Democracy Or A Republic?

College of Political Knowledge

This is the question whether it is noble to allow the people to rule or by opposing the idea end it.

And the debate rages.

To answer the question posed….the US is a republic….it was never intended to be a democracy.

The Founders made damn sure of this fact.

Few of the Founders had anything good to say about ‘democracy’….a few quotes to illustrate their distrust…..

“Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. ”  John Adams

“Were out State a pure democracy, in which all inhabitants should meet together to transact all their business, there would yet be excluded from their deliberations. 1. infants, until arrived at years of discretion. 2. Women, who, to prevent depravation of morals and ambiguity of issue, could not mix promiscuously in the public meetings of men. 3. Slaves, from whom the unfortunate state of things with us takes away the right of will and of property. T hose then who have no will could be permitted to exercise none in the popular assembly; and of course, could delegate none to an agent in a representative assembly. The business, in the first case, would be done by qualified citizens only.”  Thomas Jefferson

“One of the worst forms of government is a pure democracy, that is, one in which the citizens enact and administer the laws directly. Such a government is helpless against the mischiefs of faction.”  James Madison

I would say that their fears of democracy have been founded in their republic.

Those Founding Fathers were enamored with the idea of a ‘republic’…..

“There is no good government but what is republican. That the only valuable part of the British constitution is so; for the true idea of a republic is “an empire of laws, and not of men.” That, as a republic is the best of governments, so that particular arrangement of the powers of society, or in other words, that form of government which is best contrived to secure an impartial and exact execution of the law, is the best of republics.”  John Adams

“I trust that the proposed Constitution afford a genuine specimen of representative government and republican government; and that it will answer, in an eminent degree, all the beneficial purposes of society.”  Alexander Hamilton

In the end of the Founding Period the republic won out….but sadly these learned men did not foresee the rise of political parties……the bane of good government.

I asked the question:  Are we a democracy or a republic?

This article answers the question better than I…..

Despite clear historical evidence showing that the United States was established as a republic and not a democracy, there is still confusion regarding the difference between these two very different systems of government. Some confusion stems because the word “democracy” is used to describe both a “type” and a “form” of government. As a “type” of government, it means that generally free elections are held periodically, which America has. But, as a “form” of government, it means rule by the majority, which America does not have; America is a republic. Webster`s 1828 dictionary states that a Republic is: “A commonwealth; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person…” In a democratic form of government, the populace votes on all matters that affect them, and do not elect others to represent their interests. Therefore, a majority-rules direct democracy gives unlimited power to the majority with no protection of the individual`s God-given inalienable rights or the rights of minority groups. In contrast, in a Republic, the power of the majority is limited by a written constitution which safeguards the God-given inalienable rights of minority groups and individuals alike.  It is historically relevant to note that since the birth of our nation in 1776, no American president referred to America as a democracy until Woodrow Wilson misapplied the term during World War I. Sadly, today, it has become common to use the term democracy in describing our form of government, including in recent years by both Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

(Read On)

https://www.foundingfatherquotes.com/articles/22

These days this debate is a moot point.

Moot point because it is ll about the semantics

The experiment that the Founders put together is at a stressed point…..does it continue as envisioned or does it morph into something else?

I am old and I am worried but I believe the republic will endure….but at what cost?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

“The Senate Is There To Slow Things Down”

Mitch McConnell has used this lie over and over….followed by the GOP loyal…..they use this to try and explain why they cannot move bills forward…..

McConnell even went so far as to say the the Founders formed the senate to do this exact thing….to slow legislation down for calmer heads to prevail.

That is BS and illustrates how political idiots try to use the Constitution to explain their partisan attacks on our republic.  These people pretend to be all knowing and in reality they are a pack of self-serving individuals that care nothing for the plight of the nation.

In the formative years of our nation (1776-1787) the thought behind a ‘senate” was that it be……”… a natural social and intellectual elite…(that) would find their rightful place in the upper houses of the legislatures…..(that would) were to be the repositories of classical republican honor and wisdom, where superior talent and devotion to the common good would be recognized and rewarded…”

The Greek Thucydides observed….”to conduct the affairs of state in a safe and successful way, requires all the wisdom of the most talented and experienced members of the state, as well as vigilance and particular attention of the particular deputies of the whole people.”

Now look at the US Senate of today…..nothing about the worthless group looks like anything the Founders said it would.

