I really appreciate comments on my website and want people to give me their views. Please take the time to comment when visiting! The comments are moderated and I will post any comment that is signed and contains content that is generally about the subject of the post. I will not post comments that contain bad language and no anonymous comments will be posted! Thanks for Visiting my blog!

Search This Blog

The Cost of War

Recent Books I have Read and Recommend

  • "John Adams" by David McCollough
  • "Traitor to His Class" by H.W. Brands
  • "FDR" by Jean Edward Smith
  • "Truman" by David McCollough
  • "Thomas Jefferson Passionate Pilgrim" by Alf J. Mapp, Jr.

Tuesday, March 17, 2009

What we really need!

Truly what is really needed in this country is a new way of looking at the political system. The founding fathers were right that we should have a representative government, but their ideas have been perverted into something they probably never imagined. When someone gets elected to Congress, they spend most of their time trying to get re-elected, due to the exorbitant amount of money required to run for public office. The only way we are going to take back our government and return to the founders intent, is to change the way we elect our representatives. The money that is spent on elections mostly comes from big corporations and politicians feel beholden to these corporations due to the massive amounts of money they receive from them. Special interest lobbies are created just to lobby Congress for legislation that fits their needs and agenda. The days of an average constituent having much say in their government are long gone. We need to have tax payer funded elections with no outside money accepted. This is the only way we are going to get back government of, by and for the people.


Del Patterson said...

You have many good points, but let's walk though this frustrating system for a bit:
1. We must have some sort of lobby system to speak to the need of the citizenry; how else could state govts plea for help on highways/roads/bridges falling into decay?
2. How would students of lower and middle incomes find grants w/out the help of lobbyists to insure Pell grants and others are available?
3. How would our enforcement agencies know how to target drug cartels, organized crime, or gang violence without the lobbyists speaking on their behalf?
4. How would our natl govt know the huge problems of the "No Left Behind Child Act" without lobbyists speaking to them about the huge problems of this unfunded mandate?
Let's take Utah, for example. Demos and Repubs are ripping the stimulus package to shreds over the monies earmarked for "Mormon cricket eradication". The truth is that these roach-like critters are eating away anything thing that grows in Utah. It's a small amount of $$ under the plan but leaders from both parties just can't wait to use Utah as an example "stupid lobbying tactics". The farmers, however, say the destruction will have a huge negative impact upon the state.
To me lobbyists are central to good government so long as they aren't part of the "military industry complex"
A quick look at the GAO (Govt Accountability Office) will give anyone a reality check on monies gone wrong.

Keep teaching us. We need your words.

Thunter said...


Thanks very much for the comment. Your arguments are undeniably correct however, I am not saying get rid of the lobbyists, just the money that is associated with them. I believe there still should be special interest groups for all the many reasons you mentioned and then some, but why can't they lobby Congress without having to raise and spend enormous sums of money? Wouldn't it be nice to have our representatives spend more time making laws and studying things that are wrong with our government, rather than having to raise money night and day just to get re-elected? Not to mention, it would facilitate a totally even playing field, because all the candidates would get exactly the same amount of money, based on the office they are trying to attain, to finance their campaigns. I am sure commercial television would suffer from less money, but this might not be a bad thing overall.

Blog Archive