Time for a real change?

[nuthead]

I've been doing some thinking and it occurred to me that one of the biggest problems in this country is that we keep electing the same "class" of people into office and do not hold them accountable for their action/inaction.

It seems to me, that short of an outright revolt, the only way to remedy the situation is to completely replace everyone in office now. I think that if the country could come together to agree to do this, a clear message to the newly elected would be sent: Act right or we'll bump you out too. I know such an endeavor would probably not work if crafted on partisan terms, but maybe if it were presented independent of political parties, it might have a chance. For example, if you're a democrat, vote democrat, just vote for different democrats that you have right now. And make it complete...city, county, state and federal offices. It's probably never been done in the history of this country, but this is probably the best time for it.

What does everyone else think?

[dadyswat]

As long as they have the parties money behind you'll get the same thing.

[SteveOKC]

Maybe we need it easier for more parties to take hold or some kind of contribution change.

I agree, there does need to be REAL change in Washington not just a change of face.

[yellowreef]

We need to have real multiple parties, not just two. As long as the debate on everything is between two groups, nothing will change.

[E3CSHARP]

Yes definitely need more parties. The two parties just overshadow everyone else.

[JPR]

I like your mindset. I wish the founders had incorporated a "kill switch" or "reboot" button into the Constitution for times like this. Something like the initiative process here in California but even stronger. Something that could be actuated at the citizen level.

I have been thinking lately what it would be like if Congress just adjourned for the next year. Would the country be better off or worse off? I think it would be better off. The country would benefit from them doing absolutely nothing in my opinion.

I cannot see why we need a full time Congress. If the federal government were operating the way it was originally intended, I would think they would only need to adjourn for maybe a month or two at the most per year. The Congress should not be made up of professional politicians. It should consist of ordinary citizens who work regular jobs, go to DC occasionally to represent their community, and then return home to live under the laws they pass in DC.

Also, I believe that political parties are counter productive. I believe George Washington felt the same way. I would like to see the parties abolished. Then people would have to focus on the person running for office rather than being a loyal team member and voting along party lines.

Of course this is all academic. The system has gotten out of control. I fear it is like a car going too fast through a down hill curve on an icy road. No matter what the driver does, he is going to end up off the road.

[nuthead]

We need to have real multiple parties, not just two. As long as the debate on everything is between two groups, nothing will change.

Why even have parties? Originally, our government was designed not to have parties, but that didn't last long.

To me, parties only focus on certain issues but don't/can't cover them all...the way real people think. Very few people are 100% liberal or conservative. Why do we need parties to tell us who to vote for, or hell, to tell the elected how to vote? Isn't that OUR job? Shouldn't our elected officials vote the way WE tell them, not according to a party platform? It seems to me that each party seems to have but one goal...to keep their party in power. Doesn't matter if an idea is good for the people, the other side can't support it for fear of strengthening the opposition. Is that really in our best interests?

I don't have a perfect solution, but maybe something along the lines of the government sponsoring the elections might work. Each candidate is guaranteed equal amounts of time on the air and equal amounts for other advertising (to eliminate special interest money colouring each election). Maybe each candidate would have to "win" a nomination in their region and then you could have something like a play-off system (Yeah, I love my football!). I know there are problems with my idea, but maybe enough of us could figure out a better system....it certainly couldn't be worse than what we have now.

[ChevySSP]

What would happen is that government sponsorship would be extremely biased towards whomever is the incumbent.

Yes the Founding Fathers were very fearful of "Factions" that have now manifested themselves as political parties....but honestly thats exactly what it'll gravitate to no matter whats done. Human beings have a natural instinct to fight one another.

[SkepticAlways]

I've been doing some thinking and it occurred to me that one of the biggest problems in this country is that we keep electing the same "class" of people into office and do not hold them accountable for their action/inaction.

How would you describe the current "class" of politicians? And how would you describe the replacements?

[nuthead]

How would you describe the current "class" of politicians? And how would you describe the replacements?

Beholden to other people except the people who they're supposed to be listening to...their constituents. The current (and most of the past as far back as I can remember) "class" are what I would call dishonest. The replacements would hopefully realize why they got elected.

[SkepticAlways]

Beholden to other people except the people who they're supposed to be listening to...their constituents.

"Other people" meaning mega corporations with high paid lobbyists? If that's what you mean, I agree.

[nuthead]

"Other people" meaning mega corporations with high paid lobbyists?

And political parties, other special interests groups as well. Basically, anyone who's NOT your constituent.