A repository of honor and wisdom?  Really I have yet to see either in the Senate.

You?

There is a case for the abolition of the Senate…

The United States Senate exists today because the Constitution’s framers did not trust America to function without it. Unlike the House of Representatives, the “people’s House,” whose members were expected to be as prone to extremism and shortsightedness as the constituents they would represent, the plan was for the Senate to be the dignified, deliberative body that operated above the fray of politics. As Virginia delegate and noted optimist Edmund Randolph put it at the Constitutional Convention, a good Senate would “restrain, if possible, the fury of democracy.”

By this ambitious metric, the Senate is a failure.

https://www.gq.com/story/the-case-for-abolishing-the-senate

Even the longest serving member of Congress, John Dingell, also wants to see the Senate abolished…..

https://www.vox.com/2018/12/4/18125539/john-dingell-abolish-senate

I as well have called for ending the Senate and going to a unicameral system…..in all locations state and national…..https://lobotero.com/2021/03/10/thoughts-on-unicameralism/

US Senators earn $174,000….the leader (Mitch) makes $193,400…..that is great pay for part-time workers (and yes they are workers) they work about 3-4 days a week and about 6 months a year and it is great pay for nothing but obstruction and partisan BS.

But what about the “outside income” that all Senators have….Permissible “outside earned income” for Representatives and Senators is limited to 15% of the
annual rate of basic pay for level II of the Executive Schedule. According to the House Ethics
Committee and Senate Ethics Committee, the 2016 limit is $27,495.

Does this explain how members when they leave the Senate are millionaires?

Think about it!

When has anything good come out of the Senate…that “repository of wisdom and honor”…(sorry I tear up from laughter every time type that)

This country does not need this useless appendage of government any longer.

The US Senate is similar to the human appendix….once served a purpose but now it is a useless party of the body…..now that it is cancerous it is time to surgically remove the diseased appendage of the body politic.

My distaste of the US Senate is not mine alone…..

Teddy had it right on target…..“When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer ‘Present’ or ‘Not Guilty’.”
― Theodore Roosevelt

And then there was yet another accurate observation…..“Do you pray for the senators, Dr. Hale?’ someone asked the chaplain. No, I look at the senators and I pray for the country.”
― Edward Everett Hale

For those that are interested in seeing what the case was for adding the Senate to the government…..I suggest Federalist 62……https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed62.asp

Then there is AntiFederalist 62…in opposition……http://resources.utulsa.edu/law/classes/rice/Constitutional/AntiFederalist/62.htm

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Bi-Partisanship–A Silly Notion

The US government has become weak and ineffective.

Part of the problem is what we like to called ‘bi-partisanship’.

The only purpose this term serves is an excuse by politicians who claim the ‘other side’ do not negotiate in good faith…..it is nothing but a pathetic excuse by political cowards.

This is a word that the MSM is in love with…..it gives them some vague idea that they can beat us with daily and continuously.

Personally I do not think the word has any meaning….other than a media talking point.

I have made thoughts known on this whimsical ideal…..https://lobotero.com/2009/02/17/bi-partisanship/ as you can see I have seldom thought that this was an idea that has any legs in our form of government…..in an ideal country this may work but not in ours.

The term “Center” is also an offshoot of the myth of bi-partisanship….as the political world of the country is today that center does not exist…..what small amount we find in government is usually not on some large scale program that benefits the entire nation but rather minute BS that serves NO purpose other than wasting time.

To illustrate this divide we need to look No further than the Obama years…..

What America considers a debate is pretty messed up. Apparently, the existence of climate change is a “debate.” Allowing 33,000 Americans to die every year because they can’t afford health care is a “debate.” Continuing to arm ISIS and Al Qaeda in Syria is a “debate.”

And yet, there’s one singular issue that seems to read “case closed” in the minds of millions of Americans, both red and blue: bipartisanship. Somehow, we have wound up in a world where saying “we should stop literally arming terrorists” is an opinion, but lauding the glories of bipartisan politics is unbiased and impartial.

View at Medium.com

The whole silly idea of bi-partisanship is a seriously flawed belief……

The flaw in simply blaming hyperpartisanship is pretending we have two parties with similar structures or aims: on one side is a diverse, center-left technocratic coalition that mediates the interests of groups and puts pragmatic, evidence-based governance ahead of ideology; on the other side is a group of politicians, donors, and activists singularly focused on maximizing their ideological victories. This is not merely progressive hogwash, but rather is frequently accepted by a range of political scientists and scholars.

