The solution to fixing dysfunction in Congress H.R. 5334 Bill

Status
Not open for further replies.

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
20121005-broken-democracy-interior.png


Representative democracy is in crisis in the United States. One of the three pillars of our system of government — the legislative branch — is failing. The current Congress has shut down the federal government, bickers constantly and increasingly does not speak broadly to the American people. Obvious problems, from a struggling middle class to a flawed tax code to crumbling roads and bridges, go unaddressed. The American people have certainly noticed; according to Gallup, 80 percent disapprove of Congress.

We can’t let 535 people continue to limit the progress of a nation of more than 300 million.

After two decades spent gaining a data-driven perspective in the private sector, I believe that problems on this scale are usually caused by structural failures. Our electoral process has created perverse incentives that have warped our democracy and empowered special interests and a vocal minority. Congressional dysfunction is the logical result of closed primaries, too many gerrymandered one-party seats and low-turnout elections.

To address these problems, I filed the Open Our Democracy Act in July. If passed, the legislation would mandate open primaries for House elections, begin the process of national redistricting reform and make Election Day the equivalent of a federal holiday.

Step one is giving independents and moderates a voice. Maryland, where independents are the fastest-growing voter bloc, is an example of a changing electorate that isn’t being served by the current system. In January 2001, according to data from the state Board of Elections, 13 percent of Maryland voters were not registered as Democrats or Republicans; by July 2014, that number was 19 percent. This group now includes more than 700,000 people — more than the population of Baltimore — but it plays little role in Maryland politics, because in most of the state, primary elections are the only contests that matter.

Around the country, we select candidates using a partisan primary filter, then act surprised when the huge portion of the electorate that isn’t ideological is unhappy with its general-election options. My legislation would open House primaries to allow all voters to participate in one race, with the top two vote-getters advancing to the general election.

Such a system is much more likely to send pragmatic bridge-builders to Washington. Because of low turnout, candidates in traditional, closed primaries have an incentive to appeal only to the most committed — and ideological — voters. In an open primary, the electoral math changes, and reaching out to swing voters becomes more important. Open primaries can have a moderating effect even in districts that are so red or blue that the top two candidates are likely to come from the same party; in both primary and general elections, an ability to win votes beyond a narrow base could be decisive.

Step two is redistricting reform. Gerrymandering has turned the vast majority of House districts into one-party enclaves, whose representatives’ main concern is making the most rabid faction of their parties happy. According to the Cook Political Report, only 16 percent of House districts are competitive, and I can tell you from firsthand experience that members from these districts are much more likely to work on a bipartisan basis. We know what’s happened in Maryland, which Governing magazine ranked as having the most gerrymandered congressional districts in the United States, but my state isn’t alone. In Virginia, a true purple state, there is only one competitive House contest this fall; meanwhile, the state’s congressional delegation is dominated by a party that has lost the last three statewide elections.

Not only do safe districts encourage the election of members who won’t compromise, they rely on irrational boundaries to achieve their goals. When this happens, communities lose their vote in Congress. My bill would put us on a better path, directing the Government Accountability Office to examine the feasibility of national standards for drawing district lines. Let’s examine what works — a number of states provide good examples — and develop a framework.

Step three is to make it easier to vote. In some states, polls close as early as 6 p.m., and even later closing times can be difficult to manage for working parents who have to commute from work to day care to home to a polling place. My bill treats Election Day as a federal holiday so more Americans can participate.

We need to act. Low voter turnout, gerrymandering and non-competitive elections are creating a frightening negative feedback loop. As mainstream voters grow increasingly disgusted and apathetic, only extreme partisans stay interested, creating more race-to-the-base contests, which then turn off more moderates and on and on.

Congress has lost the will to find bipartisan solutions. In the past, divided government didn’t mean open political warfare. The Highway Act, the Clean Water Act, tax reform and the Americans With Disabilities Act were accomplished under divided government. We can get there again.

Each of the reforms in the Open Our Democracy Act, individually, would help counteract the dysfunction that has broken Congress. Taken together, they can do more than that. Let’s make the House of Representatives actually representative.

Link to the news article on this

Link to the Bill

-------------------------------

I actually like what he is proposing in this bill. But not sure if this will go anywhere...
 
Last edited:

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,909
8,494
136
IMO, it's not so much who gets elected. It's how they've been systematically corrupted into being tools of special interest groups before and after they get into office.

