Yesterday, at a kickoff for political pundits Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein’s new book “The Broken Branch,” former Speakers of the House Thomas Foley and Newt Gingrich spoke on the dreadful state of Congress. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank wrote “The Ex-Speakers Speak With One Voice on the Sorry State of Congress,” about the event.
Gingrich said: "Congress really has to think about how fundamentally wrong the current system is." And when considering foreign and domestic issues, he noted, "it's important to have an informed, independent legislative branch coming to grips with this reality and not sitting around waiting for 'presidential leadership.' "
Foley agreed with Gingrich: "If I didn't have a somewhat long history with Newt Gingrich... I would listen to what he had said if he were a candidate for Congress and say, 'I think I'll vote for this guy.' I think he's absolutely dead right in his diagnosis of what's happening to this country and to the Congress."
According to Gingrish and Foley, here are the symptoms that are ailing Congress:
“...collapse of committee deliberations, the demise of oversight of the executive branch, the loss of the ‘regular order’ of rules for debate and legislation, a runaway spending process, and a shrinking legislative calendar.”
Gingrish and Foley believe these are the causes of the Congresses sorry state of affairs:
“...gerrymandered districts, travel and fundraising needs keeping lawmakers away from Washington, the loss of centrists in both parties, quickening news cycles and the reliance on lobbyist-raised cash.”
And although both agreed that they have no “silver bullet,” they did offer these solutions:
“Restore committee power to write laws, ban fundraising in Washington, abolish lawmakers' political action committees, end spending ‘earmarks’ and enforce the rules that guide the legislative process."
Gingrich provided historical context to the division: "I believe we are drifting into a cycle where the challenges we face are a greater mismatch with our potential solutions than any time since April of 1861.” Foley concluded that, “If the Congress fails, democracy fails.”
Gingrich gave this message to the American people: "The correct answer is for the American people to just start firing people.” Gingrich “had some pithy advice for lawmakers" too: "My answer to them is 'Go home.' "
No solution will come from the Congress – not even from a new Congress. Only the people can cause genuine change – and that can only happen by changing the leadership style of Washington.
That is what Unity08 is all about. Give Washington a powerful lesson in leadership through a Unity Team in the White House – and the Congress will change its ways. Give them evidence the people want crucial issues resolved, and Washington will be a different place. As always, the people are the founding fathers. That means you.
Continue to talk more about these issues and others in our Shoutbox.
Subscribe
Interesting blog. Leads to www.newt.org which is worth reading to see some ideas we have seen in the shoutbox about campaing reform etc. Newt apparently has some populism and progressivism mixed in with his conservatism and keen intellect.
vry,
RET
.
IS THERE AN ISSUES DEFICIT — and if there is,
what are the issues in it?
The heart of the matter, if we ask what are we doing in the Unity movement, is that we are looking for issues of great moment that the presidential campaign in 2024 certainly will not address.
The campaign will not address them because it will be believed that no great numbers of voters (as they go to the polls) will have such issues in mind.
We could call these our "missing" issues or, as suggested here, an issues "deficit" — a deficit that exists because those in charge of government and big business are better off if the issues are ignored. Of course, it could also be that the individuals who represent government and big business are just too immersed in competitive campaigning to know how vulnerable to loss our nation is.
Two issues come to my mind — and they are tightly related:
(1) Is the absence of clear responsibility for economic performance, to provide for the common defense and promote the general welfare — because that responsibility for performance is said to be equally shared between the Congress; the President; the Federal Reserve; and the dominant captains of private industry in banking, insurance, manufacturing and communications — is such absence of responsibility and accountability and escape therefrom by all concerned something about which voters in a democracy ought to be riled up?
(2) Is the emphasis on "individual competition" over "team work and the golden rule" something that should be re-ordered — to reshape a dog-eat-dog society into nations whose posterity are likely to enjoy the blessings of liberty — not the rewards in hell of avarice, greed and defiance of divine commandments?
IF the first issue is real and can be addressed, discussion is already started on the basis of a proposed law. That law is posted under the topic of the National Debt, and it reads as follows:
THE FEDERAL RESERVE SHALL LEND TO THE UNITED STATES AMOUNTS CONGRESS REQUIRES OF IT BY LAW
Congress shall enact particular statutes requiring the Federal Reserve to lend the United States specific amounts of money.
Money so lent shall be repaid by a reversal of this process: Congress shall require repayment of lent money when it is in the national interest.
Money lent and not repaid shall carry no interest, charge or fee or burden of any kind.