This point is missed by most elite political commentators, who have the frustrating habit of treating politics in the abstract, as a sort of game to occupy the time of the wealthy. Politics is seen as victimless, the product of white papers, bare-knuckle negotiations, and talking points. The right’s views on abortion are treated like a fashion statement—without meaning and impact—rather than a consequential form of gender oppression.

The Myth of Bipartisanship—It’s Time to Get Tough With the Right

I reiterate…..the idea of bi-partisanship in our political circus is fanciful and a purely unattainable ideal in the American political system we have today.

Please stop pretending that it is a good idea….maybe in the past but today it is only a pipe dream of Centrists.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Treatise On Voting

One of the big stories for 2021 is that of voting and the attempts to suppress the turn-out.

Our president has signed into place an Executive Order on voting rights……a quick look at the EO…..

Direct federal agencies to expand access to voter registration and election information. The executive order will direct the head of each federal agency to submit to the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy a strategic plan outlining ways their agency can promote voter registration and participation within 200 days. These strategic plans could include actions such as:

• Leveraging agencies’ existing websites and social media to provide information about how to register to vote
• Distributing voter registration and vote-by-mail ballot applications in the course of regular services
• Considering whether any identity documents issued by the agency can be issued in a form that satisfies state voter identification laws

A good start but so much more is needed….and soon.

The dialog about voting I have heard a couple of statements that I do not agree with at all…..

“God given right” and “Voting is a sacred power”…..

There is  nothing god given about voting it is a right within a social contract……a contract that people sign onto as a member of a society and in turn are guaranteed certain rights….voting being one of them…..

All that said I am recalling some the Emma Goldman once said….”If voting changed anything it would be made illegal”.

After watching our Congress and political circus for all my years I feel she hit the nail on the head.

A little background….I have not voted for a winner since 1976 and Jimmy Carter….since that election I have voted for third parties…..in 2020 I supported candidate Tulsi Gabbard…..and in the election I wrote in my name for I had more principles than the offered candidates.

Enough about me…..

On to the institution we call “voting”……

Voting is a method for a group, such as a meeting or an electorate, in order to make a collective decision or express an opinion usually following discussions, debates or election campaigns. Democracies elect holders of high office by voting. Residents of a place represented by an elected official are called “constituents”, and those constituents who cast a ballot for their chosen candidate are called “voters”. There are different systems for collecting votes, but while many of the systems used in decision-making can also be used as electoral systems, any which cater for proportional representation can only be used in elections. (wikipedia)

Probably I need to say at this point that I think that all Americans need to have a voice in the government…..a voice that carries some weight….as it is now that is not the case.they get their information on candidates from the news and today from social media….however these sources are nothing short of political spin….very little accuracy just slogans and jingoism.

Here is another’s s thought on voting…..

I listened to a Freakonomics podcast today called “We the Sheeple”. I like to think they stay fairly unbiased, which is why I like their podcasts so much.

In the podcast, Steve Levitt was quoted as saying that he identifies someone as smart if they don’t vote (in Presidential elections). In other words, he finds people who vote with the intention of getting someone into office to be ignorant.

I’ve always been taught (or I socially absorbed) that you can’t complain about policy if you didn’t vote. People complain about low voter turnout, but hearing this idea made me wonder why the voting rate is even at ~50%.

Levitt asks, if we all know voting is useless, then why do we vote at all?

“I think the reason most people vote, and the reason I occasionally vote is that it’s fun. It’s fun to vote, it’s expressive, and it’s a way to say the kind of person you are, and it’s a way to be able to say when something goes wrong when the opponent wins, “well I voted against that fool.” Or when something goes right when you voted for a guy to tell your grandchildren, “well I voted for that president.” So there’s nothing wrong with voting. [But] I think you can tell whether someone’s smart of not smart by their reasons for voting.”

Some people would argue that the popular vote gives us a national awareness of how we feel about the President, but isn’t that what polling is for?

Is Levitt right? Are voters stupid? Does not voting obligate us to shut up and stay out of the discussion?

I say this because corporate America owns most of the outlets and these sources will “report” on the campaigns and candidates in the fashion that influences the voter to their way of thinking.