What's even worse, is the fact that the longer these corrupted traitorous assholes stay in office the more corrupted they get. Need I mention the USSC as an example?
 
Last edited:

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,817
6,778
126
Americans have been put to sleep dealing with their day to day dreams and problems of making a living, or have just given up. The only solution I see is self destruction when all the suppressed rage explodes. Bread and circuses didn't save Rome. We were created in Gods image and we live in self imposed slavery.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
IMO, it's not so much who gets elected. It's how they've been systematically corrupted into being tools of special interest groups before and after they get into office.

What's even worse, is the fact that the longer these corrupted traitorous assholes stay in office the more corrupted they get. Need I mention the USSC as an example?

Americans have been put to sleep dealing with their day to day dreams and problems of making a living, or have just given up. The only solution I see is self destruction when all the suppressed rage explodes. Bread and circuses didn't save Rome. We were created in Gods image and we live in self imposed slavery.


Yep totally agreed...

I was just reading this news article here The class war in American politics is over. The rich won.

Where the say: ... that "class warfare" is just a huge lie, a metaphor used by elites to cover up the fact that they've already won.

But I honestly believe that we still have a chance to turn things around and can make changes but we really need to get people to wake the hell up. I think the only thing that is going to happen is when it really starts affecting people more and more to the point that most of American will finally be in an all out revolt.
 

Oldgamer

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,280
1
0
It shows here how our political institutions are packed with Rich and Wealthy elites in congress:

MedianNetWorth2012v2-thumb-650x315-11721.0.jpg


"To have a class war in American politics, you need two sides. But those two sides don't exist in America's political institutions"
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,359
4,640
136
The American people have certainly noticed; according to Gallup, 80 percent disapprove of Congress.

Of course we disapprove, well except for our Representative, he is doing a bang up job and we will vote for him again! Those other 500 people should be voted out of office. If only the people in their districts could be convinced of that...
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
We need a SCOTUS that understands that corporations aren't people before we can start repairing our democracy. Until then, they will repeal whatever laws interfere with their corporatist agenda.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,001
571
126
We need a SCOTUS that understands that corporations aren't people before we can start repairing our democracy. Until then, they will repeal whatever laws interfere with their corporatist agenda.

Corporations are groups of people.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
73,155
34,475
136
The open primary proposal is dead wrong if the goal is higher quality elected officials. Government should get out of the primary elections business entirely. It is not a proper function of government to help parties pick their candidates. Parties should pick their own candidates. Parties that choose poorly should lose elections. Primaries invite non-party members to help pick a party's candidates which makes no sense. In doing so, voters develop a false sense of party affiliation leading to tribalism. Government run primaries serve to maintain the Rep/Dem duopoly.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
Steps 1 and 2 are likely unconstitutional since states are given power to determine their own election procedures. Unless it's something where another factor trumps this power (e.g. 26th Amendment) it's a non-factor although it's a good idea and I would support it in my state.

That being said, it wouldn't really matter if this bill passed or not. Two main factors are far more important:

1. Congress and the political parties are increasingly relying on the courts to make hard decisions for them and to trump any objections from the other side, thus any incentive to compromise. Why bother working out a deal that will receive bipartisan support when SCOTUS can just pull a Roe v. Wade and give you what you want without any concessions?

2. Federal government is too big and has its fingers in too many aspects of society. If you feel that it's a proper role of government to address any and all social ills and undesireable outcomes, you can't complain when they don't do it the way you like. Today you may cheer when goverment imposes heavy fines and regulation on a company you hate, and tomorrow feel betrayed when the same government cuts another hated company a sweetheart deal. Government is not a personal advocate for your pet causes or angelic distributor of moral justice, and you're a fool to hope they fill that role.
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
Corporations aren't groups of people, they are legal constructions owned by groups of people, big difference in both liabilities and rights. If a group of people does something wrong, you can sue each one of them individually. Not so with corporations. Of course Corporatist-Republicans on SCOTUS want to give owner rights to corporations while keeping the corporate responsibility away from the owners.
 

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
And those people are welcome to express themselves on an individual level just like the rest of us.

If you want to outlaw direct contributions to candidates by corporations go for it, as it stands now it's simple extortion by politicians of both sides. But why shouldn't groups of people be allowed to collectively advocate for policies via independent spending? Your proposal would be akin to saying unions have a right to express themselves individually, but not once they organize themselves into a picket line.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.