Has Anyone Else Completely Lost Faith In The Government?

CRedskins, there are a couple of problems with term limits. First, why penalize the politicians who are actually competent and principled at their job? If a district is prospering as a result of their representative introducing legislation, then the voters have every right to send that member back to Congress for another term. Basically, you limit the pool of qualified candidates by doing this.

The other problem with term limits, and somewhat related to my first point, you can't have term limits unless you have meaningful lobbying reform. The people that lobby Congress are, in many cases, more seasoned than the freshmen members of Congress. It makes no sense to have special interests with all the knowledge, insight, and ability to get bills past. It takes years to understand how to get things done on the Hill. Understanding the energy markets, financial regulations and Wall Street, and simply building relationships that benefit you and your constituents take time. In other words, the learning curb can be steep depending on what part of the country you represent, especially if you sit on a committee. Which brings up another problem, do we want new committee members rotating every few years? Hell no.

Take agricultural for example. If I'm a farmer in the midwest I want a member of Congress who understands the nature of agriculture; the impact of weather and trade agreements may have on my crops. Quite different from the guy who has a district in Seattle, where it's not as specialized or the issues as sophisticated. My point is term limits cuts both ways and in some cases it's not as practical to change the players every few years and expect results and progress.

The bottom line is, just like you can't create morality through legislation, you can't legislate or regulate an informed electorate into existence. You can regulate lobbiests, you can make term limits, BUT, if the voters don't take the time to investigate their governmental representatives (small "r"), then no amount of legislation is going to change things. Without the populous holding them accountable, lobbiests and corrupt politicians will simply find ways to manipulate and avoid the laws' and regulations' intent.

Listen to some of the comments on this board. Everyone is giving up. And this is from a cross-section of educated and generally well read individuals. In light of that, what chance is there for real reform or good governance. As more of us simply give up, it becomes harder and harder to change the status quo.

"Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite" ("Every country has the government it deserves"). Joseph de Maistre, Lettres et Opuscules Inédits, Vol. 1, letter 53: Dated August 15, 1811 (Published in 1851).

The bottom line is, just like you can't create morality through legislation, you can't legislate or regulate an informed electorate into existence. You can regulate lobbiests, you can make term limits, BUT, if the voters don't take the time to investigate their governmental representatives (small "r"), then no amount of legislation is going to change things. Without the populous holding them accountable, lobbiests and corrupt politicians will simply find ways to manipulate and avoid the laws' and regulations' intent.

Listen to some of the comments on this board. Everyone is giving up. And this is from a cross-section of educated and generally well read individuals. In light of that, what chance is there for real reform or good governance. As more of us simply give up, it becomes harder and harder to change the status quo.

"Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite" ("Every country has the government it deserves"). Joseph de Maistre, Lettres et Opuscules Inédits, Vol. 1, letter 53: Dated August 15, 1811 (Published in 1851).

Damn dude, you should be published. Seriously well said though.

Damn dude, you should be published. Seriously well said though.

I am published - everything I write is copyrighted. You owe me $22.57 for quoting me.

[j/k - Thanks for the compliment].

The bottom line is, just like you can't create morality through legislation, you can't legislate or regulate an informed electorate into existence. You can regulate lobbiests, you can make term limits, BUT, if the voters don't take the time to investigate their governmental representatives (small "r"), then no amount of legislation is going to change things. Without the populous holding them accountable, lobbiests and corrupt politicians will simply find ways to manipulate and avoid the laws' and regulations' intent.

Listen to some of the comments on this board. Everyone is giving up. And this is from a cross-section of educated and generally well read individuals. In light of that, what chance is there for real reform or good governance. As more of us simply give up, it becomes harder and harder to change the status quo.

"Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite" ("Every country has the government it deserves"). Joseph de Maistre, Lettres et Opuscules Inédits, Vol. 1, letter 53: Dated August 15, 1811 (Published in 1851).

What you see as giving up, I see as calling for a reasonable change. I think most on here can agree to certain problems - the level of lobbyist influence, spending outstripping revenues, federal govt encroaching on individual and/or state freedoms-rights, etc. To say well you have the govt you deserve implies that this talk/discussion doesn't serve to further discourse and possibly change the direction that our govt is headed. Other than TTE who clearly had withdrawn from the electorate, I think everyone on here (or most everyone) votes. We need to discuss what can be done to bring the common problems into a resolution. Clearly a man in the senate-be it Byrd or Thurmond-that holds a seat for nearly 50 years needs to be limited but also you can't say 2 terms and leave the govt fully in the hands of entrenched bureaucrats and lobbyist. We need to civilly discuss what can be done. That does not mean that we have given up, only that we are highly dissatisfied with what is.

Oops: Energy Department contractors caught altering old press releases involving another troubled green-energy project « Hot Air (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/10/19/oops-energy-department-contractors-caught-altering-old-press-releases-involving-another-troubled-green-energy-project/)

I wanted to bump this thread (for obvious reasons) by posting this article that got lost in another thread:
Insider Trading Rules That Don't Apply To Congress - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/kylesmith/2011/06/01/insider-trading-rules-that-dont-apply-to-congress/)

The double standard is absolutely ridiculous

Who else didn't vote today because they don't believe a vote would help anything? I'm probably wrong for thinking like this, but I don't believe whoever gets elected to office will really accomplish anything, because in order for anything to be accomplished in gov't, you have to have people willing to work together to solve issues, and that is probably the furthest thing that comes to mind when I think of gov't, federal or local.

^ I don't disagree. But billions of people around the world would love to vote for their government but can't. Just look at the Arab Spring - the major driving force was a desire of people to have a voice in their own affairs. For this reason I always vote. There is only one way to show gratitude for the right to vote, no matter how abortive things may work out practically.

As Winston Churchill said, "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried."

Besides, as I see it, if you don't vote, you have no right to complain about how things work out later.

Who else didn't vote today because they don't believe a vote would help anything? I'm probably wrong for thinking like this, but I don't believe whoever gets elected to office will really accomplish anything, because in order for anything to be accomplished in gov't, you have to have people willing to work together to solve issues, and that is probably the furthest thing that comes to mind when I think of gov't, federal or local.

I actually think that true change can come from the smaller "off season" elections like the ones held today. It should be interesting and somewhat telling of how the 2012 elections may play out once we can see the results. However....

I actually abstain from voting by subscribing to the "Dont Vote or Die" movement (started right this second). Its a counter movement to p-diddy's Vote or Die movement where our core beliefs are that if you dont vote you will not die as a direct result. This may be unconventional and is a complete 180 from p-diddy's beliefs, but it resonates with our members nonetheless.

Imagine this:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_b8QEOIc5Eg0/SzDn8fxvzoI/AAAAAAAADMc/jGiFEJyeKJY/s400/No+sign.jpg

On top of this guy:

http://mandmglobal.com/Libraries/Blog_images/vote_or_die2.sflb.ashx

Thats our symbol