The voter has no actual voice beyond the precincts where they go to vote……petitions are as worthless as the paper it takes to put them together…..mail/email is met with generic ‘thank you’ replies…..townhalls would be a good place but unfortunately these are stacked with supporters and answer are generic and told to the voter only what they want to hear.

So can a voter make an informed choice for their vote?

In my opinion they do not.

For one reason the information the voter gets is skewed and second the voter seldom looks beyond the person they worship.

This makes the vote a worthless endeavor.

Why?

Look at the national Congress or the state legislature……nothing about the bills passed are the ‘will of the people’….all the vote accomplishes is to legitimize the rule of the elites….all this exercise accomplish is to give the illusion that the voter is in control….but actions in the after election days illustrates that they are in control not the voter.

Voting does not determine policies whether state or federal….all it determines is which wealthy elite will rule.

For instance…the recent political battle over the American Rescue Plan to battle the Covid-19 virus….75% of the American people liked the plan and yet not a single Republican voted for its passage in Congress.

Are you sure the elected people are working for the people’s best interests?

Voting has become nothing more than a way to legitimize those in power.

If it were truly a representative action then there would be a solid recall process instead we get lame soft soap BS.

Americans have a choice….either vote or not….if they do vote their single vote means nothing…..

Voting is widely thought to be one of the most important things a person can do. But the reasons people give for why they vote (and why everyone else should too) are flawed, unconvincing, and sometimes even dangerous. The case for voting relies on factual errors, misunderstandings about the duties of citizenship, and overinflated perceptions of self-worth. There are some good reasons for some people to vote some of the time. But there are a lot more bad reasons to vote, and the bad ones are more popular.

Your Vote Doesn’t Count

Americans need to move past the single issue vote…..until they become more informed this country will continue to slide into a political abyss that it may not extricate itself from any time soon.

I do not refuse to vote….the last time I voted for a winner was 1976 with Carter……I vote my principles and right now there is NOTHING offered that would embrace my principles.

The myth of voting has become nothing more than jingoism….nothing changes and the country remains stuck in a manure pile.

I leave you with a few quotes on voting….

“In this country people don’t vote for, they vote against.”
― Will Rogers

“Politics: the art of using euphemisms, lies, emotionalism and fear-mongering to dupe average people into accepting–or even demanding–their own enslavement.”
― Larken Rose

“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’”
― Isaac Asimov

“The fact that so many successful politicians are such shameless liars is not only a reflection on them, it is also a reflection on us. When the people want the impossible, only liars can satisfy.”
― Thomas Sowell

“Representative government is artifice, a political myth, designed to conceal from the masses the dominance of a self-selected, self-perpetuating, and self-serving traditional ruling class.”
― Giuseppe Prezzolini

Again I do not refuse to vote…..I do refuse to vote for the candidates that do not hold with my principles…I do refuse to ply party politics which I feel is destroying this country from within.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Turn The Page!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

A Revisit Of The 2nd

WE have a had crappy month of April mass shootings seem to be the rule and cops killing civilians seem to be everywhere and everyday.

Something needs doing about this out of control problem.

I guess I had better restate my position on the 2nd.

I am not for unlimited gun control….I am a gun owner…I am against the unlimited access of civilians to assault weapons….I mean if they want to play with advanced weaponry then grow a set of balls and join the military…the key to that is “a set of balls”…..

I have written much on the 2nd amendment…..first my thought on the history of the amendment….https://lobotero.com/2013/01/30/why-the-2nd/

Then my post on the “true meaning of the 2nd”……https://gulfsouthfreepress.wordpress.com/2020/05/01/the-true-meaning-of-the-2nd/

This is a conversation with the author of a book on the 2nd amendment…….

As America grapples with a relentless tide of gun violence, pro-gun activists have come to rely on the Second Amendment as their trusty shield when faced with mass-shooting-induced criticism. In their interpretation, the amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms—a reading that was upheld by the Supreme Court in its 2008 ruling in District of Columbia. v. Heller. Yet most judges and scholars who debated the clause’s awkwardly worded and oddly punctuated 27 words in the decades before Heller almost always arrived at the opposite conclusion, finding that the amendment protects gun ownership for purposes of military duty and collective security. It was drafted, after all, in the first years of post-colonial America, an era of scrappy citizen militias where the idea of a standing army—like that of the just-expelled British—evoked deep mistrust.

