Archive for the Term Limits Category

The People’s Amendment: The “Contract With America” (April 29, 2013)

Posted in Awards / Incentives, Balanced Budget Amendment, Coffee Party USA, Conflicts of Interest, Congress, Constitution, Immanentizing The Eschaton, Political Parties, Tea Party, Term Limits on April 29, 2013 by e-commentary.org

. . .

X          “What do Republicans and Democrats agree on?”

Y          “Nothing.”

X          “What do Republicans and Democrats disagree on?”

Y          “Everything.”

. . .

X          “There you go.  The People’s Amendment:  ‘If a law applies to the people, it applies to Congress; if an exception or exemption applies to Congress, it excepts and exempts the people.’  One simple commutative rule enshrined in a constitutional amendment.  Genius is always obvious and simple.”

Y          “And the provision applies equally to Republicans and Democrats.”

X          “Indubitably.  Courts could easily interpret it without all the arrogant activism and ideological warfare that characterizes the courts today.  Every tax payer has standing to enforce the People’s Amendment in court.  Individual Congresspersons and Senators who vote for legislation that violates the PA are held personally liable for the attorney’s fees of the tax payer who succeeds in enforcing the PA and a small percentage of the public damages.  Each representative’s self-interest is enlisted to provide for and protect the public interest.”

. . .

Y          “While you are at it, add a simple term limits provision.  Six two-year terms in the House and two six-year terms in the Senate are balanced and fair.  The provision applies equally to Republicans and Democrats.”    

. . .

X / Y  “However, a balanced budget amendment is hollow and shallow.  Congress can balance the budget without a balanced budget amendment if Congress wants to balance the budget.  Congress can circumvent a balanced budget amendment if Congress wants to circumvent a balanced budget amendment.”

. . .

[See the “e-ssays” titled The “Contract with America”; The Congressional Reform Act of 2010 (March 29, 2010), Term Limits (May 14, 2007) and Bringing Balance To The Balanced Budget Amendment Debate (July 18, 2011).]

[For an argument that John McCain and Lindsey Graham should not be considered “enemy combatants,” see the “e-ssay” titled Republicans are Enemy Combatants? (May 10, 2010).]

Bumper stickers of the week:

A Democrat for The People’s Amendment

A Republican for The People’s Amendment

An Independent for The People’s Amendment

A Libertarian for The People’s Amendment

A Green for The People’s Amendment

A Tea Partier for The People’s Amendment

A Coffee Partier for The People’s Amendment

A Partier for The People’s Amendment

My honor student supports The People’s Amendment

My average student supports The People’s Amendment

My below average student opposes The People’s Amendment

My dog supports The People’s Amendment

A sniper for The People’s Amendment

An LBGT for The People’s Amendment

A mom for The People’s Amendment

A dad for The People’s Amendment

A viscountess for The People’s Amendment

A Fan of Fred (Hayek) for The People’s Amendment

A visiting adjunct professor at the Barack Hussein O’Bama II School of Government at the University of Chicago for The People’s Amendment

The “Contract with America”; The Congressional Reform Act of 2010 (March 29, 2010)

Posted in Conflicts of Interest, Congress, Health Care, Pensions, Term Limits on March 29, 2010 by e-commentary.org

. . .

“They need to be treated like us; we need to be treated like them.  It’s that simple and that difficult.  The only mechanism to deal with the conflict of interest between elected officials and ordinary citizens is to put them in the same bed and on the same boat.  That is the real ‘Contract with America.’”

. . .

Bumper sticker of the week:

1.         Term Limits.  12 years total pursuant to one of the three options below:

A.              Two six-year Senate terms.

B.              Six two-year House terms.

C.              One six-year Senate term and three two-year House terms.

2.         No Tenure / No Pension.  A Congressperson collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when he or she is out of office.

3.         Congresspersons, past, present and future, participate in Social Security.  All funds in the Congressional retirement fund transfer to and all future funds are deposited with the Social Security system immediately.  Congress participates with the American people.

4.         Congresspersons can fund their own retirement plan just as all Americans do.

5.         Congresspersons will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.  Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6.         Congresspersons lose their current health care system and participate in the same health care system as the American people.

7.         Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people without exception.

8.         All contracts with past and present Congresspersons are void effective 1/1/11 absent some compelling reason.  The American people did not make these contracts with Congresspersons.  Congresspersons concocted these contracts for themselves.

(For some variations on these big bumper ideas, see the “e-ssays” dated March 5, 2007 titled “Congress Should Increase Congressional and Judicial Pay; Shareholders Should Reduce CEO/CFO/COO Pay,” dated May 14, 2007 titled “Term Limits,” and dated February 25, 2008 titled “’American Medicine’ Not ‘Socialized Medicine.’”)

Bridges (July 30, 2007)

Posted in Term Limits on July 30, 2007 by e-commentary.org

While Senator Ted Stevens and Congressman Don Young, Republicans from Alaska, were busy seeking funds from the federal feeder for their “Bridges to Nowhere,” some “Bridges to Somewhere” were deteriorating.  The money spent on frivolous projects detracts from beneficial projects.

Both Stevens and Young are being investigated for a variety of other crimes.  They will never be held accountable for their looting of the public fisc.

The state of Alaska reported that 100 of its bridges are “structurally deficient.”  Would the proposed “Bridges to Nowhere” also be structurally deficient?

A partial solution:  Term Limits.  [See the e-ssay dated May 14 entitled “Term Limits”].  A limit of a dozen years in each chamber is necessary.  Both Stevens and Young would have been termed out years ago.  Politicians must be termed out because many citizens impacted by their actions cannot turn them out.

Bumper sticker of the week:

Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?

Term Limits (May 14, 2007)

Posted in Politics, Term Limits on May 14, 2007 by e-commentary.org

Senators Byrd, Stevens and Inouye (and others) haul billions of dollars of pork to West Virginia, Alaska and Hawaii (and other locales).  Some say that the citizens of those states can exercise the franchise and limit their terms of office.  However, the citizens of these states want the pork.  The problem is that the citizens of other states cannot vote to get politicians from offending states out of office and away from the public trough.

Term limits are necessary to reduce abusive spending, among other public maladies.  Term limits of six two-year terms in the House and two six-year terms in the Senate balance the desires for institutional memory and new ideas.  The professional politician will be limited to two dozen years in the Congress.  The 22nd Amendment states in pertinent part that: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice . . . .”  The consummate professional pol is limited to three decades ((2 x 6) + (6 x 2) + (4 x 2)) at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.  Most individuals focus their careers on either the House (Sam Rayburn) or the Senate (Strom Thurmond) and would be limited by these limits.  These limits are hardly restrictive, yet they provide some outside parameters.

Bumper sticker of the week:

Stop Repeat Offenders
Don’t Re-elect Them