Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-09-2012, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Wasilla, Alaska
17,823 posts, read 23,435,652 times
Reputation: 6541

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
How do you figure this? Due to the larger states having more representatives in the Congress? If so, then I would suggest that as we impose the term limits on the legislation that systems be designed to prevent such a thing. Of course, this may not be needed anyway. Representatives often have more loyalty to other representatives within their party but from other states than they do to representatives from within their state but from the other party.

Problems, problems...
Such as? What could "be designed" to determine who gets committee chairmanships? The majority political party makes the determination, and it is currently based upon who is the most senior Representative. With term limits you are throwing seniority out the window, so what would you use to replace it with in order to determine who chairs the various committees?

If you impose term limits in the House you will be ensuring that only a small handful (fewer than six) States will control the entire US. They will be able to table legislation they do not like, or impose legislation that nobody else likes. Term limits in the House is one way to ensure another Civil War or at the very least a permanent break-up of the Union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-09-2012, 02:38 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,853,601 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
But not if they put in the appropriate controls when term limits take effect. This government loves to come up with regulations, so why not make them regulate themselves? Like I said, everyone needs to read Federalist #51.
Political parties are independent organizations, not government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 03:03 PM
 
4,410 posts, read 6,135,397 times
Reputation: 2908
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Political parties are independent organizations, not government.
I wish that were true but we the people end up paying for so much of each party's organization that it's hard to actually feel there's any separation at all. Why should any taxpayer pay for the Republican or Democratic primaries? The entire cost should be borne by the party members themselves, after all the process is theirs not the government's. We even pay for those stupid useless brainwashing conventions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 03:29 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,853,601 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by mhouse2001 View Post
I wish that were true but we the people end up paying for so much of each party's organization that it's hard to actually feel there's any separation at all. Why should any taxpayer pay for the Republican or Democratic primaries? The entire cost should be borne by the party members themselves, after all the process is theirs not the government's. We even pay for those stupid useless brainwashing conventions.
It is true. We the people pay for some of the apparatus that goes into the election process. The parties also shoulder some of that burden. For instance, parties traditionally pay for caucuses, because caucuses are specific. Primaries have been used by the states to vote not only on Presidential issues but also to vote on state issues.

The major political conventions get paid for if they follow a specific set of rules. If they don't follow the rules, the parties pay for the conventions themselves.

Public Funding of Presidential Elections Brochure

As far as this thread goes, the question of dictating how the party leadership awards committee appointments is like dictating to a company's board how they will manage the company. Some rules are appropriate, but others overstep the government's authority of private enterprise. And like it or not, political parties are private enterprises, private enterprises that serve a public purpose, but private nonetheless.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 03:50 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,001 posts, read 14,180,717 times
Reputation: 16697
Why not just make Congress the size of 310 million representatives?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 03:51 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,853,601 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
Why not just make Congress the size of 310 million representatives?
A glance through the political forum on City Data should answer that question.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-09-2012, 11:07 PM
 
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
11,157 posts, read 13,991,236 times
Reputation: 14940
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
Such as? What could "be designed" to determine who gets committee chairmanships? The majority political party makes the determination, and it is currently based upon who is the most senior Representative. With term limits you are throwing seniority out the window, so what would you use to replace it with in order to determine who chairs the various committees?

If you impose term limits in the House you will be ensuring that only a small handful (fewer than six) States will control the entire US. They will be able to table legislation they do not like, or impose legislation that nobody else likes. Term limits in the House is one way to ensure another Civil War or at the very least a permanent break-up of the Union.
Well, I'm not a legislature but I do think that placing some rules on committee chairmanship is possible. For example, seniority can still come into play because even under the term limits you still have up to 12 years (assuming my model was accepted) in the House. Appoint these guys after they've served 2 terms or 3. Rule some ineligible for certain positions if another representative from their state already is in a key committee chairmanship.

Furthermore, why does seniority have to matter at all? All that does is result in pork barrel politics. Keep the blood fresh in Washington. I once read a bumper sticker: "Politicians and diapers need to be changed often. And for the same reason."

Bottom line: I don't see this ever happening anyway. It would take the house and senate voting to impose these limits on themselves. That idea is laughable. I don't think any of them have ever read Federalist #51.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2012, 04:34 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,948 posts, read 17,844,201 times
Reputation: 10370
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
As a near-poor American, I absolutely do not trust states with broad powers. As they have demonstrated, they have a vested interest in attracting wealthy residents and, importantly, repelling poor people.
How is California or Vermont representing you? Do they care about the people in your state more than the ones in their state?

Why would I want my state to have even more power to screw me over?[/quote]Because of the second sentence out of the two in my post "At least the backroom deals would be amongst instaters and the local voters can vote them out."

The idea behind allowing people to exercise personnel responsibility is to allow them to make decisions for them selves through less government.When small government exercises her powers she should do it at the local level which allows people a greater opportunity to live in areas that suit their needs. You can make your voice heard at the local level, national level not nearly so easy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2012, 04:35 AM
 
Location: Texas
37,948 posts, read 17,844,201 times
Reputation: 10370
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
I' m looking to government to restrain the states from screwing over poor people, or at least providing redress and compensation.
Why do 50 states know better for the people in your state than the ones living there? Are you trying to tell me that people in your state are corrupt while the ones in other states are not?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-10-2012, 04:53 AM
 
Location: Fredericktown,Ohio
7,168 posts, read 5,362,195 times
Reputation: 2922
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
I agree on all points. I wish I had the free time to start an advocacy group to push for this kind of reform. It would be a huge uphill battle -- the lobbyists would fight this tooth and claw -- but it would get America back on track to being more of what it was meant to be. Don't worry elitists -- you still have 100 Senators to buy, sell and trade.
You just made the best argument against this idea, if the lobbyist still control the Senate increasing the House is a moot point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:28 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top