Fixing our Parties

[BoomerD]

The problem isn't the parties.

It is the government itself. There is too much power and too much money being controlled by Washington.

Why does a union spend millions of dollars to help one person get elected? Because once that person is in office they can repay the union by sending it billions of dollars one way or another.

Same with corporations and interest groups etc etc etc etc.

Take the power away from Washington and then you'll take the power away from the parties and then things will start to change.

Hell PJ, why would Meg Whitman spend (at last count) $104 million of her own dollars to get elected Governor of Kahleeforneeya? (Of course, she's only loaning it to her campaign...and expects to get it paid back)

I don't know if there's been an increase, but as of 2007, the job pays $206,500. Doesn't seem like a good return on investment to me...unless there's more than meets the eye.

BUT, I agree...the biggest problem in Washington is the money...too much of it...from the wrong players.

 

[dmcowen674]

We need more moderates in the parties.

Moderate=No Balls

Would a moderate go to war to defend the country? I doubt it.

 

[Red Dawn]

Moderate=No Balls

Would a moderate go to war to defend the country? I doubt it.

Why would you doubt that?

 

[brxndxn]

The parties are currently being 'fixed.' Local groups are working hard to influence politicians on the local level. One of the biggest problems with both major parties now is that people tend to think only on the national level. Most voters only vote for the President of the United States and only in the final election. That allows the small but dedicated few that vote in all the 'minor' elections to have a large influence over what changes.

For example, Ron Paul's Campaign for Liberty (I am a member) is focusing on local rather than national politics. They are using strategies such as nullification to demand rights that have been preempted by the Federal level of Government. In the Orlando meeting last weekend, Florida State Representative Scott Plakon talked about how Florida plans to introduce a real challenge to Obamacare. The Florida House and Senate have passed a bill to allow Florida voters to 'turn down' Obamacare as a ballot initiative. It is currently being pushed through the court system as the first activist judge has tried to quash the bill.

Other examples of the states using nullification to take power back from the Federal government (and change the parties) is California's defiance on marijuana laws and Arizona's defiance on immigration enforcement. The US Constitution promotes states asserting their rights against an overpowering Federal government.

I'd say one huge problem with 'Internet people' like us is we tend to focus only on macro-level national politics just like the major news entertainment networks. I'd say more of us need to realize that for the US to work, we cannot continue to merely vote for the lesser of two evils only at the national level. It's time we start learning who our mayors, state house and senate members, judges, congressmen and senators, are - and start writing letters.

For both major parties to be fixed, they must lose entirely their centralized control. The Democrat party has been recently submissive to their central leaders while the Republican party has been showing a great deal of progess in being fractionalized.

 

[Moonbeam]

DixyCrat: Yes, it is very partisan and I'm sorry about that. But I think that no matter what side you are on you can see his point about how only those that get paid to be evil stick with it... good guys rarely make money off of being in politics.

M: Can you see that if the evil is liberals the evil is those who see liberals as evil? This guy has nothing to say to me because he is an idiot. He has the disease you want to cure.

DC: If good people serve their nation instead of letting corrupt people run either part we can have a better world.

M: If, always if, and yes. The problem is that that if isn't. The problem is what is the good. The problem is that everybody thinks that what they think IS the good and they can't all be right.

DC: It is only beyond hope if people of good will stay at home instead of try to take back over the parties.

M: If good people stayed home nobody would vote. There are only good people. Just ask them. I am the only worthless piece of shit you will ever meet.

 

[StageLeft]

Neither party is fixable. They're full of life-long members who know nothing else.

 

[SunnyD]

The only way to "fix" the parties are to get rid of them. Completely.

Then we roll back salaries and "donations" back to founding-father days, where being a civil servant was just that - no pay for being a politician. You do it out of the love for your country. PAC's go away, campaign contributions go away, and the people in office still need to have a "day job" to make ends meet for their family. That way they can respect what it means to be a Congressman or President.

 

[Anarchist420]

To fix the Parties, you repeal the 17th Amendment and get the Presidential electors chosen by the state legislatures.

You also amend the Constitution to limit the Federal Government's powers.

 

[nonlnear]

To fix the Parties, you repeal the 17th Amendment and get the Presidential electors chosen by the state legislatures.