The Second Amendment: A Biography, Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, digs into this discrepancy. What does the Second Amendment mean today, and what has it meant over time? He traces the history of the contentious clause and the legal reasoning behind it, from the Constitutional Convention to modern courtrooms.

This historical approach is noteworthy. The Heller decision, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, is rooted in originalism, the concept that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the original intent of the founders. While Waldman emphasizes that we must understand what the framers thought, he argues that giving them the last word is impossible—and impractical. “We’re not going to be able to go back in a time machine and tap James Madison on the shoulder and ask him what to do,” he says. “How the country has evolved is important. What the country needs now is important. That’s certainly the case with something as important and complicated as guns in America.”

The Second Amendment Doesn’t Say What You Think It Does

Interesting thoughts.

Anything to add?

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Thoughts On Unicameralism

I have written about my thoughts on our Congress….thoughts that will not be popular but nonetheless something needs to be considered because the the dysfunction in our legislative branch of government.

You can read my thoughts here…..https://lobotero.com/2019/04/24/against-bicameralism/

Our Senate is as worthless as teats on a boar….it is non-functioning at best.  Time for a change…..that is if you want this country finally start progressing to a better future.

There are so many things that need changing and most of them will take a Constitutional Convention……things like guns, the emoluments, voting rights, etc….so if we decide to have this debate then why not include the Congress and a way to make it better or at least functioning.

Since civics is not  priority in our educational system let me do it for you……what is the function of the legislative branch?

The House has several powers assigned exclusively to it, including the power to initiate revenue bills, impeach federal officials, and elect the President in the case of an electoral college tie.

The Senate has the sole power to confirm those of the President’s appointments that require consent, and to ratify treaties. There are, however, two exceptions to this rule: The House must also approve appointments to the Vice Presidency as well as any treaty that involves foreign trade. The Senate also tries impeachment cases for federal officials referred to it by the House.

In order to pass legislation and send it to the President for his signature, both the House and the Senate must pass the same bill by majority vote. If the President vetoes a bill, they may override his veto by passing the bill again in each chamber with at least two-thirds of each body voting in favor.

That is a very simplistic look at the branch (if more info is needed my I suggest use the Google button)

Do not get me wrong I do understand the concept of “checks and balances”…..but what good is it when the system makes a dysfunction commonplace?

But in case your Civics is not what it use to be…..

The system of checks and balances in government was developed to ensure that no one branch of government would become too powerful. The framers of the U.S. Constitution built a system that divides power between the three branches of the U.S. government—legislative, executive and judicial—and includes various limits and controls on the powers of each branch.

Again very simplistic but for the sake of brevity will have to do or you could do what I advised earlier.

Now that all that explanation and historic stuff is out of the way…..

Since the Congress is useless maybe it is time to reconsider the make-up of said institution.  The Senate is where good bills go to die.

In my opinion Going to one house for legislation makes good sense…..

My idea is get rid of the senator post ….keep representatives….. they will be limited to 10 terms…..the two most senior reps from each state will be elevated to the post of senator, a post within the House.

The leader will be known as the Speaker For The Assembly and that post will be determined entire Congress…..majority of votes elevate the person to speaker a post that can be held for 6 years….then a new election will determine the next speaker.

I feel this could open up the chance for the country to move forward without all the BS that goes with the two houses.

AS it is today the most useless part of our government is the legislative branch is the Senate…that needs to be modified for the sake of the nation and its people.

I continue to believe that unicameralism is the only way this country can recover and move forward with progress.

More of my thoughts to come.

Watch This Blog!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Get Those “Domestic Terrorists”

After the events that unfolded on 06 January…there has been a new focus on “domestic terrorists”….those home-grown terrorists that are doing damage to this republic.

I gave my readers a little background on my primary blog, In Saner Thought…….https://lobotero.com/2019/08/15/call-it-domestic-terrorism/

After the insurrection the Congress has acted with the introduction of H. R. 350……Domestic Terrorism Prevention Act of 2021…..

Sponsor:	Rep. Schneider, Bradley Scott [D-IL-10] (Introduced 01/19/2021)
Committees:	House – Judiciary; Homeland Security; Armed Services
Latest Action:	House – 01/19/2021 Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Homeland Security, and Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Interesting, yes?

If interested in what this bill has contained within it…..

Click to access BILLS-116s894is.pdf

But where was this concern say 2010?

