WJ caller: Is our government still an effective form for this day and age?

[Skidmore]

How's that for a scary mind set?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

1. Frankly, it is a good question.

200 yrs ago the largest state had two senators that represented slightly more than a million people. Their congresscritters had districts small enough where they could actually meet each and every one of them .

Today, with 300,000,000 citizens, the average congresscritter represents 700,000 people.
given the chance, who will they take the time to talk to? A poor mom whose legless IraqNam vet-son is being charged for losing his BodyArmor because the medics did't save it? Or a rep from big pharma who is dangling $30,000 in campaign donations?

Dick Durbin made a beautiful statement about governing and the day to day ritual in the Senate. 75% of his waking hours are spent raising campaign funds. 75% Just think about it.

That means that huge corpserations and the military industrial complex AND big journalism now are far more important than doing the right thing. Examples of how those influences have made America a former shell of itself? Patriot Act. Bankrupcy Deform. IraqNam. Military Spending. Faith-based spending on social programs.

by the sheer size of our country, our congresscritters no longer represent us. They represent themselves, perhaps their party and more likely a couple of lobbyists who make or break their careers. Our senators are even more remote.
as an aside, I have dealt with Durbin on many occasions, and know him well enough to exchange hellos. The guy is a hard-working, honest, smart and dedicated public servant - so when he says our system is broken, I take notice. He did not limit his opinion to campaign fund-raising, by the way, but how money corrupts the entire system.

So, I think the question was well put, and that we have to review our entire system. It is NOT effective in its current form. There is no democratic representation, not in any meaningful sense. If we tripled the size of congress, say to 1500 reps, even then, each one of them would represent 200,000 individuals, still slightly remote from personal contact, but a HELL of a lot better than the current system. That would not be enough. Make gerrymandering illegal. Demand term limits for the senate (3-max) and for congress (7-max). Bar any former military officer or congressional aide from lobbying. for 4 years at a minimum. if they break that rule, manditory 10 yr sentences, plus millions in fines against the company that hired them.
ban Pharma ads and Pharma lobbying, or they get nationalized. I'd also suggest that we close 70% of our military bases around the world, cut all star wars spending in Alaska. Lastly, prevent any congress critter from specified legislation, targeting a lucky group in his/her state.

[Skidmore]

2. I would think there would be better ways to resolve the problem

of money and corruption in goverment than to tear the Constitution apart and rewrite it. I don't think the problem is with the document or the ideas it was founded upon. The way congress has legislated and they way they behave is what needs to be corrected, as well as a lot of the bullshit that is associated with the manipulations of political parties. First, we need more of them and less gaming of the election system by the big two.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. Most founding fathers hated the idea of political parties

we see the fruits of their fears inside the bloatway every day.
When party politics is more important than protecting our constitution, then our system has a fatal, self-destructive flaw.

Much of that blame can be laid to the parties themselves. parties used to create themselves, die off, spring up on particular issues. the Republican Party rose from the ashes of the Whigs. The democracts came to be with the collapse of another party combined with a small regional one.
Once the partied began to control the nominating and ballot mechanisms, they guaranteed themselves lifetime jobs.

Something else has been lost over time. And it has been devastating to America. During the birth of the GOP, budding pols would train almost as apprentices. They learned the mechanics of governing working for others. During the 30s-early 60s, political parties trained their young, not to be crooks, but how to make things work. Say all you want about chicago's Daley machine or Pendergast Missouri muggers, they did get the garbage picked up, they did build roads and they made sure that their people learned their jobs. In fact, as crooked as they were, both wanted the jobs done first, and then they allowed their people to pick up the crumbs as rewards.

There is no school, no training, no method of educating people as to their jobs once in office. There is no learning curve. there are lobbyists, campaign funds and office staff who simply rotate among the members, but always knowing where their butter and bread come from.

As for corruption? I submit that today's is far worse than under the old parties. Today's GOP has taken the opposite approach from Daley or Pendergast. First line the pockets of your corporate masters, then see if there is enything else left for the original task.

[Skidmore]

4. Let's identify what has been lost and reclaim it then.

Don't throw out the Constitution instead. The parties need to be reformed.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. I do not advocate tossing it: to the contrary.

pardon me for being unclear. the three, now four branches of government are critically important. (the the fourth being Agencies, Commissions and the like, EPA, SSN, Customs, FCC, FDA, NIH,and hundreds of others) The problem rests mainly in two branches, the executive, and the legislative.

The executive problems are easily laid on the feet of one person - Darth Cheney. With his manipulation, greed and power-mongering, he controls the Exec branch far more than any other individual in the history of our country. FDR, for all his powers, a World War, a post inflation devastated economy, a hostile congress, a more hostile judiciary, and severe personal physical problems, never sought unitary executive, tsar-like control. I discount the damage done by the president. He is more of a puppet, no matter what he might think about it.

The legislative could help reign in the executive, but for the fact that the neoconmen and ultra-religious maniacs control it and worse, the democrats let them get away with it.

It is no longer a representative body, far from it. the senate is a super-senate, aloof, unresponsive, and misguided. Today's congress has become a collection of 435 fiefdoms, precisely the opposite result than the founding fathers sought. Part of the prolems lies with the existence of political parties and their power structure. Money, however is the rest of the problem. Campaigning costs are out of control. PACs and lobbyists are enablers of the worst kind of prositution - a situation where we get fucked, but we don't get the orgasm to go with it. Today's congress is more like the original senate(in theory) - removed from reality, far apart from the people, protected in their cocoons from dealing with real problems of real people. Hell, we face an erosion of constitutional rights and what do they do? they debate gay marriage. We are destroying innocent lives in an ill-fated invasion based on lies, and Congress discusses a brain-dead florida girl as though it was the end of the world. They rarely lose office, they have millions in their accounts, and they are beholden to no voter - just to the lobbyists who paid their way into office.
That is exactly what we were supposed to avoid.

I do not want to trash that quaint document - but I suggest that it needs some tinkering. Lobbying, PACs, campaign finance are starts. But really, the healthiest thing would be to expand the legislative by tripling its size and letting people again deal with a real, personal, unbribed representative.