizing people who try harder than you give them credit for. .

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', ' ')You have a bizarre view of reality. A teacher has no control over the curriculum they have to teach or the methods of discipline acceptable to the school system. A congressional Representative or a Senator MAKE THE RULES. To be fair you would need to be comparing punishing a Congressional Clerk who is just doing their job with punishing their boss, who made the rules and then broke them without caring.

[evilgenius]

They make the rules in concert with each other. No single representative makes them on their own. If a state has a very good representative who looks out for their interests they shouldn't be docked for that, when the pay is attached to how the over all group performs. Sure you can dock everybody's incentive pay, the individual did fail to influence the group so as to bring about a different solution. Docking their regular pay is simply outrageous.

And another thing, why should a balanced budget be the determiner of a job well done? There are emergencies aside from war that the country has to face. The interstate highway system was built in order to ensure that the military could get from one place to another quickly if the Cold War got hot. Those people represented back then would only go for a war footing as reason enough to come up with the money. Today, we probably wouldn't have such a problem. We can see what kind of public good it brings. But, you know what, maybe we couldn't.

[vtsnowedin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('evilgenius', 'T')hey make the rules in concert with each other. No single representative makes them on their own. If a state has a very good representative who looks out for their interests they shouldn't be docked for that, when the pay is attached to how the over all group performs. Sure you can dock everybody's incentive pay, the individual did fail to influence the group so as to bring about a different solution. Docking their regular pay is simply outrageous.

And another thing, why should a balanced budget be the determiner of a job well done? There are emergencies aside from war that the country has to face. The interstate highway system was built in order to ensure that the military could get from one place to another quickly if the Cold War got hot. Those people represented back then would only go for a war footing as reason enough to come up with the money. Today, we probably wouldn't have such a problem. We can see what kind of public good it brings. But, you know what, maybe we couldn't.

[Newfie]

Since we are floating rule changes I've got another.

Prorate votes by the amount of money spent on each candidate.

So if A spent $1000 to get 1,000 votes and B spent $500 for 1,000 votes then the final tally would be A get 500 votes and B gets 1,000.

It doesn't have to be purely linear maybe a 50% bias. It would help to take money out of the election.

Yeah, I know there would be a whole rule beater industry. Just keep legislating the heater out.

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Newfie', 'S')ince we are floating rule changes I've got another.

Prorate votes by the amount of money spent on each candidate.

So if A spent $1000 to get 1,000 votes and B spent $500 for 1,000 votes then the final tally would be A get 500 votes and B gets 1,000.

It doesn't have to be purely linear maybe a 50% bias. It would help to take money out of the election.

Yeah, I know there would be a whole rule beater industry. Just keep legislating the heater out.

[Plantagenet]

The Trump people are floating the idea of cutting government jobs by 10% or so to reduce waste and abuse.

This is a good idea if they get rid of the right people.

Obama is reportedly shuffling all his white house staffers into full-time government jobs. Thats clearly unnecessary----those people should be immediately fired.

The EPA people who released the polluted mine waters and polluted entire rivers should be fired. So should the EPA people in charge of clean water for the Flint area be fired. Those people are a disgrace.

A side benefit of reducing staff is that it frees up money for operations. Some of the government agencies I work with are so overstaffed with Ph.D. scientists and professional that they have no money left over to do any work. The scientific staff just sit in their offices and moan about lack of money.

Cheers!


Trump should fire the morons at the EPA who polluted the Animas River.....and so should their supervisors who shielded them and failed tø fire them after they caused a huge spill of toxic mine waste. Then they should all be prosecuted to the full extent of the law for polluting the river.

[Cog]

Obama's political appointees are being made civil service employees. But here is the trick on that. If they require Senate approval, that isn't happening. Also GS employees have a one year probationary period and can be fired for cause. As a manager, I would either come up with a cause or transfer them to Adak, Alaska or some out of my office assignment where they could do no harm. Put them in a basement producing memo's or counting the hairs on the back of a caterpillar.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'O')bama's political appointees are being made civil service employees. But here is the trick on that. If they require Senate approval, that isn't happening. Also GS employees have a one year probationary period and can be fired for cause. As a manager, I would either come up with a cause or transfer them to Adak, Alaska or some out of my office assignment where they could do no harm.

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'T')he Trump people are floating the idea of cutting government jobs by 10% or so to reduce waste and abuse.

This is a good idea if they get rid of the right people.