Fixing the US Congress: how to make it respond to non-wealthy, unorganized people?

I've said many times on this board (with some agreement) that the best way to reduce the power of parties and moneyed interests in Congress is to elect representatives at random from the adult population of individual Congressional districts. Keep terms short (2 or 3 years) and rotate in new representatives every year.

To keep a check on the House of Representatives, the 17th amendment should be repealed. The Senate should be composed of representatives of the individual states in a manner prescribed by each state individually, and their term should be longer than a term in the House (4 or 5 years) with new members rotating in every year or two.

 

It's Time to GET MONEY OUT of politics

Bailouts. War. Unemployment. Our government is bought, and we’re angry. Now, we’re turning our anger into positive action. By signing this petition, you are joining our campaign to get money out of politics. Our politicians won’t do this. But we will. We will become an unrelenting, organized wave advocating a Constitutional amendment to get money out of politics.

As the petition grows, we can use my show on MSNBC as a platform to force this issue to the center of the 2012 elections. Join us. Sign up. Tell your friends. Facebook it. Tweet it.#GetMoneyOut.

From our Washington Insider, Jimmy Williams, here is our Constitutional Amendment:

"No person, corporation or business entity of any type, domestic or foreign, shall be allowed to contribute money, directly or indirectly, to any candidate for Federal office or to contribute money on behalf of or opposed to any type of campaign for Federal office. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, campaign contributions to candidates for Federal office shall not constitute speech of any kind as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution or any amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Congress shall set forth a federal holiday for the purposes of voting for candidates for Federal office."

Sign here: http://www.getmoneyout.com/?recruiter_id=126955

 

I don't have the time to write a long post on why the idea of "get money out of politics" is silly at best, but I'll simply point out Ron Paul. I may not like him at all, but he does have very devoted supporters, and without those supporters donating money, his campaign would crash. Same with Obama last year. I mean, wouldn't such an amendment just ensure that the only people who can run for office are those who have lots of money to begin with?

 

Step 1 - take a billion out of the military budget and make it an election fund.
Step 2 - force candidates to have to gather signatures to run . . . EVERY ELECTION.
Step 3 - Divide the billion into increments for each state's Federal Election fund
Step 4 - Each state divides the Fed Election fund to each Federal Candidate
Step 5 - spend wisely Mr. Candidate because that is all the money you will get and or are allowed to use. No one else can purchase or buy anything on your behalf. Violation of this is not jail. It is a Massive fine for you and the 'contributer' and YOU ARE BARRED FROM RUNNING FOR PUBLIC OFFICE EVER AGAIN!

Not overly complicated . . . . if you don't think a billion is enough
Take another one . . with the money not going to candidates
you can raise taxes slightly with no ill effect.

Rocket River

 

As long as DC is powerful, money will try to influence it, there is no scheme or law that can avoid that.

No one is going to waste money trying to influence/corrupt a powerless entity.

 

Nonsense.

Changing the role of $ in elections through restrictions and public funding will change the incentives

Also, take power away from DC then more money will try to put power back in DC in hands friendly to them and influence the state capitals for the same purpose.

 

5 men on the supreme court, in their infinite wisdom, have arbitrarily decided that money donated by artificial nonperson constructs to buy elections = core free speech that the founding fathers went to war about.

Monied interests will buy and sell elections at leisure as long as this state exists.

 

term limits would solve most of these problems. also publicly funded elections, ban all lobbyists, ban corporate contributions and make a law that says if you voted for legislation that benefited a particular industry or company you cannot work for them after leaving office for say five years.

 

Man, every post in this thread made me realize what a statist I am.

Honestly, as far as I can tell, there's a PAC or special interest group for everyone; it's just that most private citizens treat politics too much like sports and only think about how many points their team gets each game. No one reads the preseason previews, scouting reports, studies offensive or defensive techniques, or studies the financial or commercial picture for their respective franchises, but it's all just as relevant to the outcome and just as publicly available.

Just do the research, and whether through time or money, find your horse and back it.

 

Money just flows to other groups that influence elections rather than to campaigns. Doesn't make it better, just less transparent.

State power should be limited as well.

We give the state all kinds of power over our private lives and then lament when others try to influence it.

Then we pass laws to try and purify the system, which inevitably amounts to restrictions on our ability to influence the state.

When GE or Newscorp have entities devoted to influencing elections, that's free speech. But if other corporations try to influence elections, that's corrupt and must be silenced.

 

How about just have 99% of the voting population vote? It's simple, it's already on the books, and it would work.

Right now we have a little over 60% voting for president and about 40% or less voting in off-year congressional elections.

That means roughly 21-33% of the voting populace is putting people in office. Let's say you're a Senator running in an off year election... and let's say a special interest group can gin up 1/5 of the 21% you need to win. If so, you are going to be beholden to them for putting you in office and they are going to funnel you money for votes because they know they own you.

Now, if everyone votes and the winning percentage is 51, all of sudden the influence of that special interest group on voters is cut in half or more. The Senator can't afford to pay as much attention to them as before because he has a bunch of other people and groups that put him over the top and he knows that since everyone is voting, he can't get too radical because all of a sudden his base is comprised of a bunch of voters who aren't true believers.

Unfortunately, pols seem to realize this and are making it increasingly harder to vote. After living through a century of expanding the right to vote to all citizens, we seem to now be working on ways to limit voting to certain constituencies. Another data point in the decline of my country.

 

I'd say make voting compulsory...
But that would actually do more harm than good.
Not to mention a bunch of idiots will walk around yelling that its against the constitution.

 

@Rimrocker & RedRedemption:

That is exactly why I proposed that elections be held at random from the adult population. Essentially, everybody would be voting without casting a ballot. No need to make voting compulsory, or whatever.

 

Make Congress like Jury Duty

Rocket River

 

You want the meth head from the corner representing you? Why not Nero's horse? I want talented, driven people in Congress held accountable by the voters. You know, like the Constitution intended. Under this plan, there is absolutely no accountability because nobody has to run for reelection or even explain themselves to their constituents.

My God, people are so obsessed with being on TV and following the lives of celebrities that elevating those folks to a position of responsibility would be a train wreck. It'd be a cross between Jersey Shore and Springer on Capital Hill. At least now the lobbyists have to pay something significant and pretend like it's a honest system. Under that scenario, all you'd have to do is buy an appearance by J-Lo and have her tell the Congressmen how to vote. Not to mention all the friends and family members suddenly elevated to congressional staffers. Ugh. Seriously, that is a horrible idea.

 

That's Democracy for you. I trust the average person to represent me (no horses though ). Besides, that's why I proposed that the 17th amendment be repealed, so the Senate could act as a check on the House of Representatives as was originally intended.

 

I should also mention that under the system I've proposed, it would be statistically unlikely for a meth addict to end up representing a Congressional district.

 

I would eliminate all lobbying as we know it. I would only allow "lobbyist" to submit briefs. I would also institute strict conflict of interest laws that would make it a crime to go into an industry that they were involved in drafting legislation for. I would also limit all campaign contributions to 500-1000 dollars and draft a constitutional amendment to exclude corporations from being involved in campaigns.

I would essentially take every incentive out of being a congressman and make it a true sacrifice to serve the country.