Looks like it is only a problem when their lives are threatened.

But I guess that as they say “better late than never”.

Does anyone here remember COINTELPRO?

No?

Then learn something…..COINTELPRO, in full Counterintelligence Program, counterintelligence program conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from 1956 to 1971 to discredit and neutralize organizations considered subversive to U.S. political stability. It was covert and often used extralegal means to criminalize various forms of political struggle and derail several social movements, such as those for civil rights and Puerto Rican independence.

In their scope and tactics, these FBI operations occasionally went much further than the original anti-Communist COINTELPRO effort. They involved at least twenty documented burglaries of the offices of the SCLC, an organization headed by martin luther king jr. Hoover detested King, whom he called “one of the most reprehensible … individuals on the American scene today,” and urged his agents to use “imaginative and aggressive tactics” against King and the SCLC. To this end, agents bugged King’s hotel rooms; tape-recorded his infidelities; and mailed a recording, along with a note urging King to commit suicide, to the civil rights leader’s wife. The COINTELPRO operation against the radical Black Panther party, which Hoover considered a black nationalist hate group, tried to pit the party’s leaders against each other while also fomenting violence between the Panthers and an urban gang. In at least one instance, FBI activities did lead to violence. In 1969, an FBI informant’s tip culminated in a police raid that killed Illinois Panther chairman Fred Hampton and others; more than a decade later, the federal government agreed to pay restitution to the victims’ survivors, and a federal judge sanctioned the bureau for covering up the facts in the case.

Now you know let’s move on…..

The more I read about this new bill the more I think it is just another COINTELPRO program…..a secret police if you will……

This attempt could be a very slippery slope….and we have had enough of this…..

This is how it begins.

We are moving fast down that slippery slope to an authoritarian society in which the only opinions, ideas and speech expressed are the ones permitted by the government and its corporate cohorts.

In the wake of the Jan. 6 riots at the Capitol, “domestic terrorism” has become the new poster child for expanding the government’s powers at the expense of civil liberties.

Of course, “domestic terrorist” is just the latest bull’s eye phrase, to be used interchangeably with “anti-government,” “extremist” and “terrorist,” to describe anyone who might fall somewhere on a very broad spectrum of viewpoints that could be considered “dangerous.”

Watch and see: we are all about to become enemies of the state.

The Government’s War on Domestic Terrorism Is a Trap

I also think we have resources in place all ready a new “sweeping” bill is not needed….and I am not alone…..a coalition of 151 organizations agree and have made their thoughts known….

On behalf of The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights (The Leadership Conference), a coalition charged by its diverse membership of more than 220 national organizations to promote and protect civil and human rights in the United States, and the undersigned 151 organizations, we write to express our deep concern regarding proposed expansion of terrorism-related legal authority. We must meet the challenge of addressing white nationalist and far-right militia violence without causing further harm to communities already disproportionately impacted by the criminal-legal system. The Justice Department (DOJ), including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), has over 50 terrorism-related statutes it can use to investigate and prosecute criminal conduct, including white supremacist violence, as well as dozens of other federal statutes relating to hate crimes, organized crime, and violent crimes. The failure to confront and hold accountable white nationalist violence is not a question of not having appropriate tools to employ, but a failure to use those on hand. To date, DOJ has simply decided as a matter of policy and practice not to prioritize white nationalist crimes.   Congress should use its oversight and appropriations authorities to ensure that law enforcement appropriately focuses investigative and prosecutorial resources on white nationalist crimes.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/01/25/coalition-urges-congress-not-expand-domestic-terrorism-charges

Again I feel this “Act” is a bad idea and I can see abuses in the near future.

I feel this is an overreaction from their lives being threatened….and not some grand policy for the rest of the country to help it remain a viable entity.

Any thoughts?

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Those Term Limits

In these days of Covid-19 news many issues get pushed from the minds of the electorate….so Gulf South Free Press is here to help us remember those issues that need to be addressed…… Many people including myself have been calling for term limits for our ‘elected’ (I use the term sparingly) officials…..my idea is to make it 12 years for the House (that is 6 terms) and 12 years for the Senate (that is two terms) and make it unlawful for any ex-rep to go into a lobbying firm for 10 years.

This idea was brought up by Steyer before he took it on the lam…..at the last debate he was in he brought this up (something none of the others would do)….