You also amend the Constitution to limit the Federal Government's powers.

That would change the balance of power between federal and state governments, but it would do virtually nothing to change the Republicrat duopoly.

To fix the party issue (by that I mean the game theoretic stability of the two party state) there are a few things to be done:

At the Presidential level:
Federalize the Presidential nomination process, so that the Dems and Repubs don't have 50 venues to scuttle third party candidates with nuisance lawsuits. If a citizen's vote is held for President, have a nationally uniform Presidential ballot on election day (no comment here on the EC). On election day you get a Presidential ballot, and a ballot for everything else. (Ironically I've heard people make the argument that having states determine the federal election process reduces the likelihood and impact of systemic problems on Presidential elections, when it obviously makes problems 50 times more likely. It only takes one state with a bad ballot design to mar an entire election.)

For Congress (and states):
Abolish gerrymandering either by abolishing Congressional districts altogether and going to statewide elections by party. (Yes, that would institutionalize the parties, but it would instantly mean third, fourth, and fifth parties would get representatives.) If districts are to be kept, mandate that all district boundaries to have a strictly limited aspect ratio M:m, (where M= maximum distance between two points in the district, and m= minimum length of a line segment bisecting the area of the district), and be convex, except for no more than (say) 10% of the area AND (say) 20% of the population - the boundary of the non convex portion determined only by rivers (of a minimum width) or county lines. Also end seniority in determining committee positions. Committee positions are assigned by random drawing, but can be traded.

For all politicians:
Public servants are performing public acts when discharging their duties. As such, there is no right to privacy when on the job, as their entire job is public. Mandate full time published surveillance of all elected federal officials while at work or conducting government business (mandate it at the state level for state elected officials too), and make it a felony for an elected official or public employee with direct regular access to elected officials to discuss policy with private citizens without published surveillance. (Grant exceptions for legal privilege, protected privacy, and security issues - but worded carefully so that military industrialists can't sneak general business in under security issues.)

 

[Dr. Zaus]

DixyCrat: Yes, it is very partisan and I'm sorry about that. But I think that no matter what side you are on you can see his point about how only those that get paid to be evil stick with it... good guys rarely make money off of being in politics.

M: Can you see that if the evil is liberals the evil is those who see liberals as evil? This guy has nothing to say to me because he is an idiot. He has the disease you want to cure.

DC: If good people serve their nation instead of letting corrupt people run either part we can have a better world.

M: If, always if, and yes. The problem is that that if isn't. The problem is what is the good. The problem is that everybody thinks that what they think IS the good and they can't all be right.

DC: It is only beyond hope if people of good will stay at home instead of try to take back over the parties.

M: If good people stayed home nobody would vote. There are only good people. Just ask them. I am the only worthless piece of shit you will ever meet.

You make great points, that you better recognize your own low-standing morally puts you significantly ahead of most (me) morally.

I see your point and agree. But, what he's done is give his opponents proportional power when he didn't have to even if the thought they were wrong. If we stop disrespecting our opponents maybe we can even learn to respect their point of view and we can return to a deliberative-body in our representation instead of trying to win before the first speech.

That would change the balance of power between federal and state governments, but it would do virtually nothing to change the Republicrat duopoly.

what do you think of approval voting? I think that would allow for other parties to come into the mix.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting

 

[nyker96]

forget the local parties, if you can make people in this thread working congenially together w/o naming calling, I'd say you doing pretty well already.

 

[nonlnear]

what do you think of approval voting? I think that would allow for other parties to come into the mix.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting

There are a lot of proposed methods for determining election winners. It's a fun academic diversion, and while there are doubtless a lot of better systems than the one we use I think focusing on that part of elections detracts from more substantial problems. Specifically in the nominations, as well as in the nature of the prize itself (see my point about putting the public back into public officials).

Parties themselves aren't really the problem either. Given that the big two are pathologically corrupt, I understand why other parties form, and that they symbolize causes that are unrepresented by the corporate endorsed Republicrat machine. However until some of the other rules that make a duopoly a game theoretic stable solution, throwing a bone to minor parties doesn't really fix anything substantial.

BTW, I finally got around to watching the video and have to thank the OP for posting it. It was long, and well worth the time. It gave me pause to think that there really is a (faint) hope of changing the Republicrat machine from the inside.