The House of Lords
My pal Jonathan Schwartz comes up with a gem of a quote from James Madison, as he explains why the House of Lords (The Senate) was created in the first place.
And James Madison explaining more than 200 years ago why the Senate would naturally represent the interests of rich people:
Should experience or public opinion require an equal & universal suffrage for each branch of the Govt., such as prevails generally in the U. S., a resource favorable to the rights of landed & other property, when its possessors become the minority, may be found in an enlargement of the election districts for one branch of the legislature, and an extension of its period of service. Large districts are manifestly favorable to the election of persons of general respectability, and of probable attachment to the rights of property, over competitors depending on the personal solicitations practicable on a contracted theatre. And although an ambitious candidate, of personal distinction, might occasionally recommend himself to popular choice by espousing a popular though unjust object, it might rarely happen to many districts at the same time. The tendency of a longer period of service would be, to render the body more stable in its policy, and more capable of stemming popular currents taking a wrong direction, till reason & justice could regain their ascendancy.
Say what you want about the founding fathers, you can't claim they weren't up front about what they were doing.
So you see why the Senate acts entirely against the interests of ordinary America.
And Digby is pissed at this one:
This is unbelievable. Apparently the Democrats not only can't break a filibuster on the new school loan bill, they may not even have 50 votes. What is going on here?...read on
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSqkdcT25ss
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
... they were simply copying the British parliamentary system: House of commons vs. House of Lords.
It is not the turn of events in the senate, who I think the founding fathers would be surprised about, but rather the complete "lordification" of congress. I bet they did not see that one coming...
Progressives are to the DNC what conservatives are to the RNC. We're a base that gets used.
You know how we laugh at the right because we know the RNC is totally using them? Well, same for Dems and progressives.
And if you compare the core of the TeaBagger's and Glenn Beck's complaints (that the government is being run by the elites, for the elites) with the progressives' complaints, you find there really isn't much difference between "us" and "them".
Of course you have to strip away the racism, faux Christianity and bizarro conspiracy theories to get down to the right wing's core complaint, but it's the same as ours.
WHAT IF we could deep-six all the wedge issues, that really are of secondary importance, and form a populist coalition that takes on the corporate interests?
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
Originally (Article I, § 3, Clauses 1 and 2 of the Constitution) Senators were selected by the legislatures of each state.
The Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution - passed by the Senate on June 12, 1911, the House of Representatives on May 13, 1912, and ratified by the states on April 8, 1913 - transferred Senator selection from each state's legislature to popular election by the people of each state.
So .. I guess we're making progress!
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
is that the majority of Americans... as opposed to the lords and ladies of the nobility... are being sold out by the members of both parties as well as the members of both houses.
The nobility has usurped our "House of Commons" through the simple expedient of buying themselves enough of its members to thwart the public will because in their eyes, anything that takes a dime out of their pockets in support of the common good constitutes a "wrong direction" and qualifies as "unjust".
They are now in a position to enforce their narrow minded view on the rest of us and for some reason... mostly involving money... we keep voting the same damned sellouts back into office every cycle. Until we get tired of sitting on our gonads and get on our hind feet and start voting these blubber butted whores out of office, we're going to be getting just what we've got coming.
This bullshit about once you're in office you're there until you decide to go or you're in line for a juicy lobbying job has got to fricking stop.
"This bullshit about once you're in office you're there until you decide to go or you're in line for a juicy lobbying job has got to fricking stop."
Term limits and a five year embargo on lobbying ...there, fixed it.
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
waiting for THAT to happen!
dandy
I know... I just argued against my own premise and you're absolutely right, that would do it. But it's going to require a majority deciding it needs to be done and that same majority going out and doing it and that's the rub.
Waiting until enough people finally get mad enough to simply refuse to take it anymore when our so called leadership bends over backward on a daily basis to appease the nobility and their government whores... I don't have any answers as to how to bring about what you're talking about but there are people out there who do and I hope that my own ignorance doesn't preclude me from looking for them.
are merely an insurance policy that Congress will be filled with inexperienced, and therefore ineffectual, policymakers. The problem isn't lengthy terms in office; the problem is that less than 50% of the electorate participates in any meaningful way.