In considering and debating the law contemplated above, such limitations as (a) limits on such lending, annually, to a percentage of the gross national product and (b) the vote to borrow or repay may have to exceed a bare majority by an additional percentage (such as 5%) of one or both bodies of congress, and (c) other restrictions, if necessary, to allay fear of hyperinflation.
Such considerations are expected to guide the Congress and the President who signs the laws.
.
IF THE SECOND ISSUE IS REAL and can be addressed, a FULL EMPLOYMENT program, to protect the growth of the middle class and the economic rights of individual Americans to earn a living (in commercial or self-employment, or in government service,) shall be fully financed by the United States. Such program will be a featured item in the Unity08 agenda. This issue has also been a topic for discussion. It is raised by Edmond and is on the Issues to be Discussed forum.
.
John Gelles
http://unity-now.wikispaces.com
Unity08 Platform – Why Not?
America is divided on almost every issue. Why? Because people hear only two view points, one Democrat and the other Republican. Democrats have formed a coalition of special interest groups promoting their vested self-interests. Republicans have formed a coalition of special interest groups promoting their vested self-interests. Is anyone interested in the best policy for the most people or our common good?
What can Americans agree on? Not much. We are all in the same ship together, but can we agree not to run into the iceberg?
How does Unity discover common ground? How can Unity form a platform? May I suggest a brief outline? When 70% of Unity membership votes in favor of a POSITION then it becomes a part of the Unity PLATFORM. A platform is something you stand on. A PLATFORM is something Unity stands for. If 70% of Unity membership supports the PLATFORM then it is likely a majority of voters will agree with it.
When 51% of Unity membership votes in favor of a PROPOSAL this PROPOSAL becomes a POSITION of Unity. A position is where you are standing today, but may change tomorrow. A member of Unity can submit a PROPOSAL. People can discuss, debate, and then decide how to vote on the PROPOSAL. COUNTER-PROPOSALS can be introduced and discussed. Maybe a third point of view will be discovered? Perhaps someone will come up with a new idea few of us have ever considered? A POSITION on an issue will be determined by the genius of the people rather than the vested self-interest of special interest groups. A solid, structured process that leads Unity to common ground will produce a Unity platform at least 70% of membership, and likely a majority of voters, will agree on.
Come one, come all, to the free market place of ideas. Lay your cards on the table of debate face up. Let your voice be heard and your views known. Boldly declare your position on any issue. When Unity membership likes your idea because it is brilliant, celebrate, but don’t gloat. When Unity membership rejects your idea, don’t BMW.
How do you organize the process? Agreed upon rules. Perhaps a Proposal is limited to 200 words. Maybe a Proposal will have a number of weeks to be read and addressed and then a vote. If the vote meets a quorum of say, 5,000, the Proposal is placed on a ballot of similar subject Proposals. When you have more than three people deciding something it is a good bet someone will disagree with someone. If someone has an more detailed organization then let everyone know about it so anyone can commit.
R Miller,
1st good suggestions if it were not for the reality of Unity.
Unity is NOT planning a platform but an vauger agenda.
Unity is not going to start the convention for a long time.
They for sure are not going to take any position other then general dissatisfaction with the status quo until they build a membership much larger than it is today.
You could take your postition to the RULES COMMITTEE but they are being held in an undisclosed and highly secret location.
vry,
RET
.
R. Miller offers ideas that may be good for real elections. They do not demand Lincoln-like genius (never forget his greenbacks); rather, they most often find consensus around profound ignorance resting on popular belief.
IF, to avoid a sad and enormous loss of national greatness, goodness and security, it is necessary that we solve contradictions of capitalist fundamentalism, by redeploying the financial tools of WW II, -- which is another way of saying what I covered below in my harrangue on the Federal Reserve and paying for results we want ahead of tax collections and without adding to our interest bearing national debt, -- then that is what we must do even when everyone says NO.
Our role in 2024, to be honest, will not be to elect a ticket; it will be to open the minds of people who get elected to solutions rejected by majorities but which are so dead right that without them our only hope will be that our rivals for leadership in the future make even greater errors than we do.
John Gelles
Unity-now wiki
My Website
mailto:john.gelles@gmail.com
Human rights and how to pay for them are key to a livable world.
I plan and encourage others to consider voting out the lame special interest incumbants this fall and in the near future. If they won't do the job they were elected to do, FIRE them with your votes. Look at the records of those in office and keep the people's representatives and give the others the boot. Stop voting for long term senators and congresspersons just because they have held the offices too long and their names are the only ones familiar to you. There are no sacred cows in Washington right now, just a lot of old bull. Unity08 sounds like a positive force worth working with. Think before you vote!
"You could take your postition to the RULES COMMITTEE but they are being held in an undisclosed and highly secret location."
So much for openness and transparency, HA!