Of course there are pros and cons to term limits….the most recent was in Vox and was a con article….

Steyer pressed his proposal to impose term limits on lawmakers. “I am for term limits of 12 years for every congressperson and senator,” Steyer said, pointing out that term limits would “get rid of Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz.” One problem with Steyer’s proposal is that it is unconstitutional. In US Term Limits, Inc v. Thornton (1995), the Supreme Court struck down an Arkansas state constitutional amendment that sought to term limit members of Congress. As the Court explained, the “fundamental principle of our representative democracy” is that “the people should choose whom they please to govern them.” That means they can choose someone with many years of experience in office.

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy-and-politics/2020/2/25/21063741/tom-steyer-term-limits-debate

I would like to hear your thoughts on this issue…..but first there should be a minor educational portion of this post….

The idea of imposing term limits for Congress, or a mandatory restriction on how long members of the House and Senate can serve in office, has been debated by the public for centuries. There are pros and cons and strong opinions on both sides of the issue, perhaps a surprise, given the electorate’s less-than-flattering opinion of their representatives in modern history.

Here are some questions and answers about term limits and the ongoing debate surrounding the idea, as well as a look at the pros and cons of term limits for Congress.

https://www.thoughtco.com/debate-over-term-limits-for-congress-3367505

Limits would hopefully force Congress people to grow spine and do what is needed for the country…..

1. Term limits could encourage politicians to have courage. One of the primary reasons why legislation happens at a snail’s pace in the United States is because most elected officials start concerning themselves about their next election once they start in office. President Trump began his re-election campaign the moment after his inauguration in 2016, and similar examples of behavior exist all the way down the ladder in Washington. If our Representatives and Senators know that they can make a meaningful change

2. It would limit the potential for corruption in the government. Politicians have less time to get “dirty” when there are term limits in place. Although someone could be elected while under the influence of special interests, most would start from the very beginning, not knowing how to influence the governing body for their personal gain. Most newly elected officials are skeptical of lobbying groups and undue pressure for specific legislation, which would give American society an extra level of resilience against unwanted rules and regulations.

…read on……

17 Key Pros and Cons of Term Limits for Congress

Now that I have done my part on this issue….I would like to get my readers thoughts on this issue…..

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

This Impeachment Thing

We are in the middle of a gut wrenching process of trying to impeach the president of the United States…..that is all the the news echoes day after day……

I need to let my readers know how I feel about this process.

I have been writing about the process in my other blog, In Saner Thought, but I have not been straight forward with my opinion on this process.

First do I think the president should be impeached?  Yes I do!  Why?  Because I feel that he is gaming the system for his benefit and not that of the country.

After all that said….

I kinda hope he comes out of this okay.

Why would I wish that?

That sometime down the road a Democrat will take office and he can do whatever he likes to the system….insult politicians, investigate political opponents, force corruption with foreign countries, etc.

If Trump walks on this then it will come back a bite the GOP sycophants in the ass…a position that many of them may favor these days.

I want to hear the whining by the sycophants like Gaetz, Jordan and Meadows….their performances ought to be Emmy worthy….just listen to their words….they have nothing to say about the evidence they only bitch about the process.

We can blame the rise of the Tea Party as the start of this breakdown in civility and order……nope….we can blame Newt and his band of radicals in 1994  as the beginning….the hatred for one party for the other began in word and deed with Newt.

In rolling out his proposal for a progressive agenda, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has repeatedly referenced Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America.” On one level that makes sense, since the “Contract with America” is arguably the only example most people can think of where a national political platform of sorts did not come from a presidential campaign. It also played a significant—though sometimes poorly understood—role in altering the trajectory of American politics, and thus it makes sense to reference it when setting out to alter that trajectory again.

A lot of what people remember about the Contract just isn’t so, and a lot of what was so is forgotten. It was not a conservative document so much as it was a targeted GOP play for the support of Ross Perot voters (as described in the book “Three’s a Crowd: The Dynamic of Third Parties, Ross Perot, and the Republican Resurgence” by Ronald Rapoport and Walter Stone), and despite its poll-driven nature (touted by Gingrich at the time), its late release indicated it was less a play for broad political support than it was for shaping elite political discourse after an election Republicans knew they would win. At its core, it was the very essence of political gamesmanship, even as it paraded itself as a populist attack on the establishment.

https://www.salon.com/2015/05/23/the_power_grab_that_destroyed_american_politics_how_newt_gingrich_created_our_modern_dysfunction/

Since those days it is hate for one party or the other and the people within those parties……

Our government is dysfunctional….and to blame it all on the Dems is disingenuous……Repubs have been equally to blame for this disunity…..and we can thank the Tea Pargty for making the sore of dysfunction spread like an all consuming rash on the skin of our nation.