... we don't seem to be doing too well with our bunch of "experienced" and "effectual" policy makers right now.
It usually only takes one term to determine where any politician's primary interests lie... after that the experience you're voting for may not be doing you a hell of a lot of good and the effectiveness is working against your best interests.
We only pay them a salary and benefits... the nobility makes them millionaires. Kind of hard to compete for their hearts and minds in that scenario.
"... we don't seem to be doing too well with our bunch of "experienced" and "effectual" policy makers right now."
That depends on who you ask. They aren't listening to the electorate because the electorate is too busy watching "Dancing With the Stars." In our absence, they will listen to the Fatcats, who regard them as highly effectual.
dont really agree re: inexperience ... smart people can get up to speed quickly.
and experienced at WHAT?
Whereas No Limits are an insurance policy that Congress will be filled with
(albiet experienced) entitled, uncaring, self-absorbed, old boys who simply know how to play a game and do nothing to represent the people who thought they were sending a voice to speak for them ...which would you prefer?
I would prefer someone who KNEW the clock was ticking , had to get things done, and was in no position to benefit unjustly from from the position of trust they were given. They would go back to the ciommunity they came from with honor.
... And yes it will never happen.
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
"... smart people can get up to speed quickly."
I offer you Senator Franken and Representative Grayson as examples. That type may be harder to find than your Boners and Cantors but they're out there somewhere.
...........is really slow on the draw not seeing the forest for the trees, because Rahmie keeps him isolated.
someone is. There are lots of ropes to learn in both houses of Congress. It's unrealistic to expect senators to be "up to speed" in less than a couple years.
granted, if 'the ropes' involve years of jumping thru arcane Legislative hoops and years scratching backs and developing networks to do favors and grant pork ...
and Lifetime Presidents...? havent heard of that.
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
A few years ago, I had a job as a purchaser for an aftermarket copier parts company. Most of our vendors were in Asia, India & Europe. I had to learn a large & constantly changing inventory, negotiate pricing & shipping terms, calculate lead times, estimate arrival dates and all sorts of other maddening details. One year, I averaged 60 hours a week. This job frazzled me to the bone, and it took me almost two years to get somewhat comfortable with the job. This job wasn't one tenth as difficult as a senator's. I'm a fairly bright guy, but probably (hopefully) not as smart as most senators; despite their presumed intellectual advantage, I still think it's unrealistic to expect them to excell within two years. Simply blurting out "TERM LIMITS!" is too simplistic.
I actually said nothing of the kind about excelling after 2 years, one term, anything like it.
I 'blurted' out that a LIMIT (of whatever period)
is a fixed point in time, (and is expected in many upper management positions)
AND if the system is so arcane and complex that it requires literally DECADES of on the job training, there is something seriously wrong with it.
I greatly doubt that many of these people are active, engaged 'learners' after decades ...but I know they are making out like bandits.
By this logic 'President for Life' is no different.
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
that power is being abused, and that many of the powerful do not rightfully deserve their positions. The main thrust of my argument, though, is that only constant vigilance on the part of the electorate will prevent or at least reduce corruption. There is no push-button solution. I'll bet that less than half of the eligible voters participated in most of, say, Arlen Specter's re-elections. I mean, if he's so bad (and I agree that he is), then why the fuck is he still in there? I'll tell you why: Cuz American Fucking Idol was on that night. Period. Meanwhile, it wouldn't really have bothered me if Paul Wellstone had served more than two terms.
sure ... voter apathy is another huge topic,
but it seems to be working to the advantage of a small group of people ...nonetheless, my point is that by squatting on these positions of power for decades, honest hardworking (ie less rich) people have no/very little opportunity to participate on a level playing field.
Thus one 'Spectre'(sp) has cancelled out how many 'Wellstones' over the decades?
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
(I dont think you are giving yourself enough credit cause that sounds like a nightmare ...)
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
.
a couple of years to get "up to speed" and the next four years to do the job they were elected to do. If they aren't cutting it for the majority and are sucking up major contributions and actively working against the interests of the public, you'll know it.
Six years is plenty of time to figure out whose direction a senator is passing gas in but even so, I don't think anyone is advocating a single term as a limit. At least I'm not
Twelve or eighteen years is more than enough time for them to either prove effective for the OTHER 95% of the population also, or to have made themselves millionaires several times over by doing otherwise but this job for life stuff which gave us old Strom... just for one example, there are many others... and some of the Strom wannabes over the years needs to be brought under control.
The House of course, with it's two year terms, is a whole other can of worms.
yep, and how many people DONT get the opportunity to partake while these overstuffed clowns are sitting there decade after decade after decade (*cough* Arlen ...)
I'm Boycotting NewsCorp! Heres what not to buy: http://www.cjr.org/resources/index.php?c=news...
Actually it's about 55% of the eligible voters.
In 2004 Bush received 28% of the votes of eligible voters.
Kerry received 27%.
That's a total of 55% .. 45% of eligible voters did not vote.
In some countries it's against the law not to vote!
And in some countries polls are open for several days - not just on Tuesday, when most people with jobs are at work.
When will government of the people, by the politicians, for the corporations perish from this Earth?
Not soon enough!
with the Tuesday thing anyway?
the Pukes picked a day that they figured the least amount of Dems (union workers) would show up to vote /s
to link the Madison quotation to the assertion that, "the Senate acts entirely against the interests of ordinary America." If you place Madison's quotation within the context of his other writings, I think you'll see that his concern was for momentary hyseria affecting the political process. Mob Rule has always been the downside to democracy; Madison's views on the Senate were meant to insure that things like the Terry Shiavo episode didn't lead directly to long-term legislation. Unfortunately, there's a downside to this approach as well, but to assert that the Senate acts entirely against the interests of ordinary America dismisses Paul Wellstone, for example, or Ted Kennedy & others. Just because we've got a few bought-and-paid-for dildoes screwing up healthcare reform isn't justification for villifying the entire body, IMHO.
But there's got to be more than one Ted Kennedy or One Alan Grayson ( I know, not a Senator... yet) or One Al Franken amongst 300 million people.
And it's not JUST health care reform... it involves just about every aspect of government services and I would submit that there are more than just a FEW bought and paid for dildos doing the screwing or this country would never have gotten into the mess it's in now.
But as always, lack of participation from the electorate is what has caused this problem. If you don't watch the chicken coop, the foxes will get in.
He's declared for the Democratic primary for Texas Governor, but what if he ran for Kay Bailey Hutchinson's position in the Senate?
"Courtesy is owed. Respect is earned. Love is given." --Unknown author, found in Guide to Texas Etiquette by Kinky Friedman
But I've got a feeling that any race Mr. Friedman is in is going to be a very interesting one.
I'm from California... we were sold out to the Elitist Yacht Party back in 1979. No Frankens or Graysons... or even Friedmans here.
Many schools have opted to leave FFEL, and go with Direct lending, eliminating the middleman. I saved about a thousand dollars in fees this year alone just by getting away from Sallie Mae.
From the Hill:
Arlen should try calling Sallie Mae sometime to correct an error they made....days of fun on the phone.
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising liberty and justice for all
the higher ups display towards the American people is simply astounding isn't it?
instead of a House of Lords was a House of Pantloads. Don't feel bad, we here in Canuckistan have a House of Troughers. Costs millions does nothing.
Hasa Diga Eebowai
What is going on here???? Well, Digby Rahmie is throwing a wrench into every real liberal's works. He does it each and every day! Arlan Spector????? Pleeeeeaaaaaaaaasssssssssssssee!!!! Rahmie is the PROBLEM!!! Dump Rahmie!
Comments are closed on this entry