Make no  mistake…it is HATRED for the other party…matters not the issues but rather the membership in one or the other.

It all began with the “Watergate Babies”….

For millions of Americans, from political analysts to readers confronting their morning newspapers, the dysfunction of today’s Congress is a disturbing mystery. The majority, which controls the agenda and schedule of the House, seems riven with division; the leadership seems bereft of methods or muscle for enforcing discipline; distrust pervades relations with Senate colleagues, and the relationship with the White House, controlled by the majority’s own party, is unpredictable and volatile. With the Republicans locked in seemingly intractable conflict with a minority focused on regaining power, the Congress has rarely been less productive or less well-regarded in the public’s perception.

It wasn’t always like this; in some ways, it was worse. For generations, the House was a secretive, hierarchical, tradition-bound institution that gave little regard or influence to newcomers. Power was concentrated so assiduously in the handful of committee chairs that even the elected leadership hesitated to challenge the old men with the gavel. From the dour Woodrow Wilson through the thundering Lyndon Johnson, the House lumbered along in its top-heavy, anachronistic style, incapable of competing with an executive branch that was increasingly agile and expansive, well-suited to modern mass communications, and aggregating power by virtue of its ability to act decisively.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/05/26/congress-broke-american-politics-218544

I admit that I have read and been called so many insulting names over the years that I went against my best interests and started using derogatory terms about others in the government.

I regret that I sank to that level of intolerance but I will refrain when the others also refrain.

I just want the Repubs to remember all this for of the Dems have any cajones at all they will use the GOP play book and play dirty for all common decency is gone from our political process.

“Lego Ergo Scribo”

$15 Minimum Wage

One of the biggest issues for 2020 and onward is the possibility to raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour.  Since most jobs created by this “booming” economy are minimum wage jobs and mostly in the service industry.

The CBO has issued its finding on the raise of the minimum wage…….

A Congressional Budget Office analysis published Monday showed that raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour by 2025 would significantly increase pay for over 27 million workers and lift 1.3 million people—including hundreds of thousands of children—out of poverty.

The CBO also found that more than doubling the federal minimum wage would boost the income of families earning less than three times the poverty rate by nearly $22 billion.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/07/09/cbo-analysis-shows-15-federal-minimum-wage-would-raise-pay-27-million-workers-and

The federal minimum wage in the United States is only $7.25 per hour. It hasn’t seen a meaningful boost in this required amount for more than a decade. Although it is still a comparatively high salary minimum when compared to what a majority of the world’s population receives in compensation for their work, it is worth far less today than it was when it was first raised to that level.

Because of the lack in value of the minimum wage as it currently stands, there is a political and socioeconomic push from both sides of the aisle to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 per hour. The highest value for this wage in the U.S. when adjusted for inflation came in 1968 when workers earned $8.68 per hour. Since then, the actual value of these earnings has lost over 10% of its purchasing power.

To be fair I try to give both sides of this issue…..the site ProCon.org has a debate on the rise of the minimum wage……

Proponents of a higher minimum wage state that the current federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour is too low for anyone to live on; that a higher minimum wage will help create jobs and grow the economy; that the declining value of the minimum wage is one of the primary causes of wage inequality between low- and middle-income workers; and that a majority of Americans, including a slim majority of self-described conservatives, support increasing the minimum wage.

Opponents say that many businesses cannot afford to pay their workers more, and will be forced to close, lay off workers, or reduce hiring; that increases have been shown to make it more difficult for low-skilled workers with little or no work experience to find jobs or become upwardly mobile; and that raising the minimum wage at the federal level does not take into account regional cost-of-living variations where raising the minimum wage could hurt low-income communities in particular.

https://minimum-wage.procon.org/

My personal opinion is that it has long past time for this raise….as I look for a candidate to support this is one of the issues that I use…..along with education, foreign policy.

Hopefully this post will be helpful.

Be Smart!

Learn Stuff!

Then VOTE!

“Lego Ergo Scribo”